Normative Power Europe

Normative Power Europe There are different interpretations of the European Union’s role in international affairs, starting from Francois Duchene's notion of “Civilian Power Europe,” developed in early 1970s. As Jan Orbie suggests, there were two main reasons why it was so widely referred. First, the actuality of the topic (Europe’s growing international influence), and second, the notion was offered in a quite vague terms and opened a space for interpretations.1 “Civilian Power Europe”, entails two main features, on one hand, its interests and power dimension, on the other, its value system and normative influence.2In this regard, the military integration as advancing its aims has been a matter of debate. Later, Realists criticized the notion of “Civilian Power Europe”. For example, Hedley Bull described CPE as “a contradiction in terms,”3and argued that the Britain and the Western European States needed to become more self-sufficient in military matters. Ian Manners, two decades later, in his seminal work – “Normative Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?” took up the normative dimension of CPE,4meanwhile still criticized both of the approaches as relics from their times, valuing “direct physical power in the form of actual empirical capabilities whether ‘long on economic power’ (Duchene), or a ‘need for military power’(Bull).”5 He suggests that the perception of the EU in the international affairs would be best described as a “normative power”,6 defined as “ability to shape conceptions of ‘normal’” on international arena.7 He altogether dismisses the previous reckoning that Europe would be unable to turn into a normative power without a military force.8In Manner’s opinion, Europe cannot be compared to any other former political arrangement. Concept of “soft power” is differentiated from 1 Jan Orbie, “Civilian Power Europe:Review of the Original and Current Debates” Cooperation and Conflict: Journal of the Nordic International Studies Association 41, no.1 (2006): 123–128 2 Ibid., 125 3 Hedley Bull, “Civilian Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?” JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 21 no.2 (1982): 149–170 4 For comparison of normative and civilian power see: Ian Manners and Thomas Diez, “Reflecting on Normative Power Europe.” in Power in World Politics. ed. Felix Berenskoette and Michael J. Williams (New York: Routledge, 2007), 177-179 5 Ian Manners, “Normative Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?” JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 40 no.2 (2002): 238 6 Ibid. 7 Ibid., 239 8 Ibid., 241-42 “normative power”, on the grounds of its substantive dissimilarity, as being tool of advancement of national interests, which was constructed in the US reality.9 He identifies five “core” norms, respectively given as peace, liberty, democracy, rule of law and human rights and fundamental freedoms and four “minor” norms of social solidarity, anti- discrimination, sustainable development and good governance.1011We stay in the realm of “minor” norms for the study. Talking of EU’s norms, comes up the next logical step - their diffusion. Manners differentiates between six different factors: contagion, informational diffusion, procedural diffusion (being the most relevant for following study, since it deals with institutionalization of relations with third party), transference, overt diffusion and cultural filter. 12 Hiski Haukkala contradicts Manners claim that EU poses just as a passive player, which depends on a passive diffusion of norms and he assigns it to more active role, referring to the example of accession process designed by the EU,13where conditionality plays an important role. Senka Neuman Stanivuković also highlights that, the assumption that NPE is somehow fixed system, is faulty. She underlines that because of its only focus on norm diffusion, it “overestimates the role of EU institutions in the reproduction of European norms and underestimates the role of other regional and domestic actors who are also willing and able to instigate and legitimize particular reforms in ‘the name of Europe.’”14 The approach of the EU towards different groups of states are also divergent. If towards the applicants, EU and its members states can be quite assertive and force them to abide by its demands, towards the immediate neighbors, to whom it does not grant a membership perspective, it could be seen as a “reluctant empire”, realizing the limitations of enlargement. 15 European Neighborhood Policy which developed along with the largest expansion, the so called “big bang” 9 Ian Manners and Thomas Diez, “Reflecting on Normative Power Europe,” in Power in World Politics. ed. Felix Berenskoetter and Michael J. Williams (New York: Routledge, 2007), 179 10 Ibid., 242-43 11 For detailed overview of these norms see: Ian Manners "The Normative Ethics of the European Union," International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-) 84, no. 1 (2008): 45-60 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25144714. 12 Manners and Diez, “Reflecting on Normative Power Europe,” 179 13 Hiski Haukkala, "The European Union as a Regional Normative Hegemon: The Case of European Neighbourhood Policy." Europe-Asia Studies 60, no. 9 (2008): 1605. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20451639. 14 Senka Neuman Stanivuković, “Normative Power Europe, Democratization, and Challenges of Complexity,” in Democracy Promotion and the Normative Power Europe Framework: The European Union in South Eastern Europe, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia ed. Marek Neuman (Springer, 2019): 165-166 15 Haukkala, “The European Union as a Regional Normative Hegemon: The Case of European Neighbourhood Policy,” 1610 enlargement of the of the EU, and later stemming from it, the Eastern Partnership, have been the instruments for the Union to retain its normative power, hence maintain stability in its immediate neighborhood. This argument from the perspective of normative power does not seem very moral, but also European Security Strategy outlines16 and the Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy17 confirms the ethos, in the words of Haukkala: “the EU cannot feel secure and continue to prosper if the rest of the continent is in a downward spiral towards increased insecurity and poverty.”18 This shift to policy, tailored to the fears of the domestic population, is well demonstrated in the excerpt from Catherine Ashton’s speech relating to Arab Spring and EU’s involvement in the processes: “it is very important that we send the message very clearly to our people that it is about foreign policy in their own interest. If we have a good neighborhood that is sustainable and secure, that is democratic and economically growing, that that is to our advantage because we are able to trade with them, to work with them, to support them and to see them as our neighbors into the future. So as I began, Europe should be judged by its ability to operate in its own neighborhood and my determination is to make sure that the judgment is a positive one.”1920 Haukkala criticized NPE as being directed to show an ideal version of the EU, what it “should be”, not what it is.21 Since it is claimed that EU does what it is, then again comes the questions of how this being is translated into actions and what actors come in play. Because of its mixture of “attraction, coercion and legitimacy”22 it more qualifies as “regional normative hegemon”. Sieglinde Gstöhl and Sofía López adding also the element of restrain from EU’s side, calling it hegemon “by accident,”23 which is offering no membership perspective to neighbors, but “sharing 16 Council of the European Union, European Security Strategy. European Communities, 2009 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/30823/qc7809568enc.pdf 17 European Union, Shared Vision, Common Action: A Stronger Europe: A Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign And Security Policy,2016 https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/eugs_review_web_0.pdf 18 Haukkala, “The European Union as a Regional Normative Hegemon: The Case of European Neighbourhood Policy,” 1603 19 Catherine Ashton, “Remarks on ‘The EU Response to the Arab Spring’” ( Speech, Washington, July 12, 2011), European Commission Press Release Database, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-11-524_en.htm 20 Cited in: Marek Neuman, Democracy Promotion and the Normative Power Europe Framework: The European Union in South Eastern Europe, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia ed. Marek Neuman, Springer, 22, 2019 21 Haukkala, “The European Union as a Regional Normative Hegemon: The Case of European Neighbourhood Policy,”1602 22 Ibid., 1608 23 Sieglinde Gstöhl and Sofía López, The European Union in its Neighbourhood: An Accidental Regional Hegemon, CEPOB - College of Europe Policy Brief series, March 26, 2018, https://www.coleurope.eu/research- paper/european-union-its-neighbourhood-accidental-regional-hegemon everything with the Union but institutions,”24 simply illustrates the presence of strong incentives, such as necessity to stabilize surroundings, rather than let them bring instability. Thomas Diez also tries to tackle problematics risen by contested notion of NPE by connecting it to the concept of hegemony, which was avoided because of its connotations to realist understanding of it related to forceful power, but he suggests Gramscian perception of hegemony, as disseminating “common sense” values.25 This discourse is worthy of further exploration, since it synthesizes both norms and interests of the EU as well as involvement of state or non-state actors. Although, in the limits of this article, it will be discussed in the frame of reference of the promotion of core labour standards on a single case of Georgia. Referring to the concept of hegemony in the context of normative power, one might ask why not just use the term soft power? Here I would again share the explanation of Haukkala, as he differentiates between the nature of say the US and the EU in Europe. The latter is not a state actor and we are dealing with the process of a regional integration, where third parties are usually themselves willing to align to and they often do “aspire to join before accepting its norms and values as entirely legitimate.”26 24 Romano Prodi, “A Wider Europe - A Proximity Policy as the key to stability” (Speech, Brussels, December 5- 6, 2002), European Commission Press Release Database, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-02- 619_en.htm 25 Thomas Diez, “Normative power as hegemony,” Cooperation and Conflict 48, no.2 (2013): 195. DOI: 10.1177/0010836713485387 26 Haukkala, “The European Union as a Regional Normative Hegemon: The Case of European Neighbourhood Policy”, 1608