Bruno Vandecasteele

Unpacking the influence of the Council Presidency on European Union external policies: The Polish Council Presidency and the Eastern Partnership

The special position of the rotating Council Presidency has raised a long-standing debate on the extent to which this function allows a Member State to exert additional influence on European Union decision-making, in particular in external policy. This article argues that a broader and more differentiated study of Presidency influence could further this debate. In doing so, the article analyses the Polish Council Presidency (during the second half of 2011) and its influence on the European Union’s Eastern Partnership policies across three dimensions: (i) differences between influence on the agenda and influence on the contents of decisions, (ii) the forums (different levels in the Council and international forums) where the Presidency can exert influence, and (iii) different types of external policies, an area that has received relatively little scholarly attention thus far in the literature on the Presidency. The analysis shows that (i) the Presidency can determine the agenda to a certain extent, but the position of the chair does not allow the incumbent to exert additional influence on the contents of decisions; (ii) most Presidency influence of external policies is observed in the preparatory bodies of the Council, while at the ministerial or international level this influence is much smaller; and (iii) although the Presidency can play a rather prominent role in organizing multilateral events, this rarely amounts to real political influence. In turn, the Presidency’s influence is most tangible in specific bilateral dossiers.

A fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis of the Hungarian, Polish and Lithuanian presidencies and European Union Eastern partnership policies

Abstract This article analyses and compares the influence of the Hungarian, Polish and Lithuanian Presidencies of the Council of the European Union (taking place between 2011 and 2013) on the Unions policies towards the countries of the Eastern Partnership – Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan. The influence of the Presidencies is compared through qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), which aims to identify necessary and sufficient conditions for influence to occur. The results show that there is only one necessary condition for the Presidency to exert influence, that is, the issue should be highly salient to the incumbent Member State. The absence of any other condition for influence does as such not hamper Presidency influence. Moreover, the analysis reveals three sufficient combinations of conditions for Presidency influence, in which the individual conditions play different roles. The application of QCA to Presidency influence leads to novel insights and stimulates conceptual clarity on the level of and the conditions for influence.