Nathaniel Copsey

The Choices for Europe: National Preferences in New and Old Member States*

Drawing on the existing body of literature that deals with national preference formation and building on the role played by vulnerability and deficits in shaping policy choices at the European level, this article provides a synthetic framework to explain the stances of the Older Member States (OMS) and New Member States (NMS). We subsequently apply the model to NMS, focusing largely, although not exclusively, on Poland. We argue that although many of the policy preferences can be explained by the framework, the size of states, especially with regard to ambition and capacity, and the nature of the countrys post-communist transition appear significant for the NMS and need to be incorporated into future theory-building. We conclude by highlighting areas in need of further empirical research.

The influence of newer member states in the European Union: the case of Poland and the Eastern partnership

This article seeks to examine and assess the role of Poland in the early stages of the making of the Eastern Partnership of the European Union. First, it briefly reviews Polands aims and ambitions with regard to the European Unions policy towards its eastern neighbours, both before and since it joined the European Union in 2004. Second, it describes and analyses the Eastern Partnership, including its added value for the European Neighbourhood Policy. Third, it draws on a range of interviews carried out by the authors in Brussels and Warsaw on Polands role in the initial formation of the Eastern Partnership, as seen by its partners in the other member states and European institutions. In addition, it seeks to unpack some of the early stage lessons learnt by the Polish government about how best to achieve its ambitions in the European Union, and notes the remaining weaknesses of the Polish administration, particularly in the area of administrative capacity.

Rethinking the European Union

1. Introduction 2. The Great Recession, the Eurozone Crisis and European Integration 3. European Identity 4. Legitimacy: Democracy, Accountability and Credibility 5. Solidarity: Winners and Losers in European Integration 6. Sustaining European Capitalism 7. Sustaining Europes Global Role 8. Rethinking European Integration 9. Conclusion: Rethinking the Choices for Europe

The Ukrainian Parliamentary Elections of 2007

On 30 September 2007, Ukrainians went to the polls for the fifth time since independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. The pre-term parliamentary elections were called far ahead of schedule by President Viktor Yushchenko in March 2007 – elections were not due until spring 2010 – in a bid to break the latest round of political deadlock that had dogged the country since the formation of the coalition of ‘National Unity’ comprising the Party of the Regions, the Socialist Party and the Communist Party in August 2006. Political instability and a series of short-lived governments had bedevilled Ukraine since the Orange Revolution of 2004, and the elections of 2007 were not expected to lead to a significant shake-up in Ukrainian politics. Indeed, the expectation of most commentators was that the make-up of the new Ukrainian parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, would very closely resemble its predecessor. None the less, the elections produced a number of changes in the composition of the country’s unicameral parliament, including, most significantly, the first signs of a modest shift in the pattern of voting behaviour away from traditional regional allegiances. The major beneficiary of the elections was Yulia Tymoshenko’s bloc, which moved its share of the vote from 22.9 per cent to 30.71 per cent, only slightly behind the leading Party of the Regions, which gained 34.37 per cent of the vote, up a little on its 2006 result of 32.14 per cent (albeit winning 300,000 fewer votes). In third place, was the pro-presidential Our Ukraine–People’s Self-Defence bloc, with

Remembrance of things past: the lingering impact of history on contemporary Polish-Ukrainian relations

Abstract This article investigates the continuing influence of the past on contemporary politics in Poland and Ukraine by examining the impact of the vocal ‘informed’ segment of public opinion on mutual relations between the two countries. The section ‘What history?’ examines the question of exactly what understanding of history matters so much in Polish–Ukrainian relations. The following sections examine how history influences the present, what are the contours of public opinion on Polish–Ukrainian relations within each state, and what is the impact of shared history on the contemporary politics of Polish–Ukrainian relations. Finally, the article suggests a potentially generaliseable hypothesis for future research.

The Ukrainian presidential elections of 2010

Ukrainians went to the polls in 2010 to elect a president for the fifth time since independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, electing Viktor Yanukovych with a narrow majority over Yulia Tymoshenko in the second round run‐off on 7 February. This article provides a contextual introduction to the 2010 presidential election, an analysis of the campaign and the results and concludes with a discussion of post‐election coalition building and what the election means for the consolidation of Ukrainian democracy and Ukraine’s European integration process.

THE UKRAINIAN PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS OF 2006

Ukrainians went to the polls on 28 March 2006 to elect a parliament (Verkhovna Rada) for the fourth time since independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. The elections were the first to be held under the new constitutional arrangements that came into force on 1 January 2006, which have transferred many powers away from the president in favour of parliament. For the first time since 1994, the conduct of the elections met with the approval of the OSCE, and this marked a considerable improvement on the presidential elections of 2004 and the dramatic events of the Orange Revolution that followed the disputed second round of polling (Copsey 2005). The 2006 elections were also the first to be held in Ukraine under the party-list system of proportional representation, with a single nationwide electoral district and votes being allocated to parties or electoral coalitions as a whole, rather than to individual candidates. Previously, 50 per cent of Verkhovna Rada deputies were elected in singlemandate constituencies, with the rest of the seats allocated on a proportional basis. Ukraine’s newly-elected deputies in the Verkhovna Rada elected in the 2006 elections exercise considerably more powers, including the right to nominate and dismiss the prime minister and most of the cabinet (except the foreign and defence ministers, the head of the security service and the prosecutor-general – although parliament still has to approve presidential nominees for these posts). Moreover, the prime minister reports directly to the Verkhovna Rada and not the president. Nonetheless, the president retains the power to call for new elections if the Verkhovna Rada fails to form a majority within 30 days or fails to choose a new prime minister and cabinet within 60 days of dismissing the old one. This report has five sections. First, it examines the background and context of the Ukrainian parliamentary elections of 2006. Second, it looks at the campaigns mounted by the political parties competing, with the emphasis placed on the five parties that gained the necessary three per cent of the popular vote – the threshold for gaining seats in the Verkhovna Rada. Third, it tabulates and interprets the results. Fourth, it looks at the awkward and drawn-out process of coalition-forming. Fifth, it briefly analyses the European dimension of the elections. The material on which this election briefing is taken comes from three main sources: reportage in the Ukrainian and international press; the author’s own observations as an election monitor in the 2006 parliamentary elections; and interviews with 12 Ukrainian voters carried out in Kyiv over the weekend of the parliamentary elections.

The Great Slump of 2008–9 and Ukraine's Integration with the European Union

For a number of years following the Orange revolution of 2004, Ukraine aspired to join the European Union. Although full integration was never a short-term prospect, European integration, through the Association Agreement and the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area, offers considerable benefits to Ukraine. However, the country was severely affected by the Great Slump of 2008–9 in the global economy, and this profoundly negative experience has shaped Ukrainian domestic and foreign policy in the subsequent period, putting paid to aspirations to EU membership and influencing the Ukrainian governments decision to seek a closer relationship with Russia immediately following the presidential election of 2010. Nevertheless, closer relations with Russia should not adversely affect Ukraines efforts at EU integration.