Co-auteur
  • COLOMBO Silvia (4)
  • BICCHI Federica (3)
  • TOCCI Nathalie (2)
  • ROCCU Roberto (2)
Type de Document
  • Article (10)
  • Partie ou chapitre de livre (5)
  • Working paper (2)
  • Livre (1)
This conclusion provides a comparative survey of the main findings of this special issue and suggests avenues for further research. It shows that the security–stability nexus through which the EU approaches the Southern Mediterranean has experienced some measure of reframing in the wake of the Arab uprisings. While leading the EU towards a more inclusive approach, this partial frame redefinition has on the whole translated into forms of highly selective engagement. This conclusion suggests that this mismatch between the change in frame definition and its enactment in different policy areas can be accounted for with reference to four factors: institutional sources of policy rigidity, time lag, issue politicization and the willingness of Mediterranean partners to engage with the EU.

33
vues

0
téléchargements
This article argues that the new EU’s selective engagement with Islamist parties in its Southern neighbourhood following the Arab uprisings is the result of a partial shift in the EU’s frame used to understand political Islam, combined with a form of pragmatism that puts a premium on finding interlocutors in the region. Using the case studies of Tunisia and Egypt, it shows that the EU has replaced its previous monolithic conception of political Islam with an understanding that is more sensitive to differences among Islamists. This opens the door to some forms of engagement with those actors that renounce violence and demonstrate their commitment to work within the confines of democratic rules, while violent strands of political Islam and conservative groups remain at arm’s length.

EU policies towards the Southern Mediterranean after the Arab uprisings are predominantly seen in the literature as marked by continuity with the past. This is attributed to the fact that the EU still acts with the aim of maximising its security by preserving stability in the region. By examining a range of policy areas, this special issue aims to assess and qualify this claim. Its introduction outlines our case on both empirical and analytical grounds. Empirically, it is argued that we need to offer a more detailed analysis of each specific policy area to assess the extent of continuity and change. Analytically, this introduction proposes a framework that focuses on processes of frame definition and frame enactment to explain change and continuity in the EU’s approach. More specifically, security, stability and the link between them – the security–stability nexus – are considered as the master frame shaping the EU’s approach towards the Southern Mediterranean. This is enacted along two dimensions: the modalities of EU engagement with Southern Mediterranean partners; and the range of actors engaged.

Publié en 2017-07 Collection LSE Middle East Centre papers series : 19
COLOMBO Silvia
10
vues

10
téléchargements
This paper focuses on the European Union’s engagement – or lack thereof – with Islamist political parties in North Africa following the Arab uprisings. By delving into the case of Tunisia’s Ennahda, it shows that the party’s growing moderation trajectory has been matched by a greater pragmatic engagement by the EU during the period 2011–16. It is argued that this new trend is explained by a partial shift in the frames that the EU employs to interpret ongoing changes in the Middle East and North Africa region as well as its interests and potential role in the region.

The article analyses how the Europeans (meaning European states and the EC/EU) have progressively turned a discourse about the Israeli-Palestinian border into a foreign policy practice. While much of the literature highlights the existence of a ‘gap between discourse and practice’ when it comes to Europeans’ foreign policy stance towards the Arab-Israeli conflict, we argue that the gap is dynamic and has changed across time. In the absence of an internationally and locally recognised border between Israel and Palestine, the Europeans have aimed at constructing one on the 1949 armistice line, the so-called Green Line. They have done so in stages, by first formulating a discursive practice about the need for a border, then establishing economic practices in the late 1980s-early 1990s, and most recently practicing a legal frame of reference for relations with Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA) based on the Green Line. The outcome is that, for what concerns European countries and EU legislation, the Green Line has been increasingly taken as the Israeli-Palestinian border. However, gaps never fully close and more contemporary events seem in fact to point to a re-opening of the gap, as the article explores.

This article discusses the potential of case study and process-tracing methods for studying lobbying and framing in the European Union (EU). It argues that case studies and process tracing allow us to explore different sets of questions than large-N and quantitative approaches and to shed light on the mechanisms that contribute to policy change. Through these methods it is possible to study long-term processes and under-researched areas, to analyse the social construction of frames and to single out the conditions that lead to successful framing. In order to show the advantages of case studies and process tracing, illustrative examples drawn from the case study of EU foreign policy towards the Israeli–Palestinian conflict are provided.

Publié en 2016-01 Collection Routledge/UACES contemporary European studies : 28
23
vues

0
téléchargements
This book examines lobbying in EU foreign policy-making and the activities of non-state actors (NSAs), focusing on EU foreign policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It sheds light on the interactions between the EU and NSAs as well as the ways in which NSAs attempt to shape EU foreign policies. By analysing issues that have not yet received systematic attention in the literature, this book offers new insights into lobbying in EU foreign policy, EU relations surrounding the conflict and the EU’s broader role in the peace process.

18
vues

0
téléchargements
This article investigates the role of non-state actors (NSAs) in European Union (EU) foreign policy, focusing on how they contribute to the emergence and codification of new frames that underpin EU external policies. It argues that changes in EU foreign policy are the result of interactions among a frame entrepreneur, often played by an NSA, and policy-makers in situations of cognitive uncertainty and when a policy window opens. The empirical evidence is based on the case of EU–Israel relations: a non-governmental orgaization (NGO) called MATTIN Group acted as frame entrepreneur and contributed to the emergence and codification of a new frame of understanding of EU–Israel relations, redefining them on the basis of a legal paradigm. This clarifies the territorial scope of bilateral agreements and ensures that the bilateral relations are constructed and implemented in accordance with EU legal framework and its commitments under international law.

in Fragmented Borderlands Sous la direction de DEL SARTO Raffaella Publié en 2015-06
4
vues

0
téléchargements
In the framework chapter of this volume, Del Sarto (2015) argues that Israel and Palestine may be conceptualised as the EU’s borderlands (i.e. hybrid spaces in which different types of borders coexist and partially overlap). When borderlands are created, territorial and functional borders blur and/or overlap, thus creating forms of variable geometry, which are determined by the policy under consideration. However, the situation becomes more complicated when the EU signs agreements with countries that have disputed/occupied1 territories, such as in the case of Israel-Palestine. In these cases, territorial borders lie at the heart of the problem. Against this backdrop, this chapter asks about the implications when the EU’s practice of exporting its rules to the neighbourhood, extending its legal frameworks to these countries without incorporating them into its territory, is confronted with disputed/contested territorial borders. How does the different interpretation of the territorial scope of agreements affect EU policies, as well as its bilateral relations with both Israel and the Palestinians?

in The Substance of European Union Democracy Promotion Sous la direction de WETZEL Anne, ORBIE Jan Publié en 2015-04
BICCHI Federica
8
vues

0
téléchargements

Suivant