The European Union and International Organizations

Knud Erik Jørgensen

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2009
• Print ISBN: 9780415467384
• eBook ISBN: 9781134034963
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Política y relaciones internacionales
• Subtopic: Relaciones internacionales

This volume seeks to explore the complex relationship between the European Union and International Organizations, and to fill a remarkably wide gap in existing literature on the topic.

Analysing the way in which the EU engages in some of the most important international organizations, this book outlines a framework for analysis within this thriving subject of study. By demonstrating how the EU supports 'effective multilateralism' and global governance, as well as furthering developments within foreign policy, this volume adopts a novel perspective on the EU as an international player. Seeking to move the focus of study beyond the European Union as itself an international organization, contributors set out to demonstrate EU aspirations to act within international organizations. The volume's key features include:

• the first comprehensive study on this topic
• eight case studies of the EU, including its role within the UN, WTO, NATO, and the ICC
• contributions from both internationally renowned political scientists and economists

The European Union and International Organizations will be of vital interest to students and scholars of international relations, European Politics, Political Science, and International Organisations. It will also be of interest to a wider readership including policy makers, diplomats, and journalists.

1 The European Union and international organizations

A framework for analysis

Knud Erik Jørgensen

In his reflections on the future role of the European Union and the United States, the former US ambassador to the European Union, Rockwell A. Schnabel, points to a scenario outlined by the former EU Commissioner for external relations, Chris Patten: ‘the US and the EU have two decades left to “shape the world” in the ways we deem best. After that, in his estimation, economic and demographic trends will force us to share that power with the two emerging Asian giants’ (Schnabel 2005: 75; see also Patten 2005). Schnabel adds that Patten’s deadline ‘sounds all too realistic to me. Meaning that now is the Atlantic moment, the moment of America and Europe. Will we seize it?’ (2005: 75; see also Daalder 2001). There are multiple ways and multiple arenas to shape the world, yet international organizations engaged in global governance constitute one such important arena and both the United States and the European Union have policies vis-à-vis international organizations.¹

Whereas the relationship between the United States and multilateral institutions has been extensively examined in the literature, ranging from celebrative ‘two cheers for multilateralism’ to outright warnings against the ‘false promise of international institutions’ (Keohane and Nye 1985; Mearsheimer 1994), it is considerably less well known how (or whether) the European Union aims at shaping the world (of international organizations) in ways ‘we deem best’. We do know that European diplomats during the first decade of the twenty-first century have discovered new aspects of European (multilateral) identity and interests. We also know, more specifically, that, according to numerous official statements and documents, the European Union has developed a strong belief in the value of effective multilateralism, ‘with a strong United Nations at its heart. The UN, with its universal mandate and legitimacy, is uniquely placed to respond to our common challenges’ (European Council 2003: 16).

Support of multilateralism is quite simply among those EU strategic objectives which most clearly have been spelled out in policy statements and numerous speeches. The risks of not supporting effective multilateralism have also been identified: ‘Those who want pluralism and multilateralism to survive have a duty to make the United Nations effective (as the leaders of the democracies strikingly failed to do in the case of the League of Nations)’ (Cooper 2003: 164, 168). These citations and several other indicators suggest that the relationship between the European Union and international organizations is crucially important for the future of both the European Union and international organizations. Unfortunately, this high degree of political importance has only to some extent been reflected in research. The field of study has for some time been in a rather unsatisfactory state of affairs. In other words, to the degree that there has been research on the topic, it has been more scattered and compartmentalized than comprehensive, systematic and integrated.

In light of this, the aim of this volume is to contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the relationship between the European Union and major international organizations, thereby contributing to fill a remarkably wide gap in the literature. In this fashion, we aim at a critical examination of the European Union’s policy of supporting ‘effective multilateralism’ and, by outlining a framework for analysis, we also intend to ‘try on for size’ a number of potential factors explaining the changing relationship. In the following section, I describe the main trends in contemporary scholarship on the topic. Subsequently, I briefly outline the specific approach of this book, pointing to two main sources of inspiration and presenting three sets of potential factors of explanation—internal, external and constitutive factors—for why relations between the European Union and international organizations have changed the ways they have. In the final section, I summarize the chapter.

Five major trends

Five major strands of literature contribute to our understanding of the Union’s multilateral engagements. First, there is a considerable amount of legal-institutional studies of the European Union’s representation in international organizations (Brückner 1990; Eeckhout 2004; Govaere et al. 2004; Griller 2003; Wessel 1999, 2008). These studies explore the interplay between formal and informal rules regulating EU engagement and the dynamics and consequences of treaty reforms (EC/EU Treaty). Furthermore, these studies are characterized by inquiries concerning the legal competences of EU member states and the European Community/Union as well as debates about the legal personality of the European Union. Most of the studies remain limited in their scope in the sense that they either address the subject in a rather general fashion or address only selected international institutions in single case studies. Given that the European Union is deeply embedded in a legalistic administrative culture, it would not be wise to underestimate the role of the legal-institutional dimension. Furthermore, the European Union is keen to emphasize the positive role of international law. In short, the legal-institutional approach is in many ways promising and highly relevant. However, this volume seeks primarily to understand the politics of relations between the European Union and international organizations and the legal dimension will consequently play a less prominent role. At the same time, we do try to detect the implicit politics of legally framed arguments.

Second, a number of political scientists have conceptualized relations between the European Union and (other) international organizations as interorganizational networks (Jönsson 1993). Accordingly, the European Union is either itself regarded as an international organization (Keohane and Hoffmann 1990; Moravcsik 1998; Foot et al. 2003) or as being composed of organizational parts that are comparable to organizational entities in other international organizations. As a result, relations between the European Union and international organizations are primarily analysed as relationships between like-units that may be characterized as either cooperation, conflict or competition (Bierman, forthcoming; Haugevik 2007; Guigner 2006; Ojanen 2004; Stokke and Coffey 2006; Hofmann and Reynolds 2007). This strand of research contributes significantly to our understanding of the dynamics and driving forces of the relationship between the European Union and international organizations. However, it is less capable and does not pretend to analyse the European Union as an actor engaged in changing patterns of instrumental action. The issue of a possible changed nature of these relations is hardly addressed.

This leads us to the third perspective which is rooted in the literature on EU foreign policy and conceptualizes the European Union as an international actor (Bretherton and Vogler 2006; McCormick 2007). It is to be expected that aspects of identity, interests and policy characterize this literature, which by now has examined most of the European Union’s major international relations (with states and regions) (cf. Hill and Smith 2005; Marsh and Mackenstein 2005). However, policies toward international organizations have constituted a rather neglected topic within the broader research agenda of this literature. To the degree that research has been done, scholars have paid attention to the European Union’s role in the United Nations in particular, and prioritized General Assembly politics (Gregory and Stack 1983; Stadler 1993; Luif 2003; Johansson-Nogués 2004; see also Laatikainen and Smith 2006). This literature is highly relevant for the objectives of this book and it does not take more than some focused reflection to adapt analytical frameworks to the research agenda guiding this book. In many ways, this volume is a continuation of and complementary to Katie Laatikainen and Karen Smith’s Intersecting Multilateralisms (2006) and Ole Elgstrøm and Michael Smith’s The European Union’s Roles in International Politics (2006).

The fourth cluster of perspectives focuses on the European Union’s policy of supporting multilateral institutions. This literature is foremost concerned with contemporary policy issues and therefore addresses issues situated somewhere between policy analysis and policy implications (Biscop 2005; Cameron 2004; Eide et al. 2004; Ortega 2005). This priority necessarily has an impact on the analytical set-up, as studies often take their point of departure in the European Union’s officially stated objective of supporting effective multilateralism, and proceed by means of examining what this might mean or the degree to which the political ends have been achieved. The time frame is usually short term and studies are naturally more concerned with policy than theoretical issues.

Fifth, the literature on global governance has produced insights that are most relevant for the exploration of the European Union’s relations with international organizations. This type of research focuses on multilateral institutions as prime instruments of global governance and the European Union is sometimes analysed as an important feature of this framework (Jørgensen and Rosamond 2002; Rittberger and Zangl 2006; Hawkins et al. 2006; Barnett and Finnemore 2004; Barnett and Duvall 2005). More generally, it provides a general framework for analysing actor constellations as they relate to global governance efforts. These studies have produced important insights concerning the significance of specific institutional features as well as concerning the conditions for successful international cooperation (Goldstein et al. 2001; Finnemore and Toope 2001). In the major part of the global governance literature, the European Union has been assigned a role as international organization, whereas reflections on the European Union as an actor within international organizations are rather rare.

A framework for analysis

In this book we mainly take our point of departure in the European Union’s aspiration to act in international organizations, not to be an international organization. In turn, this perspective explains why the extensive and analytically rich literature on the United States and the multilateral system can serve as a valuable source of inspiration (Karns and Mingst 1992; Ruggie 1993, 1998; Luck 1999; Patrick and Forman 2002; Foot et al. 2003).

In order to understand US policy towards multilateral institutions, Margaret Karns and Karen Mingst have developed a particularly useful framework for analysis. They focus on a two-way flow of influence and ask four main questions (1992: 1–3). If we with some care apply their analytical framework to the case of the European Union, the changing relationship between the European Union and international organizations can be thoroughly examined by asking the following four questions:

1. How has the use of international organizations as instruments of EU policy changed over time?
2. How have the constraints and influence of international organizations on the European Union changed over time?
3. Why have these changes occurred?
4. What are the policy implications for the European Union of these patterns of changing influence?

The following sections examine the analytical potentials and consequences of using these questions for structuring our explorations of the relationship between the European Union and international organizations.

Changing relations between the European Union and international organizations

Indicators of a changing relationship are legion, ranging from official documents to a considerable number of case studies. EU self-images of being a ‘frontrunner’ or a ‘leading player’ suggest that the times of being an international nobody and conducting reactive politics have been left behind, at least in some policy fields and in some international organizations (European Commission 2004). Well, such images could also suggest that a politics of aggrandizement is emerging. Yet, several case studies suggest that, whereas the European Union in the past may have been an organization in need of learning about international affairs, the European Union now seems to master several of the disciplines of international relations. Finally, it seems reasonable to assume that to some degree the changing relationship has been caused by the European Union’s own transformation from being an international organization to becoming a player within international organizations. However, this transformation is far from being fully accomplished, implying that the Union has a split identity, being a Union but also a group of small or medium-sized countries, the latter identity paradoxically nurtured by the rather state-centric world of international organizations.

While questions and indicators are useful points of departure or pointers, they do not quite constitute a framework for analysis. Therefore, the following sections explicate the ramifications of asking the above questions. The context of such issues is not unimportant. Studies of the United States and multilateral institutions often lead to the conclusion that these institutions embody US interests, cf. the following statement, ‘America’s decisions to cooperate in multilateral forums will be determined predominantly by the extent to which any specific organization is perceived by important US domestic actors to be an effective and congenial vehicle for the promotion of America’s objectives’ (Foot et al. 2003: 14–19; see also Cowhey 1993). Such conclusions do not leave much room for manoeuvre for other actors, the European Union included. However, the question is whether such findings catch all important features of multilateral institutions or rather demonstrate some of the unintended consequences of focusing on just one (exceptional) state. The subsequent sections aim at addressing this issue by means of outlining a framework for analysis.

The European Union’s instrumental use of international organizations

It is a widely held belief that US foreign policy practice is characterized by an ‘instrumental’ mind-set and EU foreign policy by a ‘process’ mind-set. In our reflections on these practices, we tend to reproduce the distinction. Hence, in studies of the United States and international organizations, it has been a regular key concern to analyse the degree to which the United States influences multilateral institutions, consistently analysed ‘as instruments of American policies’ (Karns and Mingst 1992: 6–8; see also Ruggie 1993; Foot et al. 2003: 14–19). By contrast, studies of EU policies towards multilateral institutions tend foremost to be consistent in terms of not asking about possible instrumental dimensions. It is well known that the 2003 European Security Strategy makes support of international organizations one of the European Union’s key objectives. Such phrasing suggests a kind of disinterested global public service approach that is legion in EU documents and in speeches given by EU officials. However, analysts should not necessarily buy into such political discourse and should definitely not refrain from exploring the European Union’s possible influence in, impact on, or instrumental use of international organizations.

Observers often quote two reasons for expecting considerable influence. First, the union consists of 27 states and, combined, they often have a significant share of membership of international organizations. Second, the EU/EU-27 provides major chunks of the financial contributions it takes to run international organizations. Given this uneven pattern of contributions, some are tempted to ask how much influence Euros possibly can buy. The following paragraphs address these issues of membership, budgets and impact.

In terms of formal membership, the EU-27 often has a significant share of membership in international organizations. Some critics even speak about European overrepresentation. A few illustrative examples explain why. The EU-27 has 27 members of the OSCE’s total of 55 member states, that is, 49 per cent of all OSCE members can be found in the European Union. Having such a share of membership, one should perhaps expect a very considerable EU influence in determining the OSCE’s general mission and operational missions. However, as Peter van Ham points out (Chapter 7), such an assumption is risky if not misleading. Furthermore, it is worthwhile emphasizing not only ‘share of membership’ but also form of ‘representation’. The status of the European Community, represented by the European Commission, is particularly important. The European Community is a permanent observer in the UN and in some international organizations the European Union can be said to have 28 members because, in addition to European states, the European Community has been recognized as a full member. This applies to the FAO and the WTO. This significant variation in terms of membership and representation makes an important...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• List of illustrations
• List of contributors
• Preface and acknowledgements
• 1 The European Union and international organizations: A framework for analysis
• 2 The accidental player: The European Union and the global economy
• 3 Complex engagement: The EU and the UN system
• 4 A single EU seat in the International Monetary Fund?
• 5 The World Trade Organization and the European Union
• 6 The European Union and NATO: ‘Shrewd interorganizationalism’ in the making?
• 7 EU–OSCE relations: Partners or rivals in security?
• 8 The European Union at the ILO’s International Labour Conferences: A ‘double’ principal–agent analysis
• 9 The European Union and the International Criminal Court: The politics of international criminal justice
• 10 Conclusion and perspectives