Bidding farewell? On the assessment of the structural or situational nature of the current crisis surrounding David Cameron's prospective referendum on Britain's continued membership of the European Union

Since David Cameron’s announcement for an 'in/out' referendum, Britain’s membership of the European Union has been in jeopardy. This recent crisis in the UK-EEC/EU relationship is far from being the first one. Indeed, the UK has acquired the reputation of a difficult Member State since his accession in 1973. My dissertation explores this relationship throughout the different crises that occurred under the successive premierships in order to answer the following research question: is the current crisis surrounding Cameron’s ‘in/out’ referendum a structural or a situational phenomenon? To that end, the dissertation body is divided into three parts. Part 1 deals with the legal and practical possibilities of withdrawal from the EU. Part 2 is a journey through the past UK-EEC/EU relationship with a focus on the crises and the reforms demanded by the former Prime Ministers. Part 3 focuses on the current crisis, exploring Cameron’s demands for reforms and comparing them with three other party leaders’ demands before the 2015 general election

The English paradox

peer reviewedSince David Cameron’s announcement for a referendum on the United Kingdom’s continued membership of the European Union widely reinforced Britain’s reputation as a ‘eurosceptic’ and difficult Member State. This Chapter explores the ‘English paradox’, i.e. the United Kingdom’s ever-present demands for EU reforms paired with a relative compliance when it came to the ratification of the successive European treaties. It first deals with the Cameron’s demands for reforms in order to fix the UK-EU relationship and avoid a withdrawal from the EU. It then looks back at the reforms which had already been put forward by the previous Prime Ministers during the negotiations related to the adoption of the European treaties. Finally, it explains the British internal procedure for the ratification of the European treaties and how the specific political system involves the English paradox. The conclusion puts into perspective the aforementioned elements and the United Kingdom’s ‘eurosceptic’ image

Ideas and Legitimation: The European Central Bank’s Discourse During the Eurozone and Covid-19 Crises

The paper analyses how the European Central Bank (ECB) presidents legitimized the measures taken during the eurozone and Covid-19 crises in their introductory statements. Building on legitimacy theories and ideational discourse, it differentiates throughput (decision-making) from output (result) legitimation arguments based on measure appropriateness and measure efficiency respectively. Despite hypothetical legitimation by results, the analysis reveals that the ECB mostly attempted to build legitimation through measure appropriateness, without a significant evolution over the two crises. We argue that this significant presence of throughput legitimation arguments increases the ECB’s accountability to stakeholders and leaves additional space for stakeholders’ intervention that may open the door to enhanced democratic legitimacy. The analysis allows for a refined appreciation of the ECB’s discursive construction of throughput and output legitimacy mechanisms, the evolution and possible learning processes in crisis communication, and potential democratic enhancement based on crisis communication.16. Peace, justice and strong institution

The Overseas Regions and the European Union: Historical Background, Rationale and Dynamics within the Scope of the Institutional Conception of European Identity

European identity is the first condition for a State to be considered eligible to EU membership. Indeed, Article 49 of the Treaty on the European Union, which regulates the application process for EU membership, enshrines that a State must be ‘European’, without specifying the meaning(s) attached to such a qualifier. Various interpretations were provided by the EU institutions in the course of enlargements and membership requests. One of these interpretations is illustrated by the integration, or full assimilation, of some overseas regions into the EU because they have retained ties with one of the EU Member States. Despite their remoted geographical position, these regions were indeed integrated – and not merely associated – in the same capacity as the metropolitan regions, which means that the general provisions of the Treaties apply to these overseas regions. In spite of the fact that this specific option has existed since the Treaty of Rome, different legal provisions for integration have applied to these regions, depending on their status within and ties with the motherland. This poster will provide an overview of the history of the integration of overseas regions into the EEC/EU, as well as the rationale and the dynamics (financial, geopolitical, ‘colonial’, …) behind this process, by relying on a few illustrative cases, such as the French overseas regions (Guadeloupe, Mayotte, Réunion …) and the former integrated Algeria and Greenland. The poster will also display the respective legal integration framework of these cases and the possibility to change their integration/association status enabled by Article 227 TFEU. By presenting the various aspects surrounding the relationship between the overseas regions and the European Union, the poster intends to highlight the historical (colonial) interpretation of European identity and how these regions have eventually become part of the institutional conception of European identity

Communicating in Crisis: A Comparison of the EU Institutions’ Argumentative Discourse during Political, Economic, and Health Crises

Over the past decade, the European Union has faced several crises. In these uncertain times, the EU provided quick reactions and decisions that were not always considered effective or democratic. Despite improvements in the EU’s communication strategies, these crises have jeopardized the legitimacy of EU integration and sparked off (nationalist) discourses on EU dis-integration in the public space. Yet, public institutional communication remains a key tool, especially in times of crises, to connect with citizens and strengthen political legitimacy through productive debates, provided it is used properly. Building on a corpus-based analysis of institutional documents, the paper explores the EU’s crisis communication during four major crises: the Greek debt economic and financial crisis and the subsequent Eurozone crisis, the Brexit political-institutional crisis, the political-legal crisis of EU values, and the recent SARS-CoV-2 health crisis. More specifically, this paper provides both a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the arguments that the EU political, economic and legal institutions adduced — when communicating about their strategies and decisions during these crises — with a view to consolidate the EU’s legitimacy and counter threats of dis-integration. The typological and comparative analysis of the various arguments during four different, yet impactful, crises allows a better understanding of the dynamics and mechanisms surrounding the EU’s institutional communication in times of crisis, which is critical to sustainably improve the discursive responses to future crises – no matter their nature

The representations of Europe and European identity: political values and other eligibility conditions

Intervention de deux heures en tant que conférencière invitée dans le cadre du cours du Professeur Robin de Bruin intitulé "Democracy in the European Union" et dispensé à l'Université d'Amsterdam. Durant cette intervention, j'ai tout d'abord exposé les conditions d'éligibilité à l'Union européenne, puis détaillé plus spécifiquement la condition politique, et enfin abordé les thématiques de construction du discours institutionnel et d'européanisation, ainsi que leur impact sur les notions d'Europe et d'identité européenne.Two-hour guest lecture given at the University of Amsterdam within the framework of Prof. Robin de Bruin's course "Democracy in the European Union". During the lecture, I first explained the eligibility conditions to the European Union before focusing on the political condition. Then, I tackled the construction of the institutional discourse and europeanization, as well as their impact on the notions of Europe and European identity

The Commission's Communication on European Identity within the Framework of membership requests and enlargements

peer reviewedL’identité européenne, ou l’européanité, d’un Etat conditionne, en tout premier lieu, son éligibilité à l’Union, tel que stipulé à l’article 49 du Traité sur l’Union européenne. Malgré le caractère polysémique du terme « européen », aucune définition claire de ces notions n’a pourtant été fournie dans les traités communautaires, la jurisprudence européenne ou la communication publique des institutions de l’Union afin de clarifier le sens envisagé par ces dernières. En s’inscrivant dans la lignée des travaux sur l’analyse du discours institutionnel, cet article vise à dégager les interprétations de l’identité européenne des Etats dans les documents publics de la Commission rédigés dans le cadre des demandes d’adhésion et des élargissements. Il est ensuite question d’analyser la répartition et l’évolution, ainsi que la récurrence et la prééminence, des différentes interprétations. Cette analyse permet de mettre en lumière certains mécanismes de la communication publique de la Commission sur l’identité européenne, ainsi que ses enjeux et sa participation à la (re)construction des notions d’Europe et d’identité européenne

A History of the States’ Europeanness from the EEC/EU Institutions’ Perspective: (Re)considering the Current Relevance of the Institutional Interpretations in Light of the Recent Crises

According to Article 49(1) of the Treaty on the European Union, any State wishing to apply for EU membership must be “European”, a preliminary eligibility condition which has been enshrined in EU law since the Treaty of Rome. Yet, the qualifier “European” has never been explicitly or institutionally defined, despite the fact that it may take on various meanings, going broadly from geographical to cultural ones, including political ones. Failing a clear-cut definition, the EEC/EU institutions have been brought to provide their own interpretations of the requesting States’ European identity – or Europeanness – especially in the course of membership applications, treaty-making processes and enlargement prospects. Focusing on these specific phases, and especially on the membership requests that raised eligibility issues, this paper investigates the various interpretations of the States’ Europeanness that have been provided by the EEC/EU institutions over the last sixty years. The methodological approach relies on a textual and discursive analysis of both recent documents and older records. It then considers, or reconsiders, the current relevance of these interpretations in light of the recent crises that the EU has to handle, such as the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the EU or the democratic issues in some eastern Member States, and questions the prospective EU (dis)integration based on these institutional interpretations of European identity