Paul James Cardwell

EuroMed, European Neighbourhood Policy and the Union for the Mediterranean: Overlapping Policy Frames in the EU's Governance of the Mediterranean

This article uses the language of governance to explore the relationships between the EU and the states around the Mediterranean. Against the background of multiple legal, policy and institutional arrangements which have been created by the EU since 1995 to frame EuroMediterranean relations, the article considers how seemingly different priorities and methods come together. Of particular interest is the EUs stated goal of a partnership across the Mediterranean, which is promoted by the EU at the same time as it seeks to project its own values in the countries just beyond its borders. The article considers the changing nature of the Mediterranean within EU policy-making, as well as the EUs changing priorities, which suggests incoherency but which instead underlines the central role of the EU in a EuroMediterranean system of governance. The positive connotations of the language of governance (identified in the first part of the article) are not fully present in the overlapping policy frames since the stated partnership between the two sides of the Mediterranean in a system of governance is not borne out in practice.

The ‘hokey cokey’ approach to EU membership: legal options for the UK and EU

ABSTRACT This contribution analyses the potential legal outcomes in meeting the United Kingdom’s (UK’s) demands in advance of the referendum and what they might mean for EU integration should the UK vote to remain in the Union. It argues that there is unlikely to be a ‘quick fix’ to meet the full range of demands, since there is no obvious legal mechanism which can satisfy the demands in either substance or the proposed time-frame.

Tackling Europe's migration 'crisis' through law and 'new governance'

It has become commonplace to regard the contemporary state of migration to Europe as a ‘crisis’. The European Union has been under pressure to respond effectively to this ‘crisis’, which has gone to the very top of its policy making agenda. However, despite the legal powers the EU has to regulate migration, legislative measures appear to have declined as an appropriate response. Rather, a constant stream of policy documents has referred to ‘tools’ and ‘instruments’ which appear to fall outside the scope of legislative processes, and the democratic scrutiny which goes hand‐in‐hand with them. This article argues that the practices which are emerging from the institutions can be regarded as instances of ‘new governance’, which are found in other areas of EU activity. To do so highlights the risks associated with using non‐legal tools to deal with an area where there are extremely important consequences for individuals. The policy recommendations highlight the need for vigilance to ensure that the EUs stated values are not undermined in the quest for dealing with the migration ‘crisis’.

Evolution in Investment Treaty Law and Arbitration: The European Union as a global investment partner: Law, policy and rhetoric in the attainment of development assistance and market liberalisation?

The European Unions interest and involvement in foreign direct investment (FDI) is by no means new. However, it has only been comparatively recently that one has been able to begin to distinguih the particularities of a specific EU approach to FDI, especially when placed within a broader developmental context. The approach has been most visible during the ongoing negotiations of Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) grouping of States. Though the EU-ACP relationship is often promtoed (by the EU) as a model of mutual and benign co-operation between economically divergent States, the relationship highlights, in fact, political and normative challenges for both sides. This chapter, in particular, considers the recent 2008 EPA between the EU and the Caribbean, and wonders whether the rhetoric of the linkages between development and FDI liberalization is matched by the reality.

'There's a brand new talk, but it's not very clear' : can the contemporary EU really be characterized as ordoliberal?

Ordoliberalism has undergone a dramatic resurgence as a characterization of the contemporary EU and its economic dimensions. Commentators have pointed to the ‘ordoliberalization’ of EU economic policy with Germany at its core, albeit with the latter taking the role of a ‘reluctant hegemon’. Perhaps as a result of this pervasive influence, some have claimed that the EU is itself ordoliberal, resting on a particular understanding of the relationship between ordoliberalism and an ‘economic constitution’. For this claim to be substantiated, the characterization of ordoliberalism needs to persist across time and the EUs law and policy†making spaces. In this article, we examine this proposition, and argue that the influence of ordoliberalism can help a richer understanding of the contemporary EU beyond the confines of the economic constitution and into its evolving legal system(s).

Explaining the EU's legal obligation for democracy promotion: the case of the EU-Turkey relationship

The EU has a Treaty-based obligation to promote democracy in the wider world, with a particular emphasis on neighbouring States. Doctrinal approaches to EU democracy promotion generally focus on a specific set of instruments, whereas the law of external relations underpins a much wider set of policies and practices relating to democracy promotion. This Article applies four categories of democracy promotion (on a positive/negative and express/implied axis) to a case study of the EU-Turkey relationship. The wider scope provided by this categorisation demonstrates that democracy promotion should not only be seen within the confines of “positive” measures such as enlargement conditionality but also by measures and practices which are often hidden from view. In doing so, a richer understanding of how the law of the EU’s external relations informs policy and practice can be gained.