The EU Delegation in New York: A Debut of High Political Drama

Laatikainen, Katie Verlin

doi:10.1057/9781137383037_11

Cited by 30 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The fact that the unanimity rule has been preserved in foreign policy decision‐making means in practice that the HR's leadership role in shaping the agenda is circumscribed. In addition, Member States continue to play a critical role in relations with external actors, for instance in the UN system where the EU only has observer status (Laatikainen, ). Another limitation to the HR leadership is that the HR is not controlling all of the relevant foreign policy instruments and material resources that are placed in the Member States and at the Commission.…”

Section: A Shared Organizational Reality? Mapping Leadership Rolesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Leadership Paradox in EU Foreign Policy

Aggestam

Johansson

2017

J of Common Market Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines a leadership paradox at the heart of EU foreign policy between the demand for effective European leadership, and leadership legitimacy embedded in state practices. This paradox is manifested in the Lisbon treaty that delegated significant formal leadership functions to the European level. We probe the question how and by whom leadership can and should be performed in EU foreign policy. To answer this question, we advance a new theoretical framework drawing on sociological institutionalism and role theory. We argue that leadership should be understood as a social role shaped in a process of interaction between leader and followers. We contribute with new empirical knowledge of leadership role relations based on an interview survey conducted in 2016. The empirical results point to role conflicts over the formal leadership functions in EU foreign policy and the emergence of new informal leadership practices by EU member states.

show abstract

Section: A Shared Organizational Reality? Mapping Leadership Rolesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Leadership Paradox in EU Foreign Policy

Aggestam

Johansson

2017

J of Common Market Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The question of who would present the EU's positions in the UN – the EU delegation or the EU presidency – proved to be highly contentious (Guimaraes, ; Laatikainen, ). The EEAS, the High Representative and numerous EU Member States argued that the Lisbon Treaty mandated a change of the EU's observer status in the UN, because it conferred ‘legal personality’ on the EU, and indicated that the High Representative, supported by the EEAS, would represent the EU in international affairs.…”

Section: Implications Of the Lisbon Treaty For Eu Co‐ordination And Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The groups within which EU Member States have been active can be informal cross‐regional or ad hoc groups (often formed solely for the purpose of collaborating on a particular issue), or more formal groups such as the Nordic Group or the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie. The use of such alternative fora by EU Member States is new: the Nordic Group had been quiescent since Sweden and Finland joined the EU (Laatikainen, , ), and the Francophonie had almost never been active in the UN on human rights issues. But now there is co‐ordination within both groups.…”

Section: Eu and Member State Activity At The Unmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Balfour et al (, p. 198) concluded that EU Member States can still choose to address international challenges through the EU or outside it. Katie Laatikainen argued that the new institutional arrangements in New York have ‘liberated member states to pursue other less institutionalized diplomatic pursuits’ (Laatikainen, , p. 211), and she called for further research into this possible trend.…”

Section: Explaining the Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus the central EU institutions have been unable to do much more than handle ‘inherited’ statements and resolutions. Although burden‐sharing between the EU delegation and Member States exists in New York and Geneva, it is not systematic and depends on Member States volunteering to help (Laatikainen, ; Spence, ). Geneva is particularly difficult, because the HRC is almost always in session.…”

Section: Explaining the Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

EU Member States at the UN: A Case of Europeanization Arrested?

Smith

2016

J of Common Market Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article addresses two questions about the EU's and EU Member States' diplomacy in the UN General Assembly's Third Committee and the Human Rights Council: have EU Member States been more, or less, active outside the framework of EU co-ordination since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty? Has EU activity increased? The findings are that EU Member States have been increasingly active at the Human Rights Council and have increasingly worked with other states outside of the EU, while the level of EU activity has remained largely the same. In the Third Committee, Member States speak more than the EU but neither the EU nor Member States have been sponsoring more resolutions. Europeanization is 'arrested' in these cases, as Member States are reluctant to push for more EU activity because both the internal intergovernmental decision-making system and external context discourage it.

show abstract

The EU in UN Politics: Analytical and Empirical Challenges

Blavoukos

Bourantonis

2017

The EU in UN Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The EU Delegation in New York: A Debut of High Political Drama

Cited by 30 publications

References 10 publications

The Leadership Paradox in EU Foreign Policy

The Leadership Paradox in EU Foreign Policy

EU Member States at the UN: A Case of Europeanization Arrested?

The EU in UN Politics: Analytical and Empirical Challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About