Newsletter
Newsletter
In the autumn of 2005, the IES organised a lecture series on “The impact of 9/11 on European Foreign and Security Policy”. Based on this series, initiator and then Senior Research Fellow Giovanna Bono edited a book bearing the same title.
The process of ‘securitisation’ is reflected in the endorsement by the EU of the notion of ‘threats’. Today, the ‘threat’ of ‘terrorists’ acquiring ‘weapons of mass destruction’ influences a wide range of new policies. Thus there has been the creation of new nexuses between internal and external security, and security and development. Overall, the EU has not yet been fully successful in resisting the demands of officials and experts who want to persuade the public of the need for ‘exceptional measures’ to combat terrorism. Hence, EU officials have not yet been able to unequivocally reaffirm in practice their adherence to international law.
Between September 26 – 29, the Technologiepark Villach was the venue of the ICL 2006 conference. This conference is a part of a series focusing on how ICT can be used in the learning process. The conference featured over 200 contributions from all over the world, with a representation from the 5 continents. As a part of the demonstration-sessions, IES researcher Ruben Lombaert presented, and gave a live demonstration of the IES e-learning modules, which was received positively. The emodules of the IES are drawn up from the basic principle that puts the end-user in the central spot. This approach made a clear difference with other demonstrations, where quite a high level of ICT-skills were required to be able to use the e-learning software. Later during the conference, Mr. Lombaert also chaired the session on New Learning Models and Applications, which featured contributions from Switzerland, Italy and Brazil.
IES Academic Director Sebastian Oberthür delivered the academic address during the 2006 graduation ceremony of the Erasmus MUNDUS programme Master in Economics of International Trade and European Integration that took place at the VUB on 2 December 2006. The address had the title “Beyond Economics: The EU in International Environmental Governance”. Prof. Oberthür argued that economic thinking provides an important basis for exploring the role of the EU in international environmental policy and politics in general, but that it needs to be complemented with additional factors in order to arrive at a fuller understanding. The M.A. In Economics of International Trade and European Integration is a one-year interuniversity programme with participation from Belgium (VUB, University of Antwerp), Italy (University of Bari), Spain (University of Cantabria), the UK (Staffordshire University), the Czech Republic (Prague University of Economics), and France (Lille University USTL).
Established in 1955, DGAP is one of the leading foreign policy think tanks in Germany. Its International Forum on Strategic Thinking promotes a comprehensive perspective on global security challenges and threats. The participants of the New Faces Conference are promising young professionals and scholars pursuing an active career in the field of foreign and security policy. They come from all over Europe, the US, Asia and the Middle East, and are invited upon recommendation only. This year’s conference dealt with regional security cooperation. There were five panels: 1) Regional Security Cooperation: Current trends, 2) Chains of Interdependency: Coordinating Regional/Global Energy Security, 3) Reinventing the Carrot: ENP as an Alternative to EU-Enlargement? 4) The Role of Regional Security Institutions and Strategic Alliances in Asia, 5) After the Roadmap: Cooperation between Multinational Actors in the Middle East. The 10 participants presented papers on how regional cooperation and strategic partnerships between single states, regional and international organizations as well as civil society and the private sector contribute to enhance security in a given policy area and/ or region. These case studies aim at contributing to the closure of a gap in current policy research, where the literature is mostly geared towards economic aspects of regional cooperation, neglecting the increasing “securitization” of political and even economic agendas, institutions and fora. 10 other participants served as discussants in one of those five panels. Mehmet presented his paper The Geopolitics of the East-West Energy Corridor and the Viability of EU-Turkey Partnership for Security of Energy Supply in the second panel. Energy security has recently become a very important issue in the European foreign and security policy circles. Mehmet’s paper focuses on the case of the East-West Energy Corridor (EWEC). This is a multi-dimensional project for energy transport through Turkey from the Caspian Basin and Middle East to Europe. Although only partly operational at the moment, it involves secure and continuous transfer of important amounts of oil and gas: about 6 million barrels of oil a day and about 40 billion cubic meters of gas per year. The EWEC is, therefore, vital for the future security of European energy supply in the age of the globally competitive energy market. The paper first elaborates the internal geopolitics by giving details of the EWEC. It then explores the nature of the growing energy demand in the EU and second, locates it within the broader demand and supply situation at the global level. These are the external geopolitics of the EWEC. Aware of the geopolitical importance of the EWEC, the EU policy-makers hastily moved to incorporate Turkey into the EU’s energy market through ‘multilateral dialogue’. However, the way the EU policymakers have hitherto handled the issue is quite problematic. Therefore, the paper finally examines the determinants of failure in the EU-Turkey partnership for energy supply security. It answers the following questions: what went wrong in the negotiation of the Energy Community Treaty, and why did Turkey avoid signing the treaty that would make it a part of the EU’s internal energy market? The paper concludes with some policy suggestions. DGAP will publish this paper in a forthcoming edited volume in 2007.
The EU has become an unlikely and wonderful butterfly. When the EU flaps its wings to reduce the environmental impact of cars, electronics, and hazardous substances, Europe’s regulations are taken up by producers and governments across the world. Edward Lorenz’s idea of the ‘ Butterfly Effect’ can be seen in global regulatory trends. The European Union is active in an experiment in the environmental product regulation of cars, electronics and hazardous substances. Producers wanting to sell their products in Europe have to meet the EU’s standards. But, an unintended consequence is that Governments in China (PRC), S. Korea, and some US States are taking aboard measures inspired by the EU’s actions. The Korean Ministry of Commerce sponsored a workshop on June 15 2006, in Seoul, S.Korea, to look at the challenges of today’s environmental product regulation. IES Researcher Aaron McLoughlin was invited to speak about the EU’s environmental product regulation regime.
Aaron joined a panel of speakers from around Asia. South Korean and Chinese government offi cials, Korean academics, lawyers and industry, and Japanese industry were on the panel. The EU may not yet be a beautiful butterfly but when it flap its regulatory wings the unintended consequences are felt far and wide.
IES Berkeley is involved in a University of California-wide Comparative Immigration and Integration Programme under the leadership of Professor Martin. Its aim is to develop data and analysis for rational decision making on emotionally charged migration issues on both sides of the Atlantic. The programme’s two major activities are the production of the newsletter Migration News covering significant developments in the field throughout the world and organising seminars and research on topics of current interest. California is a microcosm of immigration issue in the United States in that it has a huge number of both legal and undocumented migrants from Mexico and other parts of Latin America. It is hoped that the contact with Professor Martin will lead to further activities in the field of migration between IES Berkeley, or UC Davis, and our own IES. This is the first time that Richard has visited the Berkeley campus which has impressive classical university and modern architecture (including a modern art museum) and ranks amongst the most prestigious of US state universities. It lies about 30 minutes drive from downtown San Francisco and is surrounded by mountains and Californian redwood forest. The Institute of European Studies (the preposition of is preferred to our for) was created in 1999 by the unifi cation of staff, resources and programmes of the UC Center for German and European Studies and UC Berkeley’s Center for Western European Studies. The Berkeley based IES initiates and finances research, disseminates research finding to the scholarly community and provides a community for students and faculty who share a European focus to their work
From 16 to 20 October, visiting Fellow Prof. Dr; Pascual Correa Alvarez from the University of Santa Clara (Cuba) visited Brno in the Czech Republic. Pascual lectured on Cuban Environmental Policy and Implementation of Principle 10 of the Rîo Convention in the Faculty of Foreign languages of the Masarik University of Brno. Both professors and students from the Faculties of Law, Social ciences and History were present. He gave a similar lecture to students and professors of the Faculty of Geography, and lectured in the Friendship Cuban Czech Association about Cuba nowadays. Pascual is a postdoctoral research fellow at the IES working on environmental law issues in the framework of a grant issued by the Brussels Region on “Research in Brussels”. Pascual joiined the IES in early 2006 and will stay at the Institute until early December.
IES Researcher Mehmet Y. Tezcan participated in the 1st Annual GARNET Conference on “Global Financial and Monetary Governance, the EU, and Emerging Market Economies”. The conference was organized in cooperation with the Dutch National Bank and the Reinventing Bretton Woods Committee in Amsterdam, the Netherlands on 27-29 September 2006. The conference sought to contemplate and offer ways of global reinstitutionalization that can take us back to those stability and growth conditions. Given the increasing consequences of financial crises in the developing world at the socio-economic level, institutional control of now ‘loose canon’ financialization declares more and more urgency. During three days and in numerous plenary sessions and workshops, the conference participants including high-profile policy makers and university researchers searched for answers for important questions. These included: (1) what is the appropriate balance between public and private forms of authority in global financial governance in rules setting, enforcement, and decision-making, (2) what is the appropriate public-private balance in terms of burden sharing in both crisis prevention and resolution, (3) how might the global financial architecture be made more compatible with the specific aspirations of countries in terms of economic development and economic legitimate national political processes, (4) how best to balance issues of accountability and legitimacy at the national and global level, with the need to build an architecture which is sensitive to both national policy concerns and other social developmental objectives, (5) what are the implications of monetary and financial governance for questions of gender across a wide range of societies, (6) how can the economically disadvantaged best be represented in the global financial architecture, recognizing that improving their development prospects is a principal aim of global financial governance, (7) what role can and should the EU play in monetary & financial governance in the light of efficiency/legitimacy cosiderations? ...
Training Sessions: Teaching Europe in practice: experiences from the field.
As the targeted schools included schools offering general, technical, and professional education, their audiences required a specific approach and quite a bit of research to adapt the message to the receiver. Remarkable was the lack of knowledge about the European Union, and especially about the reach of EU policies. Often, things that are a firm part of the daily life of youngsters (e.g. easy travelling in a border-check free zone such as the Schengen area) are not seen as resulting from EU-policy. Youngsters under the age of 20 consider this normal (they never knew another world). The same applies to the Euro, which was already there when these youngsters started receiving pocket money and opened their first bank accounts. When explained how the institutions work in their daily practice, youngsters start looking at the European political game surrounding them in a completely new way. Actions like these are only a first step in raising awareness, but as any political scientist knows, a political structure cannot last without having credibility and legitimacy in the eyes of its citizens.
Feature article by visiting professor Pascual Correa (with thanks to Jeroen Soete for the summary). Read the full article on p. 4-5 in the newsletter.
On 11 October Victor Do Prado (WTO, Deputy Head of Cabinet of DG Lamy) and Denis Redonnet (European Commission, Deputy Head of Cabinet of Trade Commissioner Mandelson) presented their personal views on the Doha Development Round. Under the title “The Doha Development Round: Key Issues and Players”, Both speakers addressed the current suspension of trade negotiations in the World Trade Organisation and Its underlying reasons. Some common elements in their lectures can be identified as Do Prado and Redonnet both emphasized the complexity of the WTO negotiation process, with its 149 participants dealing with 25 different issues. They also referred to difficulties resulting from the bottom-up approach (vis à vis a probably more effective top-down process), the concept of the single undertaking, and the rebalancing of power (e.g. increasing power of the G-20). Victor Do Prado analysed the different issues and the most important players in the Doha Development Round. He discussed current negotiation problems in agriculture and non-agricultural market access. Mention was made of other issues like e.g. services, intellectual property rights, anti-dumping and countervailing measures, subsidies, e-commerce, environmental Issues, etc. Do Prado identified the current deadlock in agricultural negotiations as the main reason for suspension. The unblocking of the ‘iron triangle’ (= EU, US and G-20) would probably foster progress in the negotiations again. The question, however, remains who moves first and at the moment it appears that no Member is prepared to do so. Denis Redonnet gave a European point of view. He stressed the importance of a succesful outcome of the Doha Development Round, but acknowledged the difficulties in achieving it because of several reasons such as complexity and political sensitivities (coming with the increasing public exposure of the WTO). The main challenge, according to Redonnet, is to find an acceptable trade-off between efficiency and legitimacy in the negotiation process on the one hand, and to search for a balance between what Members pay and what they win by liberalisation in certain sectors on the other hand. Redonnet stressed that the latter does not make any sense from an economic point of view, but is very important for obvious political reasons. Moreover, he argued that the current standstill in negotiations can only be solved when there is more convergence between the EU and US standpoints. An agreement between the two most important players in the WTO is an absolute and necessary precondition for a succesful outcome of the Doha Development Round. It is, however, no longer a sufficient condition as the importance of other countries (e.g. Brazil, India, China, etc.) has increased substantially. In addition to this, the current malaise is not the consequence of new players coming to the fore (this was the case at Cancun), but can be reduced to ‘business as usual’ (the lack of agreement on market access, subsidies and domestic support). To conclude, Redonnet said that not North-North or North-South relations, but predominantly South-South affairs would increase complexity in the future negotiations. On 19 October, Prof. Pieter-Jan Kuijper, Director Legal Service of the European Commission and former Director of the WTO Legal Affairs Division, talked about the relationship between the EU and the WTO from an EU perspective. Firstly, he gave an introduction to the treaty structure and the institutional development of the World Trade Organization. Secondly, he addressed the issue of the EC membership in the WTO. Although he acknowledged that the Treaty of Nice resolved uncertainties concerning the respective competence of the European Commission and the Member States (in the fi eld of services and intellectual property rights), he highlighted several problems with regard to the relevant procedural rules. In particular, Prof. Kuijper raised concerns that certain procedural loopholes (can) re-enforce the political interference of the Member States in the negotiation process. Harm Schepel, Co-Director of the Kent Centre for European and Comparative Law, responded by stressing, in a simplified analysis, the structural similarities between the EU and the WTO. According to him, both originated in an attempt of isolating technical trade issues from political matters that raise public concern. However, the ongoing process of legalization, which of course manifested itself differently in both organizations, led to a re-politization of trade. Furthermore, Schepel stressed the resemblance between the resistance of the European Court of Justice to give direct effect to WTO law and the original opposition of the EU Member States to the doctrine of direct effect of EC law. Discussions on the role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) were at the heart of the IES lecture series on the World Trade Organizations (WTO) on 25 October, 2006. Professor Van den Bossche of the University of Maastricht focused on a lawyers’ perspective on NGO participation in the WTO. First, he outlined some of the advantages and downsides of involving NGOs in WTO activities. Regarding the advantages he intimated that such involvement bolsters the pool for expertise; enhances the legitimacy of the WTO and empowers domestic NGOs, amongst others. In terms of the negative aspects of such involvement, he noted that NGOs often represent special interests; deplete legitimacy and that they render the convoluted nature of the WTO activities more so. Second, he considered and compared the legal basis of WTO-NGO relations with that of other international bodies such as the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) of the United Nations (UN). While Article V:2 of the WTO Agreement refers to consultations and cooperation with NGOs, ECOSOC Resolution 1996/31 extends observer status to NGOs. Third, he reviewed the actual practice of NGO involvement against the legal provisions, as the case may be. He opined that since the Singapore Ministerial Conference of 1996 NGOs have been allowed to attend some of the meetings as well as symposia of the trade body. In addition, NGOs have access to information; are allowed to exchange information with the WTO Secretariat; engage in informal meetings with the WTO and are allowed involvement in dispute settlement through the submission of amicus curiae briefs. In reviewing the practice of NGO involvement in the WTO he was sceptical about the utility of NGO participation in the Ministerial conferences calling it “window dressing.” Professor Van den Bossche was also wary of the exaggerated importance often ascribed to amicus curiae briefs. He noted that the overall picture was that of a décalage as between the rules and practice of NGO involvement in the WTO. On the more optimistic side though, he stated that the paucity of NGO involvement in WTO activities ought to be put into context because NGO involvement is not even contemplated in the World Bank’s and International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) Articles of Association, in contrast with the WTO Agreement. Finally, he discussed the criteria for the selection of NGOs that participate in WTO-related activities. They include the non-profi t character of the organization and involvement in trade-oriented activities. His general conclusion was that in terms of NGO involvement in the activities of the WTO, the glass is half empty. The second speaker was the London-based representative of Oxfam International (OI): Mr Luis Morago. Amongst the issues addressed by Mr Morago, were the rationale for OI’s involvement in trade related activities; OI’s role and added value in the field of trade; challenges and OI’s points to be tabled for a more positive agenda for development. Amongst the reasons for involvement was the realization that micro-projects and development activities had not made a big impact in terms of poverty reduction; the desire to tackle certain domestic problems; the need to influence some international organizations; the failure of traditional development assistance; the realization of the power of investments to foster development and the realization that trade rules were mainly supporting the interests of developed countries. In terms of the added value or achievements of OI he noted the growing presence in the trade debate of OI; improvements on intellectual property; reform in certain agricultural sectors and campaign backing the withdrawal of Singapore Issues (investments; competition, procurement and trade facilitation) from the multilateral trade agenda. Respecting the challenges that OI faces, he referred to the lack of technical capacity at the national levels; the culture of secrecy (with specific reference of the 133 Committee of the Trade General Directorate of the European Community) and incoherence. With regard to what OI will table for the future trade agenda, he intimated that his organization will be pushing for WTO reform for better governance and that OI will be looking closely at other processes such as regional trade agreements as well corporate practices. A lively discussion followed. One of the main questions addressed to the speakers was the seeming contradiction of the realization by NGOs that investment is good for development, on the one hand, and their opposition to the Singapore Issues on the other. Mr Morago responded by noting that investment is good to the extent that it is regulated by governments. Professor Van den Bossche was of the opinion that multilateral rules on investment are very important as they guarantee security and predictability for investors. After the November mid-term break, Stuart Harbinson, special advisor to WTO chief Lamy and former Chair of the WTO Negotiating Committee on Agriculture, sketched the historical background of the current negotiations in order to clarify where we stand now and how future developments may look like. The iron triangle of agricultural market access - non-agricultural market access - agriculture domestic support was present as ever. Second, Anastassios Haniotis, Head of Agricultural Trade Policy Analysis at the European Commission, made clear genuine confusion has downed on the negotiators. A brief overview of the latest EU offer at least brought some clarification into the room, if not yet into Geneva. Finally, Carlos Cozendey of the Brazilian Mission to the EC presented the perspective of the developing countries. He argued that the EU proposals were not acceptable to the G20 because it implied the developing countries had to make further concessions on top of their Uruguay commitments whereas the EU and the US had only begun to address the trade distorting practices in their agricultural policies. These three exposés were followed by a lively Q&A session. This included, inter alia, a comparison of the multilateral and bilateral approach, and an analysis of the benefits of the currently ongoing ‘quiet diplomacy’.
|
|
The book, like the lecture series it was based on, argues that there has been insufficient understanding of the extensive nature of change that has affected European Foreign and Security Policy (EFSP) since the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and the launching of the ‘war on terror’. In contrast to those who believe that the events did affect EFSP but did not transform it fundamentally, the authors demonstrate the signifi cant impact of events by analysing the attitudes of the EU towards the laws and norms governing the use of force, the modification in strategies towards the Balkans, subsaharan Africa, the Middle East and the UN, the changes in European military issues and the crisis in transatlantic relations.
On 21 November, the Board of the IES unanimously approved the IES strategic Plan for the coming fi ve years. This plan, requested by the Flemish Ministry for Education, outlines the major goals to be achieved, ie further establishment of the IES as a core excellence centre for European Studies at the VUB and internationally; substantive focus on the EU in an international context; enhancement of the IES’ role as a key player in core fi elds of the IES Research Strategy; further establishment of the IES as the focal point for European Studies at the VUB, with a coordinating role for all relevant MA programmes in European Studies; establishment of the IES as a training centre in European Studies; and maximising synergy between education, research, and academic services. The full plan can be downloaded from our website our website strategy/
IES Academic Director Prof. Dr. Sebastian Oberthür attended the 12th Conference of the
Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the 2nd meeting of the parties to the Kyoto Protocol, which
took place from 6 to 17 November in Nairobi, Kenya. In his capacity as special advisor to the German Federal Ministry of the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, Prof. Oberthür formed part of the delegation of Germany to the conference. Among the major outcomes of the conference was an agreement to prepare for an in-depth review of the Kyoto Protocol that, in its current form, expires at the end of 2012.
IES Researcher Mehmet Y. Tezcan participated in the 9th New Faces Conference on Security in a Globalized World: Towards Regional
Cooperation and Strategic Partnership. The conference took place on 20-22 October 2006 in Oslo, Norway. The International Forum on Strategic Thinking of German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP) and the Norwegian Institute of International
Affairs (NUPI) jointly organized the conference.
Mr. JaeHoon Lee, South Korea’s Vice-Minister of Commerce, Industry and Energy, opened the
one-day conference. His message addressed meeting the challenges of climate change and global environmental product regulation. 
On October 30th Senior Research Fellow Richard Lewis was hosted by the Institute of
European Studies at the University of California at Berkeley. He was invited to speak at a lunchtime meeting arranged by Beverly Crawford, Associate Director of the Institute and Philip Martin of UC Davis. Richard’s theme was the identity crisis in Europe created by heavily concentrated immigration in certain parts of Europe and notably in cities. The discussion was lively and Richard was invited to return to UC Davis by Professor Martin.
The conference took on the issue of the fragmented institutions of global financial governance. Since the US president Richard Nixon ‘closed the dollar window’, let the US dollar float freely and put a formal
end to the dollar-gold standard in August 1971, the global economy has been witnessing the eruption of various financial
crises here and there. Meanwhile, new financial innovations came into the play leading to more and more financialization of global economy. In other words, instability and systemic chaos have long replaced stability and growth, the
twin miracles of international monetary system in the postwar era.
Europe Direct West-Flanders (Europe Direct is the successor of the former Euro Info Points)
and IES researcher Ruben Lombaert teamed up and set up a project to bring Europe to the last year students of secondary schools.
Following the IES call for PhD-projects,Albanian born Zana Vathi joined the Institute in November. Zana’s project on “Migration issues and Human Rights Discourses in the EU” was selected as one of courses was selected as one of two best projects out of over 40 candidates. She will work closely with Senior Research Fellow Richard Lewis, and under the promotership of Prof. Dr. Alison Woodward. Zana has a multidisciplinary background (politics, law, ethnicity, ...) from the University of Sussex (UK) where she obtained her MA.
Selected in the same PhD-call, Alexander Mattelaer (Belgian) joined us in September
on his selected PhD-project on “European security policy motivation: lessons from ESDP operations in Africa”. His promoters are Prof. Dr. Gustaaf Geeraerts (VUB) and Dr. Sven Biscop (Royal Institute for International Relations). Alexander studied
political science in Leuven and worked at the Brussels-based think-tank “Security and Defence Agenda” before taking up his
position as doctoral researcher at the IES.
Gloria Gonzalez Fuster (Spanish) was selected by the IES and her promoter Serge Gutwirth to
fulfill the research requirements within an EC-funded experts project called REFGOV (Refl exive Governance in the public interest). Gloria, who studied law at the Univeridad Nacional de Educacion, journalism at the Universidad Autonoma de Barcelona and Languages and Literature at the ULB, will look at dataprotection issues in the framework of this project. Previously, Gloria held various posts at the DG Education and Culture of the EC.
Between February and December 2006, the IES has had the pleasue of hosting Pascual
Felipe Correa Alvarez, a senior scholar from the University of Santa Clara, Cuba. Pascual, who is a professor in International Law and Environmental Law, worked at the IES through a 9-month scholarship from the Brussels Capital Region on a project under the supervision of former IES Senior Research Fellow Marc Pallemaerts and current Academic Director Sebastian
Oberthür, entitled “Implementing Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration: a comparative study of Law and practice in the European
Union and Cuba, with a special emphasis on practice in the Brussels Capital Region”.
4 October marked the beginning of a new IES lecture series on “The WTO Doha Round,
the EU and the Future of the World Trading System”. The series’ coordinator, Prof. Dr. Servaas Van Thiel, who is also the director of the Programme on International Legal Cooperation, gave a thorough introductory lecture encompassing an overview of the EU’s involvement in the Doha-round, the issues under discussion and the effects of globalisation on our trading system.
On Friday 27 October, PILC-alumni Zak Shusterman and Tom Antonissen re-ignited the PILC Alumni association. With incentives from the IES, Zak and Tom will form the nucleus of what is hoped to be a fl amboyant new
alumni crowd (APILCA) that will give birth to many activities geared towards former students of the Programme on International Legal Cooperation. Should PILC alumni read this without having been informed personally about this re-launch yet, then please contact Zak and Tom directly via apilca@ies. be. Please send them your coordinates so that they can keep you informed about future activities. As PILC is celebrating its 35th anniversary this year, we are confi dent that many activities will follow!
IES is a Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence at the 