Jan Orbie

Civilian Power Europe: Review of the Original and Current Debates

François Duchêne’s notion of a ‘civilian power Europe’ (CPE) has dominated the debate on Europe’s role in the world for several decades (Whitman, 1998: 11; Nicolaïdis and Howse, 2003: 344). For example, in Council documents and speeches of the Union’s High Representative Solana, the prevailing European discourse is constructing the EU as a civilian power (Larsen, 2002). The CIDEL workshop ‘From civilian power to military power: the European Union at a crossroads?’ and the subsequent Special Issue of the Journal of European Public Policy (2/2006, edited by Helene Sjursen) illustrate the so-called ‘renaissance’ (Whitman, 2002) of the CPE idea.

Promoting Labour Standards Through Trade: Normative Power or Regulatory State Europe?

Since the beginning of the millennium, the European Union (EU) has committed itself to promoting the social dimension of globalization. European policy-makers argue that the ‘European social model’ should be promoted and that basic labour standards should be advanced in the world through a broad range of external activities (Orbie and Tortell 2008). This chapter addresses the EU’s contribution to a social globalization through its most powerful external instrument, namely its trade relations with developing countries. I first indicate why the focus on core labour standards and common commercial policies provides an interesting case study for analysing the Union’s normative power. The subsequent section elaborates on the social dimension of EU unilateral and bilateral trade policies from 1995 onwards. Then, the implications of this empirical case are considered from a Normative Power Europe (NPE) approach, arguing that the Union’s principles, and to some extent also its activities, do indeed increasingly correspond with what would be expected from a normative power, but that its normative impact remains unclear. In conclusion, I problematize the link between the EU’s institutional set-up as a ‘regulatory state’ and the normative content of its trade policies, suggesting that NPE accounts should also consider the ideological dimension of Europe’s global role.

Sanctions under the EU Generalised System of Preferences and foreign policy: coherence by accident?

This article investigates the relationship between the European Unions withdrawal of trade benefits for developing countries under the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) and its sanctions under the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). Our expectation is that GSP withdrawals and CFSP sanctions will not cohere. However, our research reveals that GSP suspension has been coherent with CFSP sanctions when the latter exist prior to the decision-making process on GSP sanctions and when the International Labour Organisation has set up a Commission of Inquiry condemning the country, as with Myanmar/Burma and Belarus. The presence of separate institutional frameworks explains the GSP suspension towards Sri Lanka in the absence of CFSP sanctions.

The Social Dimension of Globalization and EU Development Policy: Promoting Core Labour Standards and Corporate Social Responsibility

Abstract This article describes and analyses the role of the European Union in promoting the social dimension of globalization (SDG). In the context of its policy coherence for development (PCD) commitments, the EU aims to promote decent work, including core labour standards (CLS) and employment objectives, in the Third World. The first part of this article shows that the “direct” impact of internal EU social policies on developing countries has been limited. Moreover, the Communitys capacity to act in the International Labour Organization has been confined by sensitive competence issues. The second and third parts elaborate on the “indirect” trade and development mechanisms through which the EU is advancing the SDG. Whereas the EU originally used a narrow approach centred on CLS in trade relations, it gradually developed a broader and development‐orientated perspective, including the support of voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) schemes. The article concludes that although the EU has clearly increased the social face of its development policies, this softer approach is still in an embryonic phase.

Everything But Arms: Much More than Appears at First Sight*

This article examines the impact of the EUs ‘Everything But Arms’ initiative. Starting from the observations that the effects in terms of trade flows have been modest and that EBA nevertheless sparked fierce debate within the EU, we argue that it has had broader ramifications beyond exports of least-developed countries. Subsequently, we analyse the influence of EBA on three interrelated areas: reforming EU agricultural policy (internal), restructuring EU–ACP relations (regional) and forging a WTO round (global). We conclude that EBA has played a catalysing role in these issues, in line with the globalist-liberal preferences which have become dominant in the EU.

The Europeanisation of development policy

ABSTRACT Despite the growing academic interest in the development policy of the European Union (EU) and the booming literature on Europeanisation, the impact of Europe on national development policies has largely been overlooked. By exploring member state interactions with and through the EU level across a number of different issues, this study looks to herald a new research agenda. The picture emerging from the empirical evidence is that of modest degrees of Europeanisation. In fact, resistance to Europe can be attributed to different (f)actors, some operating at the domestic level (e.g. established cultural and normative structures, different types of veto players) and others related to the existence of several groupings with alternative policy prescriptions (e.g. Nordic donors, like-minded countries, former colonial powers). Even where there are signs of convergence (or divergence), they may be due to other influences rather than pressures coming from the EU.

The EEAS’ discretionary power within the Eastern Partnership: in search of the highest possible denominator

This paper investigates the role of the newly established ‘EU foreign ministry,’ the EEAS, in the Eastern Partnership. It focuses on the distribution of competences between the MS, the EU institutions and the Civil Society Forum. More specifically, starting from the principal–agent framework, the study examines the discretionary power of the EEAS agent with regard to the MS principals in the Eastern Partnership multilateral framework. First, the analysis points to close monitoring and tight control of the EEAS by the MS. Second, the study finds that to varying degrees, the European Commission and the European Parliament function as ‘institutional checks’ vis-à-vis the EEAS. Third, the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum is the primary platform for ‘third party monitoring’. By and large, the discretionary power of the EEAS vis-à-vis the MS in the Eastern Partnership multilateral track amount to the agenda setter and for the rest decreases to the level of the highest probable denominator.

The European Commission’s implementation of budget support and the Governance Incentive Tranche in Ethiopia: democracy promoter or developmental donor?

The complex relationship between democracy and development has been extensively discussed in academic literature. However, we do not have much knowledge of how this translates into donor practices. How does the European Commission (ec) deal with tensions arising from promoting democracy and development? To answer this question, this article operationalises the distinction between ‘democracy promoters’ and ‘developmental donors’, focusing specifically on budget support and governance incentive tranches. Empirically we examine the implementation of the ec’s budget support and Governance Incentive Tranche in Ethiopia (2005–10), a case where the dilemma between democracy promotion and development cooperation is particularly strong. Investigating the position of the ec along the democracy promoter versus developmental donor continuum, we conclude that the ec’s position lies between these extremes. However, in the case of budget support, a shift has been made away from the Commission being a democracy promoter and towards the role of developmental donor.

Beyond Economic Partnership Agreements: the European Union and the trade-development nexus

Without disregarding them, this volume seeks to go beyond the controversial and extensively researched Economic Partnership Agreements to offer new perspectives on the evolution of the trade–development nexus in the European Union against dramatic changes in the international context. In particular, it focuses on the reform of the Generalised System of Preferences, the negotiation of various Preferential Trade Agreements, the application of trade sanctions, the allegedly ambitious agendas on decent work, Aid for Trade and aid untying, and the implications of the changing balance of power in global economic relations. Taking diverse approaches and, at times, reaching different conclusions, contributors directly or indirectly address one or more of the three general themes that are discussed in this introduction: differentiation, coherence, and norms.

The new trade and development agenda of the European Union

Abstract The European Union has always used trade policy measures for development objectives. But the design and content of the EUs ‘trade and development’ relations have changed considerably during the past five decades. This paper focuses on the most recent changes in the Unions common commercial policy vis-à-vis the South, looking at three levels: The EU role in the multilateral negotiations of the WTO Doha Development Agenda, Europes bilateral trade agreements with third countries and regions and its unilateral market access schemes through the Generalised System of Preferences. Although historical factors continue to determine the EUs position in these areas, a relatively new European trade and development agenda can be discerned. More specifically, it is argued that two trends have underlined recent changes in this area. First, there is a drive towards reciprocal trade relations, in line with the WTO regime. Even Europes unilateral and bilateral trade relations are increasingly streamlined with the multilateral trade rules. Second, there is a growing emphasis on regulatory issues, capacity building and aid for trade. This new and broad trade agenda illustrates the European position that promoting free trade is not sufficient for economic development of the South. However, the paper concludes that the EUs new commercial policies are not consistently development oriented, and that more coherence between trade and aid policies would be needed.