Federica Bicchi

‘Our size fits all’: normative power Europe and the Mediterranean

Abstract The article focuses on the normative connotation of European foreign policy and makes three points. First, through the criteria of inclusiveness and reflexivity, it draws a distinction between ‘normative power Europe’ and Europe as a ‘civilizing power’. Second, the article puts forward a sociological institutionalist interpretation of the EU as a ‘civilizing power’. It suggests that much of the EUs action can be characterized as an unreflexive attempt to promote its own model because institutions tend to export institutional isomorphism as a default option. Third, the article shows the utility of a sociological institutionalist analysis by examining the case of the EUs promotion of regionalism in the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership.

The EU as a community of practice: foreign policy communications in the COREU network

This contribution shows the added value of analysing the European Union (EU), and more specifically the EU foreign policy system, as a community of practice, i.e. a group of people who routinely get together on a common or similar enterprise with the aim of developing and sharing practical knowledge. The paper analyses the COREU network, which allows member states and EU institutions to exchange confidential information about foreign policy. It argues that officials involved display the key features of a community of practice: (1) there is a high degree of mutual engagement; (2) the functions served by the network go well beyond what was first stipulated; (3) there is a shared repertoire of resources to negotiate meaning. The existence of such a community of practice suggests that there is in the EU foreign policy system at least one organizational structure able to transcend national boundaries and based instead on a European practice of foreign policy communications.

The convergence of civilizations : constructing a Mediterranean region

Acknowledgments PART ONE: THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK * Normative Power: The European Practice of Region-Building and the Case of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership EMANUEL ADLER and BEVERLY CRAWFORD PART TWO: LOGIC AND MODELS OF REGION-BUILDING IN THE MEDITERRANEAN * Mare Nostrum? The Sources, Logic, and Dilemmas of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership ETEL SOLINGEN and SABA KENSES OZYURT* A Political Agenda for Region-Building? The Euro-Mediterranean Partnership and Democracy Promotion in North Africa RICHARD GILLESPIE* The Euro-Mediterranean Partnership and Sub-Regionalism: A Case of Region-Building? STEPHEN C. CALLEYA PART THREE: INSTRUMENTS AND PRACTICES OF REGION-BUILDING * The European Origins of Euro-Mediterranean Practices FEDERICA BICCHI * Political Securitization and Democratization in the Maghreb: Ambiguous Discourses and Fine-Tuning Practices for a Security Partnership SAID HADDADI * Economic Liberalism between Theory and Practice ALFRED TOVIAS * Practices and Their Failure: Arab-Israeli Relations and the Barcelona Process JOEL PETERS PART FOUR: CULTURE AND IDENTITIES * The Building of Regional Security Partnership and the Security-Culture Divide in the Mediterranean Region FULVIO ATTINA * Turkey: Between East and West METIN HEPER * Region-Building, European Union Normative Power, and Contested Identities: The Case of Israel RAFFAELLA A. DEL SARTO PART FIVE: CONCLUSIONS * The EuroMed beyond Civilizational Paradigms KALYPSO NICOLAIDIS and DIMITRI NICOLAIDIS Contributors Index

The Union for the Mediterranean, or the Changing Context of Euro-Mediterranean Relations

This contribution analyses the set of conditions that made the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) possible, highlighting the change vis-à-vis the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) and the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP). First, it develops a conceptual framework for the analysis of the actors contributing or opposing the initiative, according to their attitude, motivation and resources invested in the process. Second, it examines the institutional logics that underpin the UfM. It suggests that the UfM was launched because a very small group cajoled an uninterested majority into yet another initiative for the Mediterranean. The outcome represents a shift away from regionalism as conceived in the EMP. At the same time, the Arab–Israeli conflict has politicized and disrupted the agenda of the UfM, as national interests have come to the fore and democracy and human rights have receded.

Talking Tough or Talking Together? European Security Discourses towards the Mediterranean

The tense security environment produced by 9/11 and subsequent terrorist bombings in Madrid, London as well as in Arab states from Morocco to Jordan had an impact on the understanding of various actors about political Islam, but this did not automatically entail a convergence of views or solutions to existing dilemmas. This article examines examples of security discourse towards Islam at three levels: at the level of the national member state (in the case of the United Kingdom), at the level of the European Union (EU) and at the level of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP.) It highlights that while there has been a progressive securitization of political Islam at the national level within the UK, there is an absence of a coherent agenda on the part of the EU, and between the EU and the Arab Euro-Mediterranean partners there is increasing divergence towards security issues.

Dilemmas of implementation: EU democracy assistance in the Mediterranean

The article shows how and why, after having agreed upon a programme for democracy assistance under the name of European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR), the EU fell short of its original objectives in programme implementation. This is demonstrated by close analysis of microprojects in Mediterranean countries. The scope of EU action shrank as priorities for action were defined and projects approved. As a consequence, the EU has promoted democracy less than human rights, in relatively less demanding countries, and without spending all the budgeted money. This article shows how these findings are consistent with important themes in Policy analysis and implementation research, and thus supplements other explanations of EU shortcomings. EU democracy assistance, as represented by the EIDHR, is an ambiguous and contested policy, which also suffers from an institutional setting characterized by a long chain of command. This means that there are opportunities for small decisions to gradually shift the focus and downsize the relevance of the policy initiative. The EU is thus unintentionally undermining its own policy goals, as the large number of actors interpret the EUs best interest (and their own position in relation to it) in various and divergent ways.

The Politics of Foreign Aid and the European Neighbourhood Policy Post-Arab Spring: ‘More for More’ or Less of the Same?

This contribution assesses the practices of EU aid to Arab countries in the Mediterranean in the post-Arab spring context, and in particular the role of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP). It looks at the institutional practices relevant to EU foreign policy vis-à-vis Arab countries, the main ENP policy tenets (often summarized in the ‘more for more’ motto) and the financial practices of committing and disbursing funds on the ENP Instrument. It shows that while there has been a proliferation of institutional actors and a nominal increase in the amount of funds available, the policy tenets did not change and the rate of funds disbursed actually worsened – a situation better described as ‘less of the same’.

Democracy Assistance in the Mediterranean: An Overview

Democracy assistance has increasingly featured in the foreign policy discourse of the European Union toward the Mediterranean. This article overviews three of its key aspects. First, it shows how the Mediterranean has become an area for democracy assistance. Second, it focuses on the implementation of the European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR), with a special emphasis on microprojects funded in the Mediterranean, showing the gaps between discourse and practice. Finally, the article briefly sketches the current format of the EIDHR, which covers 2007–13, questioning whether it represents an improvement. The overall goal is to offer a starting point to readers interested in the topic, by summarizing historical developments of democracy assistance in the EU, its legal framework and issues arising from its implementation in the Mediterranean.

The European external action service: a pivotal actor in EU foreign policy communications?

[Summary This article analyses the role of the European External Action Service (EEAS) in EU foreign policy communications. Having cumulated a number of pre-existing functions, the EEAS is situated at the centre of the existing communication systems used in the European Union in relation to matters of foreign policy. Moreover, the EEAS is contributing to the expansion of the existing practice of foreign policy communications in three ways. First, it has affected the direction of communication flows in the most well-established (but now declining) communication system — the COREU/CORTESY network — as a growing proportion of messages now originate in Brussels. Second, the EEAS is developing an autonomous EU capacity for information gathering, as EU delegations regularly draft political reports. Third, the EEAS has contributed to the expansion of information sharing in consular affairs, which is an area of mixed and contested competences. The EEAS is thus a key actor in EU foreign policy communications, although practices are forever shifting and its role is still under construction., SummaryThis article analyses the role of the European External Action Service (EEAS) in EU foreign policy communications. Having cumulated a number of pre-existing functions, the EEAS is situated at the centre of the existing communication systems used in the European Union in relation to matters of foreign policy. Moreover, the EEAS is contributing to the expansion of the existing practice of foreign policy communications in three ways. First, it has affected the direction of communication flows in the most well-established (but now declining) communication system — the COREU/CORTESY network — as a growing proportion of messages now originate in Brussels. Second, the EEAS is developing an autonomous EU capacity for information gathering, as EU delegations regularly draft political reports. Third, the EEAS has contributed to the expansion of information sharing in consular affairs, which is an area of mixed and contested competences. The EEAS is thus a key actor in EU foreign policy communications, although practices are forever shifting and its role is still under construction.]

European diplomatic practices: contemporary challenges and innovative approaches

Abstract As the aim of this special issue is to show practice approaches at work in the case of European diplomacy, this introduction provides readers with a hands-on sense of where the conversation about practices and European diplomacy currently stands. By introducing the key terms and overviewing the literature, the article contextualises the guiding questions of the special issue. It starts by reviewing how practice approaches have evolved in IR debates. It then describes European diplomacy’s nuts and bolts in a post-Lisbon setting. It continues by focusing on specific practices and analytical mechanisms that contribute to understand European diplomacy’s transformations and the role of security. While the debate about practices goes beyond the case of diplomacy, the latter has become a showcase for the former and this special issue continues the debate on practices and diplomacy by zooming in on the European Union.