1 / 20

Tim Haughton University of Birmingham SSEES, University College London, 26 Oct 2009

Vulnerabilities, Accession Hangovers and the Presidency Role: Slovakia, Slovenia and the Czech Republic’s Choices for Europe. Tim Haughton University of Birmingham SSEES, University College London, 26 Oct 2009. Wh y look at NPF in New EU MS?. Existing literature mostly looks at OMS

dariog
Download Presentation

Tim Haughton University of Birmingham SSEES, University College London, 26 Oct 2009

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Vulnerabilities, Accession Hangovers and the Presidency Role: Slovakia, Slovenia and the Czech Republic’s Choices for Europe Tim Haughton University of Birmingham SSEES, University College London, 26 Oct 2009

  2. Why look at NPF in New EU MS? • Existing literature mostly looks at OMS • Most scholarly discussion of NMS has focused on accession and conditionality, but what explains their preferences at the European level as MS? • But also examining the process of NPF in NMS also illuminates the dynamics of domestic politics • inc. power and influence of societal groupings etc. • questions of state capacity • Legacies of communism, post-communist transition and the consequences of the accession process • Insights into future direction of EU • Feeds into theoretical debates about what drives integration and broader debates about preferences

  3. National Preference Formation Various explanations used in the literature: • Unique historical experiences (George, Paterson etc) • Size (Archer and Nugent) • Public opinion (Nguyen; Hooghe and Marks) • Dependency (Trade and EU-funds) (Stone Sweet & Sandholtz; Aspinwall) • Ideology (Aspinwall) • Societal interests (Moravcsik) • Vulnerabilities and perceived weakness (Copsey and Haughton, 2009; Haughton, 2009)

  4. Focus of study: Policy Areas

  5. Slovenia’s Choices for Europe

  6. Slovakia’s Choices for Europe

  7. Cz R’s Choices for Europe

  8. Economic Preferences • If ideology key to NPF might expect changes in all three cases • However – change not stability of prefs • Powerful societal interests? • Topolanek’sgovt and energy liberalization –CEZ –altho linked to dependences • Fico’s opposition to tax harmonization – foreign business lobby –although vulnerabilities • Weak unions – or just focus on domestic politics?

  9. External Preferences Support for Enlargement espec to WB: • Ideology – some element in the Czech case (Klaus and Svoboda) • Trade and business links • imp for Slovenia: top list of priorities for presidency • Decision to block negotiations for Croatia in Dec 2008 due to deeper set of motivations

  10. Institutional preferences • Ideology – yes on the catholic conservative right in all three cases • SK and Lisbon Treaty • Experience of 2003-4 IGC – decision to ‘retreat to the bench’ (Bilcik and Haughton, 2010) • Instrumentalization of Lisbon ratification • Fico welcomed decision to launch new IGC in 2007, but his priority eurozone entry

  11. Completion of integration Imp for Slovakia: • Valence issue • Business interests – in 2006 Fico’s publicly voiced doubts – impact on koruna • Vulnerability – fear of ‘capital flight and devaluation’ (Gould, 2009) • Link here to deeper sense of vulnerability associated with SK’s complicated accession – preference sublimation/entrapment?

  12. The Presidency Effect - SI + CZ • Raised profile of European issues • Changes in institutional architecture • Affected stance of key politicians • SI – preparations for a gaffe-free presidency cast long shadow over SI – fostered consensus • Presidency effect and preference formation

  13. Vulnerabilities and Weaknesses • Vulnerability vs dependency: • Dependency is narrower concept which focuses on economics • Perceived weakness not just about eco stats • All of the key priorities of the 3 states (liberal internal market, energy security, opposition to tax harmonization, further enlargement and flow of EU funds) can be explained. • 2 components: • economic and the perceived place

  14. Economic 4 measures of vulnerability: • Net recipient/net beneficiary • Openness of economy • Trade dependency on EU-27 • Debt to GDP • Bring together in composite measure

  15. EU Dependency: Net Recipients and Net Contributors (2007)

  16. Openness of Economy

  17. Perceived place • Much harder to quantify • Vulnerability of labels: • SI – liminal state; seen as ‘Balkan’, ‘former Yugoslav’ etc. • ‘Insecurity discourse’ in Slovakia – link to no at Lux in 1997 • Fainter echo in Czech case

  18. 4 vulnerabilities • History of 20th C: benefits of European co-operation and being seen as part of Western European club of established democracies • Size – dependent on neighbours not just for security, but for economics • Klaus et al EU as a ‘marriage of convenience’ not a ‘marriage of love’ (Braun, 2008) • EU as a protective umbrella vs harsh rains of globalization • Lack of power and voice in multinational organization –Benes decrees (Fico and Klaus)

  19. Conclusions • Accession hangover – time and effort on accession – still coming to terms with membership • Presidency effect in cases of SI and CZ • Vulnerabilities = key, but bases of vulnerabilities not all set in stone – what happens when/if become net contributors? • Economic crisis and vulnerabilities – will this change stances?

  20. Reasons not to be cheerful.......

More Related