Differentiation as a double-edged sword: member states’ practices and Brexit

Abstract

Differentiation is a principle that has applied to the polity and policies of the European Union since its creation. It has been reinforced in the last 20 years as a consequence both of successive enlargements and of a broadening of the EU policy agenda. The British renegotiation process and the UK referendum scheduled for 23 June 2016 constitute a further stage in the debate on differentiation. For the first time a 'no' vote in a national referendum could mean that disintegration rather than differentiation is the preferred choice for an EU member state.The leaders of the EU member states, as well as scholars and analysts of the EU, have difficulty dealing with the concept of disintegration. For this reason, it is hardly surprising that most of them would like to see the UK referendum ending with a 'yes' vote. Yet this position is not necessarily shared by all segments of European public opinion. Those who have strong Eurosceptic concerns would like to use a Brexit as leverage in their own contests with the EU.This article considers the future of differentiation in the light of the debate on Brexit. To this end, the article has been divided into four parts. We start by examining the concept of differentiation in the EU from a theoretical perspective. In the second part, we analyse different national practices of differentiation in the member states. In the third part, we try to understand the reactions of the member states towards the British demand for renegotiation in order to avoid a Brexit, before drawing some conclusions in a fourth part. Differentiation: more integration or more fragmentation?Differentiation and integration are intricately linked. Differentiation may be defined as the process that allows some EU member states to go further in the integration process, while allowing others to opt not to do so. It therefore runs counter to the assumption of 'ever closer union' among the member states.The debate over differentiation revolves around the distribution of competences across all levels of government-local, regional, national and European. To be more precise, the question of differentiated integration arises as part of a debate * The authors would like to thank Douglas Webber for his comments on an earlier draft.INTA92_3_ChopinLequesne.indd 1

Differentiated Integration and Disintegration in the EU after Brexit: Risks versus Opportunities

“…Others emphasize that the creation of a differentiated but institutionalized European social model could reduce inequalities across European regions (for example, Taylor-Gooby et al 2017). In his volume The Future of Europe, Piris (2012) suggests that while some mechanisms of differentiation included in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (such as the permanent structured cooperation, constructive abstention or enhanced cooperation) could improve the EU's efficiency and political legitimacy, a formal two-speed Europe (based on eurozone membership) with a core of avant-garde states would simplify the picture by creating two distinct groups to replace the existing informal clusters of member states (see also Chopin and Lequesne, 2016).…”

Exploring Differentiated Disintegration in a Post‐Brexit European Union

“…The first envisions Brexit as a process of European disintegration . In commentaries published shortly after the referendum, Jones () and Rosamond (), among others, emphasize the need to fill this new gap in the literature by developing ideas of European disintegration as well as differentiation, which the ‘EU will not escape […] in the future’ (Chopin and Lequesne, , p. 545). In a study of the referendum's consequences on international political economy, Sampson () further categorized Brexit as a case of ‘international disintegration’.…”

Keep Calm and Carry On (Differently): NATO and CSDP after Brexit

“…The role of key member states and the influence they can exert remains key to assessing the consequences of external shocks such as Brexit upon the relationship between the EU and NATO. As such, Brexit could give rise to further differentiation, that is, the process that ‘allows some EU member states to go further in the integration process, while allowing others to opt not to do so’ (Chopin and Lequesne, , p. 531) among European states, as they would need to find a way to safeguard their own interests in an altered institutional framework.…”

“…In this scenario, Brexit would constitute an added layer of complexity to increasing differentiation within EU–NATO relations. In fact, Brexit could give rise to differentiated disintegration rather than integration (see in particular Chopin and Lequesne, ; Schimmelfennig, ). Therefore, if differentiated integration eventually leads to further integration, we might expect a positive effect on EU–NATO relations; otherwise, should fragmentation prevail, the EU–NATO IOR would be negatively affected.…”