Late sovereign diplomacy

The Hague Journal of Diplomacy

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 121-141

  Adler Nissen, Rebecca ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Constitutional pluralism; Doxa; European union; Late sovereign diplomacy; Legitimacy; National interest; Socialization

Indexed keywords

EID: 72449127622     PISSN: 18711901     EISSN: 1871191X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/187119109X440870     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1977), p. 328.
2. Neil Walker, 'Late Sovereignty in the European Union', in Neil Walker (ed.), Sovereignty in Transition(Oxford and Portland OR: Hart Publishing, 2003).
3. See also Brian Hocking, 'Introduction: Gatekeepers and Boundary-Spanners: Thinking about Foreign Ministries in the European Union', in Brian Hocking and David Spence (eds), Foreign Ministries in the European Union: Integrating Diplomats (Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave, 2005), p. 9.
4. Andrew Moravcsik, 'Integrating International and Domestic Politics: A Theoretical Introduction', inPeter Evans, Harold Jacobson and Robert Putnam (eds), Double-Edged Diplomacy: Interactive Games inInternational Affairs (Berkeley CA: University of California Press, 1993).
5. Robert D. Putnam, 'Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games', International Organization, vol.42, no.3, 1988 427-460.
6. Moravcsik, 'Integrating International and Domestic Politics', p. 23.
7. Iver B. Neumann, '"A Speech that the Entire Ministry may Stand For", or: Why Diplomats Never Produce Anything New', International Political Sociology, vol.1, no.2, 2007 183-200.
8. Walker, 'Late Sovereignty in the European Union', p. 9.
9. Even if this has not always been a true and fair picture, it is the prevailing understanding of how diplomacy has functioned since the Peace of Wesphalia in 1648. From the perspective of international law,it can hardly be denied that 1648 marked an epoch in its evolution, not least by establishing the principles of political self-determination, non-intervention and legal equality between states. See Leo Gross, 'The Peace of Westphalia, 1648-1948', The American Journal of International Law, vol.42, no.1, 1948,pp. 20-41.
10. Gary Marks, Liesbet Hooghe and Kermit Blank, 'European Integration from the 1980s: State-Centric Versus Multi-Level Governance' Journal of Common Market Studies, vol.34, no.3, 1996 341-378.
11. See also Tanja E. Aalberts, 'The Future of Sovereignty in Multi-Level Governance Europe: A Constructivist Reading', Journal of Common Market Studies, vol.42, no.1, 2004 23-46.
12. See Jozef Bátora, 'Does the European Union Transform the Institution of Diplomacy?', Journal of European Public Policy, vol.12, no.1, 2005, p. 56.
13. Morten Egeberg and Jarle Trondal, 'An Organization Theory Perspective on Multi-Level Governance in the EU: The Case of the EEA as a Form of Affiliation', ARENA Working Paper, no. 97/21 (Oslo:ARENA, 1997).
14. Brigid Laffan, 'The Social Psychology of Identity Change', in Richard K. Herrmann, Thomas Risse and Marilynn B. Brewer (eds), Transnational Identities: Becoming European in the EU (Lanham MD:Rowman & Littlefield, 2004), p. 84.
15. See Simon Hix, 'The Study of the European Union II: The "New Governance" Agenda and Its Rival'. Journal of European Public Policy, vol.5, no.1, 1998 38-65;
16. and Marks, Hooghe and Blank, 'European Integration from the 1980s' 270-271.
17. John Ruggie, 'Territoriality and Beyond: Problematizing Modernity in International Relations', International Organization, vol.47, no.1, 1993 139-174.
18. The debate can be linked back to Bull, The Anarchical Society 254-255.
19. For a detailed account of 'neo-medievalism' and its relevance for contemporary international relations, see Jörg Friedrich, 'The Meaning of New Medievalism', European Journal of International Relations, vol.7, no.4, 2001 475-501.
20. Walker, 'Late Sovereignty in the European Union', p. 23.
21. Michael Bruter, 'Diplomacy without a State: The External Delegations of the European Commission' ,Journal of European Public Policy, vol.6, no.2, 1999 183-205.
22. Simon W. Duke, 'Preparing for European Diplomacy?', Journal of Common Market Studies, vol.40,no. 5, 2002 849-870.
23. David Spence 'The Evolving Role of Foreign Ministries in the Conduct of European Union Affairs' ,in Brian Hocking and David Spence (eds), Foreign Ministries in the European Union: Integrating Diplomats(New York: Palgrave, 2005), p. 33.
24. Jo Shaw, 'European Union Legal Studies in Crisis? Towards a New Dynamic', Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, vol.16, no.2, 1996, p. 231-255.
25. Shaw, 'European Union Legal Studies in Crisis?', p. 237.
26. Case 6/64, [1964] ECR 585, 593.
27. Karen J. Alter, 'The European Court's Political Power', West European Politics, vol.19, no.3, 1996,p. 458.
28. Jo Shaw and Ant Je Wiener, 'The Paradox of the European Polity', in Maria Green Cowles and Mike Smith (eds), State of the European Union 5: Risks, Reform, Resistance and Revival, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).
29. Pierre Bourdieu, In Other Words (Stanford CA: Stanford University Press, 1990).
30. Socialization can be understood as a process of inducting agents into the norms and rules of a given community; see Jeffrey T. Checkel, 'International Institutions and Socialization in Europe: Introduction and Framework', International Organization, vol.59, no.4, 2005 801-826.
31. Leon N. Lindberg, 'The Political Dynamics of European Economic Integration', in Mette Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, Debates on European Integration: A Reader (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), p. 127.
32. See also Ben Rosamond, 'The Uniting of Europe and the Foundation of EU Studies: Revisiting the Neo-Functionalism of Ernst B. Haas', Journal of European Public Policy, vol.12, no.2, 2005 237-254.
33. Thomas Banchoff, The German Problem Transformed: Institutions, Politics, and Foreign Policy, 1945-1995, (Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press, 1999).
34. Banchoff, The German Problem Transformed, p. 22.
35. Jeannette Mak, 'Informality as an Asset? The Case of EMU', in Thomas Christiansen and Simona Piattoni (eds), Informal Governance in the European Union (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2003), p. 205.
36. Richard K. Herrmann and Marilynn B. Brewer, 'Identity and Institutions: Becoming European in the EU', in Richard K. Herrmann and Marilynn B. Brewer (eds), Transnational Identities: Becoming Europeanin the EU (New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004), p. 12.
37. Jeffrey Lewis, 'The Janus Face of Brussels: Socialization and Everyday Decision-Making in the European Union', International Organization, vol.59, no.4, 2005 937-971.
38. Laffan, 'The Social Psychology of Identity Change' 87-88.
39. See also Lewis, 'The Janus Face of Brussels'
40. Checkel, 'International Institutions and Socialization in Europe'.
41. Bátora, 'Does the European Union Transform the Institution of Diplomacy?', p. 56.
42. Hocking, 'Introduction'.
43. Mai'a Keapuolani Davis Cross, 'A European Epistemic Community of Diplomats', in Paul Sharp and Geoffrey Wiseman, The Diplomatic Corps as an Institution of International Society (New York: Palgrave,2007) 224-225.
44. Rebecca Adler-Nissen, 'The Diplomacy of Opting Out: A Bourdieudian Approach to National Integration Strategies', Journal of Common Market Studies, vol.46, no, 3, 2008 663-684.
45. Stephanie Bailer, 'Bargaining Success in the European Union: The Impact of Exogenous and Endogenous Power Resources', European Union Politics vol.5, no, 1, 2004 99-123.
46. Stephen Wall, A Stranger in Europe: Britain and the EU from Thatcher to Blair (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), p. 202.
47. After preparation in COREPER, proposals enter Council deliberations labelled either as 'A-points' or 'B-points'. A-points are decisions that have already been made by COREPER and are therefore accepted without discussion in the Council. B-points are proposals on which the COREPER could not agree and thus need to be discussed and possibly voted upon by the ministers. Empirical studies show that up to 90per cent of Council decisions are A-points. See Jeffrey Lewis 'Institutional Environments and Everyday EU Decision-Making: Rationalist or Constructivist?', Comparative Political Studies, vol.36, no.1, February 2003 97-124.
48. According to May all, the underlying rationale of the diplomatic profession is to facilitate orderly and peaceful relations among states; see James May all, 'Introduction', in Paul Sharp and George Wiseman(eds), The Diplomatic Corps as an Institution of International Society (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan,2007), p. 6.
49. Iver B. Neumann, ' To Be a Diplomat', International Studies Perspectives, vol.6, no.1, 2005 72-93.
50. See Josef Janning, 'Leadership Coalitions and Change: The Role of States in the European Union' ,International Affairs, vol.81, vol.4 821-831.
51. Annica Kronsell, 'Gender, Power and European Integration Theory', Journal of European Public Policy,vol.12, no.6, 2005, p. 1034.
52. See also Christopher J. Bickerton, 'The Perils of Performance: Legitimization in EU Foreign Policy' ,Perspectives: The Central European Review of International Affairs, vol.28, 2007, p. 37.
53. See also Walker, 'The Variety of Sovereignty', in Rebecca Adler-Nissen and Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen (eds.), Sovereignty Games: Instrumentalizing State Sovereignty in Europe and Beyond (Basing stoke: Palgrave, 2008) 21-32 at p. 31.
54. Dario Castiglione, 'Reflections on Europe's Constitutional Future', Constellations, vol.11, no.3,2004 393-411;
55. Marlene Wind, 'The European Union as a Polycentric Polity: Returning to a Neo-Medieval Europe?', in J.H.H. Weiler and Marlene Wind (eds), Constitutionalism beyond the State (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003).
56. J.H.H. Joseph, 'In Defence of the Status Quo: Europe's Constitutional Sonderweg', in Weiler and Wind (eds), Constitutionalism beyond the State, p. 10.
57. Jacob Lempp and Janko Altenschmidt, 'The Prevention of Deadlock through Informal Processes of"Supranationalization": The Case of COREPER', Journal of European Integration, vol.30, no.4, 2008,pp. 511-526.
58. James Heartfield, 'European Union: A Process Without a Subject', in Christopher J. Bickerton, Philip Cunliffe and Alexander Gourevitch (eds), Politics Without Sovereignty: A Critique of Contemporary International Relations (London: Rout ledge, 2007), p. 147.
59. Allot, quoted in Knud Erik Jørgensen, 'Modern European Diplomacy: A Research Agenda', Journal of International Relations and Development , vol.2, no.1, 1999, p. 86.
60. Late sovereign diplomacy is linked to the reflexion or self-confrontation, which is characteristic of late modernity; see Ulrich Beck, The Reinvention of Politics: Towards a Theory of Reflexive Modernization(Cambridge: Polity Press, 1994).
61. Paul Sharp, 'Who Needs Diplomats? The Problem of Diplomatic Representation', in Christer Jönssonand Richard Langhorne (eds), Problems and Issues in Contemporary Diplomacy, Volume III (London: Sage,2004), p. 76.
62. See Andreas Follesdal and Simon Hix, 'Why There Is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone and Moravcsik', Journal of Common Market Studies, vol.44, no.3, 2006 533-562.
63. See also Gráinne de Búrca, 'The Quest for Legitimacy in the European Union', The Modern Law Review, vol.59, no.3, 1996 349-376.
64. Sharp, 'Who Needs Diplomats?', p. 67.
65. See Andrew F. Cooper, Brian Hocking and William Maley (eds), Global Governance and Diplomacy: Worlds Apart? (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006).
66. Amitav Acharya, Constructing a Security Community in South-East Asia: ASEAN and the Problem of Regional Order (London: Routledge, 2001);
67. and Andre Malamud, 'Mercosur Turns 15: Between Rising Rhetoric and Declining Achievement', Cambridge Review of International Affairs, vol.18, no.3, 2005 421-436.
68. Markus Krajewski, 'Democratic Legitimacy and Constitutional Perspectives of WTO Law', Journal of World Trade, vol.35, no.1. 2001, p. 171.
69. Aalberts, 'The Future of Sovereignty in Multi-level Governance Europe'.