monetary autonomy, fixed exchange rate, and complete capital liberalization

 - quartet: + free movement of goods & services

Kagan

Of Paradise and Power

• genuine belief that US is the world's balance wheel but can't do everything
• this is why US was hesitant to go to Libya
• US has more military power, Eu has soft/econ power
• Eu wants to be a superpower again, but Kagan says that has to come militarily and not only economicall
• Europeans much more in favor of the Kantian democratic peace, negotiations, etc. - they've gotten away w/that because the US has been the (democratic) military power
• Libya: 
• contrary to Kagan: US should have gone in first, doesn't make sense that the UK and France would have led the charge - Schengen, UK and Fr would have wanted to make sure there are no refugees to get into Italy
• supports Kagan: 
• world is a safer place if other countries help the US carry the diplomatic and military load of ensuring global stability

Study Questions

1 - IG

• political actors, states call the shots for political negotiations and bargains
• strict oversight, no asymmetry of information because the delegated power DERIVES from the states
• they won't do anything that will hurt their interests

• ---

  SEA: IG, LCD bargaining, protection of sovereignty
• preference convergence b/w Fr, Ger, UK (--> econ [internal market] & political segments [voting reform])
• Britain threatened with exclusion

• ---

  TEU: argument 4 from Sandholtz
• IG b/c state governments making negotations & bargaining, generally calling shots
• Fr & others wanted to keep Ger close, fear of it getting too big
• Ger wanted to show it was a good European country, German dilemma
• 
  ALSO: some of Argument 2 from Sandholtz
• Domestic policy - France had a CA in diplomatic rel.s instead of the economy - wanted to take relative power away from Germany's Bundesbank

Study Questions

2 - Functionalism

• spillover: when integration in one sector creates pressures for integration in another sector - also typically includes more power to supranational actors, helped by non-state actors such as businesses
• automatic in that non-state actors can accrue political power without the help of individual states
• F.ists say that it's been very crucial
• Examples:
• ECSC --> EEC/Rome, adding internal market goals (and social policy?) & more than the production of steel
• EEC --> SEA, more market liberalization & political reform to give more power to the EU because it had performed well before, credible commitment to do more good things, etc.
• SEA --> TEU, added several things, most importantly: monetary union, 3 pillars to give more policy areas to the EU as a whole
• EMS --> EMU
•  
• Sanholtz Arg.s 1: spillover

Study Questions

3 - Inter-theoretical relations :)

• more convinced by the IG argument...
• Moravcsik: (IG, LCD bargaining, sovereignty protection)
• Functionalist side (given by Moravcsik): growing dependence on trade/global econ conditions, European institutions(kangaroo, crocodile groups)/creations of EMS(/spillover?), Euro business groups, entrepreneurial role of the Commission (DeLors)
• IG more compelling b/c: intuitive to identify why which actors have which interests, clear-cut
• Functionalism doesn't explain why business int.s were slow at getting on board...
• Weaknesses: F.ism explains spillover, where the state actors power comes from, asymmetry of information/principal agent problems

• ---

  Moravcsik = IG, Sandholtz = mix of the two w/an emphasis on functionalist
• Can be reconciled, which Sandholtz does, by explaining different parts of the same developments, not ACTUALLY antithetical

Study Questions

4 - MS interests (UK and France)

• France has used Commission the most! Benefitted from EU actions, so their interests are more closely aligned with the EU
• DeLors & Mitterand in SEA policies (+ failed social policy), CAP!
• Opportunities for more social policies, redistributive things, Challenges with sovereignty and MS control
• UK: Thatcher's market liberalization in the SEA
• Challenges to keep it shallow and wide, prevent from going deeper

Study Questions

5 - TEU & EMU

EMU: move from quasi-fixed rate exchange system to single currency as the completion of the internal market, keeping prices stable & inflation low

TEU = EMU + 3 pillars + extended rights to citizens + power to the EP & EU

Cue Sandholtz argument!

Study Questions

6 - New countries & Germany's choice

• Germany's choice: Germany chose to move Eastward, have peaceful borders with its neighbors - though this is challenging because it also means that Germany had to tie itself more the W. Eu. in other ways
• Generally good for the UK, shallow not deep - harder to come to agreements, but with the threat of a potential 2-tiered Europe
• Generally bad for France - CAP, harder to go deeper ... (but then why did they vote to let these countries in?)

Study Questions

8 - European Identity

• Could exist a European identity, but currently "identity lite"
• "Europeanization of national identity"
• Problem because it's multilingual (but celebration of diversity!) and no clear public sphere
• Language: Many countries have multiple languages and do just fine (uh, Switzerland has 4...)
• EU has tried really hard to create a public image of European ID - flag, license plates, passports, anthem (Ode to Joy, lol), etc.
• EU stands for values of modernity, democracy, human rights, and peace
• Most people have multiple identities (inclusive,not exclusive nationalists)