Liberal Intergovernmentalism

The aim of the article is to theorise on the role of principles as important variables influencing European politics. Recent Europe-related events, including but not limited to the immigration crisis, international economic and political competition on a global scale (as well as relations with third parties such as Russia and the United States), prompt us to revise liberal intergovernmentalism as proposed by Andrew Moravcsik at the beginning of 90s last century. The study is based on the analysis of four cases: immigration crisis, posted workers directive, multiannual financial framework post-2020, and relations with Russia concerned energy security. The article puts forward an idea that principles of European law (such as the principle of solidarity or the principle of the rule of law) have been successfully instrumentalised by a range of actors (major governments, as well as European Commission acting on their behalf) to the greatest benefit of the most powerful governments in Europe.

Climate change is regarded as one of our times greatest environmental, social and economic challenges. The impacts of climate change on natural ecosystems, human society and economics are potentially severe, making it one of the most significant political issues facing the international community. The EU’s response to global climate change, from the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 with the 8% emission reduction to 2008 years Climate and Energy Package with a 20% reduction, illustrates a clear increase in ambition for the region.

There has been  a shortage of a general discussion  about the benefits and shortcomings for the public in Iceland in relations to the possibility of Iceland joining the European Union (EU) and European Monetary Union  (EMU). The main  reason  is probably  due to  shortage of conclusion regarding this specific subject.
The aim of this research is to scrutinize this subject with the following research question in mind:

What are the benefits and shortcomings of joining the EU & EMU for the Icelandic worker?

An insight into the foundations of EU, EMU and the agreement on the
European  Economic Association (EEA agreement) will be provided
before looking  into  the three fundamental subjects that are of great
importance for the Icelandic public. They are: common social factors,
prices on food and beverages as well as interest rates on loans and the  monetary policy.
The paper concludes that there are many benefits at stake for the public if Iceland decides to join the EU and EMU. The common social factor would change the least due to the EEA agreement but as for the food and beverages cost it is clear that it would dramatically change for the benefit of the public. In regard to interest rates and monetary policy in Iceland the EMU would change the scenery in those areas to the better.
However the most important factor for the Icelandic worker is
regarding rates and loan cost due to high debts of Icelandic families.

Liberal approaches to regional integration, including neoliberal variants preoccupied with institutional cooperation, have informed scholarship on European integration for a long time. They still do today, and for good reason: their problematization of economic actors and resources offers a welcome departure from the static diplomatic accounts of high level politics, while at the same time allowing for an analysis of the state (and its role in integration) that, occasionally, corresponds more closely to actual policymaking (instead of offering merely a normative account of state behavior). When they first emerged some decades ago, they neatly combined an appreciation for the salience of state interests in allowing for (or inhibiting) intra-state cooperation and combined that with an acute understanding of the important role that markets, technology, and interdependence between firms and states had come to play in contemporary efforts toward regional cooperation. Liberal intergovernmentalism (LI) has managed to achieve the status of a 'baseline theory' on the subject of

This paper’s central thesis asserts that the supranational institutional changes implemented in the European Union since the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty in 2007 did not cause a ‘EU crisis of legitimacy’; but that to the contrary, it is the EU Member States’ growing strategic and performative legitimacy crisis both as Sovereign states and as Guardians of the EU Treaties that is the main driver  of demands for transformative change in the EU’s current institutional system of governance. To substantiate this thesis, this paper first investigates by means of a process tracing approach the historical double dialectics of the EU’s democratic deficit debates. It then examines the empirical evidence provided by FUEN’s MSPI drive to persuade the Commission to bring legislation protecting the rights of EU citizens belonging to autochthonous national minorities. Finally, it deploys Michael Zürn’s emerging paradigm of global politics to highlight the critical historical conjunctural bifurcation point the EU finds itself at present.

Pravac koji je uzburkao ustaljena razumevanja procesa evropskih integracija i doveo u pitanje neofunkcionalističku tezu o Evropskoj uniji kao svojevrsnom „perpetuum mobile“ projektu, liberalni intergovernmentalizam (LI) svakako je zaslužan za objašnjenje ekonomskih razloga udruživanja evropskih država. Rodonačelnik novog mišljenja, Stanley Hoffmann je prvi posumnjao u do tada neupitnu snagu, moć i uticaj institucija Evropske unije i ostao „akademski živ“, dok je Andrew Moravcsik produbio njegove početne postavke i poljuljao uverenja velikog Ernest B. Haas-a u efikasnost svojih teza. Iako zasnovana na realističkoj pretpostavci o državi kao centralnom akteru međunarodne politike, teorija liberalnog intergovernmentalizma ide mnogo dalje, odbijajući monokauzalna objašnjenja za složen proces stvaranja Evropske unije. Tako je ona posebno inovativna i privlačna zbog svoje epistemološke pozicije kreiranja mikroosnova za istraživanje integracije na osnovu sinteze tri teorije: liberalna - kojom se objašnjava formiranje nacionalnih preferencija, pogađačka teorija (bargaining theory) - koja se odnosi na proces međunarodnog pregovaranja, i na kraju institucionalna teorija - koja prikazuje razloge za stvaranje supranacionalnih institucija.

The European Union (EU) migrant and refugee crisis present a number of explanatory  challenges on Liberal Intergovernmentalism (LI). Since 2015, the EU has been accepting hundreds of  thousands of refugees following the relentless unrest in Northern Africa and the Gulf States, as well  as several other global conflicts. While the rationale for mass asylum and migration was initially  welcomed by many EU citizens, a devastating influx of inbound migrants and refugees, whose  definitions have come to a blur, has put an unforeseen and substantive amount of pressure on Member  States’ (MS) governments as well as the EU. Two years after these developments, German Chancellor  Angela Merkel began to lobby for a unifying economic plan to ideally “renew the promise of peace and security” to its EU citizens on three “existential” areas of concern, one of which being  immigration. This, however, has been received with much controversy as its effectiveness is being put to  question by a number of critics and EU citizens alike. In context of the EU migrant and refugee  crisis, this paper argues that MS’ preference-setting and MS’ bargaining dynamics ultimately  push for deeper European integration due to the primacy bestowed on MS as unitary actors  alongside the heightened role of institutions in response to the issue at hand.

Most accounts in current literature on North American integration consider the implementation of side and parallel environmental agreements to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and their corresponding institutions, as either a side-effect of the pursuit of the economic interests of the national governments or the result of the successful push of the socio-environmental demands of non-governmental organisations into the NAFTA's negotiation. These opposite explanations closely resemble liberal intergovernmentalist and transnational-focused accounts used to explain the occurrence and progression of regional integration in Europe. This article reviews and challenges both accounts and argues that they both assess inadequately the interests of governmental and transnational actors, and their roles and relative influence in determining the outcome of the negotiations of the NAFTA's side and parallel agreements on the environment. It proposes that a revised liberal intergovernmentalist account, that considers the non-economic national interests of nation-states, would explain better the pursuit and negotiation of the NAFTA's environmental side and parallel agreements, and the institutional structure that resulted from them.

The purpose of the article is to determine the probability of institutional reforms resulting from the debate on EU future held as a part of the "Conference on the Future of Europe" initiated in 2020. In the theoretical dimension, the analysis is based on the application of the liberal intergovernmentalist approach with its three assumptions: the strict categorization of intergovernmental decision-making built on the triad 'preferences-negotiations-insti-tutions', the concept of demoicracy, and the need for differentiated integration. On this basis, three hypotheses for each reform are presented and verified, which leads to determination of their possible implementation. The main thought is the statement that, when adopting the liberal intergovernmentalism, the EU will remain an intergovernmental organization, founded on societies organized in nation states, but at the same time internally differentiated in terms of the quality of membership.

This thesis endeavours to elaborate that there is a new shift in European foreign policy towards Israel, when the EU decided to go beyond rhetoric against Israeli settlement policy to take action. By analysing the pattern of EU-Israel relations, and studying the regression of the two sides’ relations between 2009-2016, the EU decision to label Israeli settlement products in 2015 could be evaluated as a political position aimed to send a serious refusal message to the right-wing policies in Tel Aviv.
Relying on theorising on European foreign policy instruments, and analysing European trade treatments of products originated in other occupied or disputed territories, the study affirms that distinguishing settlement goods were of European interest in order to rescue its role in
the Middle East, and its security priorities. By studying the role of European elites in driving the decision making process in EFP, the study claims that the labelling decision reflects the deep divergence between European and Israeli interests in the Middle East. This convention
has been raised among considerable sectors of European elites in a way pushed forward to create a shift in the way they deal with interests that clash with Israel, from hard criticism (rhetoric) to activating FP tools (action).

Iceland's application for European Union (EU) membership in summer 2009 suggests that the country's political parties had reconsidered their longstanding scepticism towards European integration and opted for closer engagement with the EU after the financial crisis. Applying Moravcsik's liberal theory of preference formation, this article investigates the European policies of Iceland's political parties from 2007 to 2010, focusing on four related European issues which have been prominent in the Icelandic EU debate: an application to join the EU with no reservations; the unilateral adoption of the euro; the inclusion of a clause in the constitution allowing a transfer of sovereignty; and the holding of a referendum on an EU application. It analyses whether the economic crash actually led to a change in the political parties' economic preferences and to a subsequent reformulation and adaptation of their long-term European policy goals and, if not, then how Iceland's decision to apply for EU membership is to be understood. The article concludes that the parties' European policies have remained remarkably stable despite the EU application. This indicates that Iceland's EU membership application can only be understood through a thorough examination of domestic politics, to which liberal intergovernmentalism pays insufficient attention.

The Liberal Intergovernmental theory is one of the most important integration theories explaining the creation and development of the European Union. Andrew Moravcsik developed this theory, which perceived the integration as an outcome of international bargaining, whereas the governments played the key role. The national governments associated with it have a clear and specific point of view about their preferences and pursue these preferences in bargaining with other member states so that this bargaining is in accordance with becoming more powerful and with greater competence. It is therefore relevant to explain why these member states decided to strengthen the European Parliament (EP), and what their interests are in making the European Parliament, a supranational institution, as powerful as the Council. Hence the question which arises here: To what extent can the Liberal Intergovernmentalism explain the strengthening role of the European Parliament after the Lisbon Treaty?