Reverse transformation? Global shifts, the core-periphery divide and the future of the EU

Abstract

The EU faces an existential crisis. The 'liberal core', which played an important role in transforming the illiberal regimes in much of the post-war period, suffers from a series of setbacks. This paper argues that the possibility of reverse transformationthat is, the power of the emergent illiberal bloc to influence the liberal core, has become a real possibility for the first time in the history of European integration. The paper contributes to the growing debate on the sources of the EU's existential crisis and its future from a global political economy perspective. We suggest that a pushand-pull framework provides a coherent analytical toolkit to explain the properties and nature of the illiberal turn in the EU with its potential implications for the future of European integration.

The New Age of Hybridity and Clash of Norms: China, BRICS, and Challenges of Global Governance in a Postliberal International Order

“…The U.S. enjoyed a period of rapid economic growth in the 1990s, which continued up until the 2007 crisis. Despite 9/11 attacks and geopolitical uncertainties associated with the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, the U.S. economy managed to grow at 3.3 percent on an annual basis without any interruption.3 The EU, the other key constituency of the liberal international order, appeared to be at the peak of its transformative capacity with its confidence boosted through a combination of 'deepening'that is, the launch of single currencyand 'enlargement'that is, admission of ten new members in 2004 (Leonard, 2005;Öniş and Kutlay 2019b). Japan found itself in a phase of relative stagnation; but this inertia occurred in an environment of high per capita income, which was the product of high growth accomplished in previous decades.…”

“…For instance, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban explicitly stated his ambition to “build an illiberal state” by pointing China and Russia as a source of emulation (The Budapest Beacon, 2014). Several Eastern European countries are now looking at Jinping’s China as new economic and political partner (Öniş & Kutlay, 2019b). China is increasingly making its presence felt in wider Europe through its trade and investment linkages.…”

“…How does the rise of Chinese model of authoritarian capitalism inform the emergence of a new equilibrium in global governance? In this section, we propose a three-stage periodization of contemporary globalization to contextualize some of the salient features of the new era, which call the “age of hybridity.” In the post-GFC, China and BRICS emerge as increasingly important actors and contest the dominance of the U.S. and other core Western powers (Öniş, 2017; Öniş & Kutlay, 2019b). What we increasingly observe is a world characterized by the absence of a hegemonic power upholding a “tight” international developmental regime (Babb & Chorev, 2016).…”

“…While northern Europe has been more successful in economic terms (with strong growth in countries like Germany and Sweden), southern Europe been deeply affected. Greece, for instance, has been the principal case with other southern European countries such as Italy, Spain, and Portugal being deeply affected (Öniş & Kutlay, 2019b, p. 10). The austerity programs implemented throughout the Eurozone have led to growing disparity between “core” and “periphery” that put the liberal ethos driving the entire European project in jeopardy.…”

“…These dislocations, in turn, have underpinned a powerful wave of anti-systemic movements throughout Europe, who have effectively capitalized on the anxieties and concerns of citizens that have been adversely affected by Europe’s multiple crises. The EU’s illiberal peripheral actors, supported by outsiders, are increasingly challenging the supremacy of the liberal core and the normative foundation of the postwar integration project (Öniş & Kutlay, 2019b). Processes involving internal fragmentation and polarization in core members of the liberal international order now pose a major challenge to both liberal democracy- and rule-based multilateralism.…”