Sophie Vanhoonacker

At a critical juncture? Change and continuity in the institutional development of the council secretariat

This article provides a historical institutionalist perspective on the General Secretariat of the Council of Ministers–an institution that has expanded significantly over the course of the integration process and whose role in the institutional politics of the EU has been recognised as significant in the recent literature on the subject. Charting the history of the institution, we demonstrate the way in which the original institutional design contributed to a particular trajectory which can be understood as a ‘path-dependent’ development. However, we also identify recent developments which can be seen as a break with the historical legacy of the Secretariat–an observation which raises the question as to whether the institution is at a critical juncture in its development. The article closes with an examination of the present and future challenges the Council Secretariat is facing at this time.

The European External Action Service and agenda-setting in European foreign policy

The new High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR) and the European External Action Service (EEAS) have emerged after the Lisbon Treaty as a potential driving force in European foreign policy. This article critically reviews the first two years of the existence of the EEAS to find out whether these new players have managed to shape the direction of the European Unions (EU) external activities. Building on a typology of agenda-setting strategies in the EU developed by Princen (2011), it successively examines how the HR and the EEAS have been trying to ‘build credibility’ and ‘to gain attention’ for their priorities. The empirical analysis shows that priority has been given to addressing the ‘credibility challenge’, with a particular emphasis on capacity-building. The strategies of mobilizing partners and arousing interest through framing still leave scope for improvement.

Evaluating Presidencies of the Council of the EU: Revisiting Nice

Judging presidencies is easy, evaluating them is not. Evaluations are rare and often superficial. This article provides a theoretical framework for such evaluations. Using contingency theory, it develops hypotheses about the demand for, and supply of, presidency roles. It offers a structured analysis by linking behaviour to the specificities of the actual negotiations. The framework is then applied to the performance of the French presidency during the IGC in 2000. The analysis shows, that apart from the complaints relating to some embarrassing failures, not all the criticism levelled at the French was justified.

Understanding the Role of Bureaucracy in the European Security and Defence Policy: The State of the Art

The establishment of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) in 1999 has led to the creation of a whole range of bureaucratic bodies in Brussels and the national capitals. These bodies support the crisis management operations of the European Union. This review article presents the state of the art of academic research on the role of bureaucracy in this recent policy area. It argues that the growing institutional complexity and the constant interaction between actors at the national and European level require scholars to go beyond the dominant approaches of International Relations. Using insights from comparative politics, public administration and multi-level governance, this article considers four important questions: who these civil servants are, why they matter, how they interact, and how they are controlled politically and democratically.

Civil Servants and Politics: A Delicate Balance

List of Tables List of Figures List of Abbreviations PART I: CIVIL SERVANTS AND POLITICS: SETTING THE SCENE Introduction C.Neuhold & S.Vanhoonacker Politicisation: What is it and why should we care? B.G.Peters Civil Servants and Politicians: Problems and Future Prospects L.Verhey Civil Servants and Whistle-blowing: Loyal Neutrality and/or Democratic Ideal? G.Hunt PART II: POLITICISATION OF CIVIL SERVANTS BETWEEN NEUTRALITY AND POLITICAL ACTIVISM? COUNTRY STUDIES Civil Servants and Politicians: A Very British Relationship D.Woodhouse Managerialism and politicisation in the Dutch Civil Service S.van Thiel Civil Servants: How to Support the Political Level: The French Case F.Baron Civil Service Reform in Slovakia and Hungary: The Road to Professionalisation? K.Staronova Civil Servants and Politics in Germany U.Battis PART III: SUPRANATIONAL BUREAUCRACIES AND CONSEQUENCES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PLAYERS Commission Civil Servants and Politics: De-politicised Bureaucrats in an Increasingly Political Organisation M.W.Bauer & J.Ege The European Parliaments Administration: Between Neutral and Politicised Competence C.Neuhold & I.Romanyshyn Conclusion S.Vanhoonacker, C.Neuhold & L.Verhey

Civil Servants and Politics

List of Tables List of Figures List of Abbreviations PART I: CIVIL SERVANTS AND POLITICS: SETTING THE SCENE Introduction C.Neuhold & S.Vanhoonacker Politicisation: What is it and why should we care? B.G.Peters Civil Servants and Politicians: Problems and Future Prospects L.Verhey Civil Servants and Whistle-blowing: Loyal Neutrality and/or Democratic Ideal? G.Hunt PART II: POLITICISATION OF CIVIL SERVANTS BETWEEN NEUTRALITY AND POLITICAL ACTIVISM? COUNTRY STUDIES Civil Servants and Politicians: A Very British Relationship D.Woodhouse Managerialism and politicisation in the Dutch Civil Service S.van Thiel Civil Servants: How to Support the Political Level: The French Case F.Baron Civil Service Reform in Slovakia and Hungary: The Road to Professionalisation? K.Staronova Civil Servants and Politics in Germany U.Battis PART III: SUPRANATIONAL BUREAUCRACIES AND CONSEQUENCES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PLAYERS Commission Civil Servants and Politics: De-politicised Bureaucrats in an Increasingly Political Organisation M.W.Bauer & J.Ege The European Parliaments Administration: Between Neutral and Politicised Competence C.Neuhold & I.Romanyshyn Conclusion S.Vanhoonacker, C.Neuhold & L.Verhey

The Changing Politics of Information in European Foreign Policy

Abstract This article studies the development of European foreign policy from an informational perspective. It illustrates how since the establishment of European Political Cooperation in 1970, the European Union has gradually evolved from a platform to share foreign policy information into a Brussels‐based system that gathers and processes information autonomously. Building upon the broader literature of delegation in international organisations, it explains the gradual shift in the centre of informational gravity from the national capitals to Brussels through motives of efficiency and credibility. The development of an operational foreign policy after the Treaty of Amsterdam has considerably raised the demands for rapid and high quality data. A system entirely dependent on the ad hoc information flows from the member states proved incompatible with these new ambitions. The recent establishment of the European External Action Service and the transformation of the European Commission delegations into Union delegations is the most recent step in this long‐term and highly institutionalised process of European informational cooperation.

ESDP and Institutional Change: The Case of Belgium

Since 2003, the European Union has launched more than 20 civilian and military missions across the world. This new role as a crisis manager has not only triggered the creation of more Brussels-based institutions, but has also brought new challenges for the domestic level. The national ministries in the EU member-states are responsible for delivering the civilian or military resources necessary for the implementation of the missions. This article raises the question whether and to what extent the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) has affected national administrative structures in terms of both competence allocation and coordination, and examines which factors account for processes of change. The proposed analytical framework builds upon the Europeanization literature and complements the historical institutionalist argument with an actor-based approach emphasizing the preferences and beliefs of the principal political actors. The analytical framework is tested in a case study of Belgium (1999—2007).

The European External Action Service (EEAS), the New Kid on the Block

In contrast to many of the other institutions discussed in this volume, the creation of a European-level foreign policy administration is of a more recent nature. Coordination of member states foreign policy only emerged from the 1970s onwards, in the form of the so-called European Political Cooperation (EPC). Being developed outside the Treaty framework, it was initially steered entirely from the national capitals. The exchange of views and formulation of joint declarations was coordinated by the rotating presidency with a key role for the national ministries of foreign affairs. As the member states tried to move beyond a merely declaratory foreign policy, the need for more permanent bodies increased. The establishment in 1987 of a small foreign policy unit in the Council General Secretariat was the beginning of a slow but ever-increasing Brusselization of the European foreign policy machinery (Allen, 1998). The last but most substantial step in this long and incremental process has been the creation of a European External Action Service (EEAS) in December 2010.

Why Study EU Foreign Policy at All? A Response to Keuleers, Fonck, and Keukeleire

In an important article on the state of European Union (EU) foreign policy research, Keuleers, Fonck and Keukeleire show that academics excessively focus on the study of the EU foreign policy system and EU implementation rather than the consequences of EU foreign policy for recipient countries. While the article is empirical, based on a dataset of 451 published articles on EU foreign policy, the normative message is that it is time to stop ‘navel-gazing’ and pay more attention to those on the receiving end of EU foreign policy. We welcome this contribution, but wonder why certain research questions have been privileged over others. We argue that this has primarily to do with the predominant puzzles of the time. We also invite Keuleers, Fonck and Keukeleire to make a theoretical case for a research agenda with more attention to outside-in approaches. We conclude by briefly reflecting on future research agendas in EU foreign policy.