Routledge Handbook of European Politics

José Magone, José M. Magone

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2014
• ISBN:
  9781317628354
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

Since the Treaty of the European Union was ratified in 1993, the European Union has become an important factor in an ever-increasing number of regimes of pooled sovereignty. This Handbook seeks to present a valuable guide to this new and unique system in the twenty-first century, allowing readers to obtain a better understanding of the emerging multilevel European governance system that links national polities to Europe and the global community.

Adopting a pan-European approach, this Handbook brings together the work of leading international academics to cover a wide range of topics such as:

• 
  
  

• the historical and theoretical background

• 
  
  

• the political systems and institutions of both the EU and its individual member nations

• 
  
  

• political parties and party systems

• 
  
  

• political elites

• 
  
  

• civil society and social movements in European politics

• 
  
  

• the political economy of Europe

• 
  
  

• public administration and policy-making

• 
  
  

• external policies of the EU.

This is an invaluable and comprehensive resource for students, scholars, researchers and practitioners of the European Union, European politics and comparative politics.

1
Introduction

The ‘Great Transformation’ of European politics: a holistic view

José M. Magone

Introduction: a guide to the complex world of European politics

‘Ich bin ein Berliner.’ The famous statement made by US President John F. Kennedy in front of the Rathaus Schöneberg building (City Council of West Berlin at the time) on 26 June 1963, now over 50 years ago, remains an important turning point in European politics. Although Kennedy directed some belligerent language towards the Communist regime in the German Democratic Republic and the Berlin Wall erected in 1961 by the East German leadership, this had only rhetorical significance in the context of the bond established between West Berlin and the United States. Kennedy clearly sought to express his solidarity with West Berlin – or rather, as Andreas Daum calls it, America’s Berlin, thus named since the famous airlift of 1948 countered the Soviet blockade of the Western half of the city (Daum 2008: 39). In reality, Kennedy was pursuing a new policy of détente with the Soviet leader Nikita Krushchev; the questions of Berlin and Germany were secondary to the overall global Cold War between the two superpowers, the US and the Soviet Union. This policy of détente was expressed on the same day in Kennedy’s speech after receiving an honorary doctoral degree from the Free University of Berlin (Daum 2008: 156–65).

Berlin was to remain an important setting for world politics until the end of the Cold War in 1989. The efforts of Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan to improve relations between the two superpowers had the important side effect of preparing the conditions for the reunification of the city (after the fall of the Wall on 9 November 1989) and Germany itself (on 3 October 1990). Simultaneously, the emergence of the newly unified Germany had the spill-over effect of creating an opportunity for the unification of Europe. The fall of the Iron Curtain during the second half of 1989 represented one of the most spectacular transformations in European history. A domino effect of transition from Communist rule to liberal democracy and from planned to market economies affected most of the countries in Central and Eastern Europe. This type of democratization had already taken place in Southern Europe after 1974, such that at the end of the millennium, apart from Belarus, all countries in Europe were more or less functional liberal democracies sustained by liberal market economies. The role of European integration in shaping this new regional community of democratic states cannot be underestimated. The Council of Europe, the European Union, the Organization for Cooperation and Security in Europe (OSCE) and the more international Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (the descendant of the OEEC) laid out the foundations for the construction and advancement of these liberal democracies and social market economies.

In this reconfiguration of European politics, due to its geostrategic position and its size (in terms of area, population and gross domestic product), Germany remains the central country in Europe. It is one of the historical ‘big three’ countries (along with France and the United Kingdom), and its elites have always been very pro-active in promoting the European integration process as a means of overcoming past actions, but also as a way to recreate a new German identity in which the European dimension plays an intrinsic role (Schild 2003; Patterson 2011). One of the reasons why Kennedy came to Berlin was the fact that France’s president, Charles de Gaulle, was pushing for a more independent foreign policy and had obtained the support of German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer for the Franco-German Élysée Treaty (signed on 22 January 1963). Although this was just a bilateral agreement for more intensive cooperation between the two countries, it became (and still remains) one of the most important informal motors of European integration. The Franco-German friendship between two formerly bitter enemies, particularly since the nineteenth century, has been a central pillar of the peaceful coexistence of European states since 1945 (Defrance 2013; Klünemann 2013; Pfeil 2013; Schwarzer 2013). However, the Franco-German cooperation has not been consistently stable and intense throughout the past fifty years. This cooperation has depended strongly on common interests, and above all on the chemistry between French presidents and German chancellors. While there was quite a high level of cooperation between France and Germany during the management of the Eurocrisis due to the good relationship between President Nicolas Sarkozy and Chancellor Angela Merkel (referred to in the tabloids as ‘Merkozy’), Merkel has had difficulties maintaining the same close relationship with President François Hollande (Cole 2008; Hilz 2013). The Franco-German friendship is so crucial for European integration because the United Kingdom is hesitant to take part in the ongoing construction of the European Union. As Hussein Kassim has shown, British Prime Minister Tony Blair tried to be more pro-active in shaping the European Union between 1997 and 2007; however, this was apparently a step too far. The lack of support from the predominantly Eurosceptic British population and divisions within both main political parties were major factors leading him to moderate his position. This became quite clear during the negotiations over the Constitutional Treaty in the Convention on the Future of the European Union in 2002–3 and in the negotiation of the budget during the British EU presidency in 2005. Although pro-active and constructive, the British government was forced to deal with an overwhelmingly negative and Eurosceptic population at home that opposed many of the policies of the Labour government (Kassim 2008: 177–78, 180; for more detail on the evolution of the relationship between Britain and the EU, see Geddes 2013: Ch. 2, 3, 4).

In this sense, 1963 was also the year of a new orientation for Europeans, following the strong positive input of the United States in the reconstruction and unification of Western Europe through the Marshall Plan (1947–53), the establishment of the Organisation of European Economic Co-operation (OEEC) and the tentative engagement in the first steps towards European integration through the Schuman Plan, which contributed to the reconciliation between France and Germany. For the United States, it was quite frustrating that Western Europe was divided into so many small national markets, preventing the application of an economies-of-scale approach on the part of US industries. The preferred model was a European-wide integrated market similar to that of the United States (Milward 1984: 169, 180; Clemens 2008: 95–6). This US influence on Western Europe and the Soviet dominance in Eastern Europe are essential elements in the understanding of modern European politics. The legacies of these postwar influences still play a role in shaping the behaviour of political elites and (at the least) the older generations of European populations.

According to the sociologist Piotr Sztompka, the transitional events in Germany and Central and Eastern Europe in 1989 can be regarded as epochal turning points similar to the French Revolution in 1789 and the Russian Revolution in 1917. It is important to note that such transitions are traumatic for the people involved, signifying that many populations in Central and Eastern Europe are still in the process of dealing with these transformations. Many developments in national politics in Central and Eastern Europe are related to still unfinished business in terms of social, cultural and political adjustment to the new reality. The divisions in societies such as Hungary, Latvia (between pro-German and pro-Russian Latvians, and between ethnic Latvians and the country’s Russian minority), Poland and several countries in the Western Balkans are still deep and will need to be addressed peacefully over time. The changes occurred so quickly that there was no time to reflect upon them (Sztompka 1993, 1996, 2000). The ‘politics of memory’ have become an important new dimension in many European countries, including Germany, Spain, Hungary and Poland. Paul Preston’s book on the Spanish Holocaust illustrates that the negative past related to the Spanish Civil War (1936–9) and the authoritarian dictatorship of general Francisco Franco (1939–75) remains in the present in the context of democratic societies if there is no attempt to truthfully address it. In this regard, lustration processes in Central and Eastern Europe have also attracted some degree of public attention (Aguilar Fernandez 2008; David 2004; Sikkink 2011; Preston 2012).

In view of the increasingly complex web of European politics – at local, national, European and transnational levels – this Handbook can serve as a modest guide, allowing insight into this dynamic world. It is intended to provide any reader with a useful instrument for location of the most relevant information and further reading on particular aspects of European politics. Consequently, the Handbook does not claim to be a comprehensive authority, but merely a first examination of this extraordinary world of European politics at the beginning of the twenty-first century.

We focus primarily on contemporary European politics, but always reflecting on the change that has taken place since the end of the 1960s. Our approach is comparative: the diversity and commonalities across the different countries of Europe are at the heart of this Handbook. The national level is our main focus; however, like a kaleidoscope, we often change perspectives in order to better understand what is happening at different levels of political systems. Since the Treaty of the European Union was ratified in 1993, the European Union has become an important factor in an ever-increasing number of regimes of shared, pooled sovereignty, such as the Economic and Monetary Union, the coordination of employment policies, trans-European networks, common spaces of citizenship, security and liberty, and (last but certainly not least) common foreign and security policy. This Handbook seeks to present a valuable guide to this new and unique system, allowing readers to obtain a better understanding of the emerging multilevel European governance system that links national polities to the European level and even to the global level.

We have set out to achieve three main purposes. First, we seek to provide to the interested reader well-informed and comprehensively researched information on specific aspects of European politics. Some of the chapters use textboxes to highlight important concepts in particular areas. Second, we attempt to reduce the complexity of European politics by analytically examining various aspects in more detail. Of course, there are limits to the in-depth study of particular aspects of European politics; however, the Handbook is thorough enough to present an excellent first mapping of the subject. Finally, we seek to motivate readers to continue their inquiries by providing them with a comprehensive literature review in each chapter and a commented bibliography at the end of the Handbook.

Four main topics will be addressed in the following sections. In the first section, we contextualize European politics within the broader tendencies of world politics. James Rosenau’s concept and framework of ‘turbulence’ in world politics is applied to explain how the global, European and national levels form part of the same complex web of transformations. In the second section, we conceptualize ‘European politics’ as comprising the entire continent, from Lisbon and Dublin to Kiev, Chisinau and Ankara. We link this discussion to what we call the ‘Great Transformation of the Twentieth Century’ in an allusion to the book by Karl Polanyi published in 1944 (now experiencing a revival after decades of neglect). The third section reflects on the democratization of the continent, first in Southern Europe and then in the Central and Eastern European countries. This is complemented by a bird’s-eye view of European politics today, in which the role of the European Union in shaping this process is highlighted. The fourth section discusses the values of Europeanism and the place of Europe in the world. This is followed by a short review of the chapters in the Handbook and some brief conclusions.

Turbulence and change in global politics: the impact on European politics

In the ‘brave new world’ of global politics, in order to get a sense of how realities have changed, a systematic guide to important phenomena and events is an absolute necessity. In 1990, James A. Rosenau characterized world politics as turbulent and unpredictable. According to this scholar, the new turbulent world can be conceptualized through three interconnected parameters: structural, relational and orientational factors. His point of departure was the change and major transformations that occurred in the period after 1950 (Rosenau 1990: 10).

The structural parameter has seen the replacement of the dominant realist Western state system by a bifurcated system in which states are no longer the sole actors. On the contrary, new actors (including non-governmental organizations [NGOs], private governance entities such as rating agencies, and international and supranational organizations like the United Nations and the European Union, respectively) cooperate but also compete with states. In this context, one should not neglect the growing importance of the large transnational corporations that sometimes have more financial power than states (Rosenau 1990: 100). Hedley Bull describes this new world as ‘neo-medievalism’, in reference to the overlapping authorities lacking clearly defined borders characteristic of the Middle Ages (Bull 2002: 245–57). The most dramatic change can be witnessed in the nation-state as a ‘power container’, as Anthony Giddens has characterized it. In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, by hardening its borders to the outside, the European nation-state (France being the best example in this regard) began to structure its national territory. War played a major role in creating th...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• List of illustrations
• List of contributors
• Preface
• List of abbreviations
• 1 Introduction: the ‘Great Transformation’ of European politics: A holistic view
• PART I Historical and theoretical background
• PART II The political system and institutions of the European Union
• PART III National political systems and institutions in European politics
• PART IV Political elites in European politics
• PART V Party systems and political parties
• PART VI Public administration and patterns of policy-making in European politics
• PART VII The political economy of Europe
• PART VIII Civil society and social movements in European politics
• PART IX Europe and the world
• Annotated bibliography
• Index