Unethical power Europe? Something fishy about EU trade and development policies

This article analyses the impact of European Union (EU) policies in the field of fisheries on development in Africa. It contests the premise that the EU promotes local economies, and argues that it often contributes to depleting fish stocks, distorting African economic policies and harming fishers’ communities. In so doing, the EU is violating its basic duty to avoid harm to other states. However, it is now committed to sustainable development. This article offers suggestions on policies which would enable the EU to take on both its negative and positive duties

The International Criminal Court: limits, potential and conditions for the promotion of justice and peace

The International Criminal Court (ICC) aims to promote not only justice, but also peace. It has been widely criticised for doing neither, yet it has to contend with some severe structural and political difficulties: it has limited resources, it faces institutional restrictions, it is manipulated by states, and it is criticised for an alleged selectivity in the way it dispenses justice. However, the icc could contribute significantly to the promotion of international justice and peace, and have a major impact on the prevention of crime, since its prosecutions represent a clear threat to highly placed individuals who commit serious crimes. While this article concentrates on the work of the icc in Africa, the only continent where it has issued indictments against suspected criminals, it also looks at its efforts on other continents. It argues that, in the larger international context, the contribution of the icc to international justice and peace depends on its institutional power and the support it receives from states, on its own impartial work, and on the way it is perceived by potential criminals and victims in the world

China, Responsibility to Protect, and the Case of Syria: From Sovereignty Protection to Pragmatism

Will the rise of China, an authoritarian, party-state with a poor record of protecting its citizens' human rights, undermine humanitarian intervention? This question has been particularly pertinent since China's 'assertive turn' in foreign policy. Drawing on the case of Chinese reactions to the humanitarian crisis in Syria, we argue that China's attitude toward humanitarian intervention remains ambiguous and contradictory. While China has at times prevented the UNSC from threatening sanctions on Syria, it has not necessarily denied that a humanitarian crisis exists. We show that the People's Republic of China (PRC) is beginning to act more as a 'norm maker' than 'norm taker', and is offering its own vision of humanitarian intervention, coined as 'responsible protection'

the european union and un peace operations what global regional peace and security partnership

Over the last twenty years, the EU has become a prominent crisis management actor. This chapter aims to locate the EU's crisis management role in the UN mandate of "maintaining international peace and security". What is the EU's approach to managing crises? Does this approach converge with and support the UN peacekeeping agenda? What do EU member states' institutional choices tell us about the UN–EU global–regional peace and security partnership? Tardy provides an overview of EU crisis management operations, compares EU and UN operations, and sheds light on the causes of this cooperation and its consequences for their relationship. Finally, the chapter assesses the European participation in Mali and suggests how EU member states' institutional preferences may evolve in the coming years

European Foreign and Security Policy: States, Power, Institutions, and American Hegemony

The European Union's (EU) Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) stipulates that all member states must unanimously ratify policy proposals through their representatives on the EU Council. Intergovernmentalism, or the need for equal agreement from all member nations, is used by many political scientists and policy analysts to study how the EU achieves its CFSP. However, in European Foreign and Security Policy, Catherine Gegout modifies this theory, arguing instead for analyses based on what she terms 'constrained intergovernmentalism.' Gegout's theory of constrained intergovernmentalism allows for member states, in particular France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, to bargain with one another and to make rational decisions but also takes into account the constraints imposed by the United States, the European Commission, and the precedents set by past decisions. Three in-depth case studies of CFSP decision-making support her argument, as she examines the EU position on China's human rights record, EU sanctions against Serbia, and EU relations with NATO.Published version of EUI PhD thesis, 200

"The U.S. presence within the EU's common foreign and security policy system: The relevance of neo-realism and of the security community concept"

The EU's foreign policy is currently facing major changes; firstly, the Amsterdam Treaty has provided visibility and analysis capacity with the creation of both the post of the High Representative and of the Policy Unit. Secondly, the member states have also decided to give the EU a military capability name the European Rapid Reaction Force and an institutional structure with a Political and Security Committee, military staff and a military committee. Finally, the EU succeeded in adopting a common view on its policy towards the Balkans. What are the reasons for these changes? I argue that the main reason for these changes is the position of the U.S. on both EU foreign policy and on U.S. foreign policy (in this case, the EU member states react to the U.S. foreign policy). What can we say about the impact of transatlantic relations on the CFSP? The air of this paper is to evaluate how and under which conditions the U.S influences a change in a member state's position to reach a common EU agreement in the CFSP field when highly sensitive issues are at stake. When the U.S. influences a state's position, this means the state can change position, either to agree or to disagree with the U.S