Book review: alarums and excursions: improvising politics on the european stage by Luuk van Middelaar

In Alarums and Excursions: Improvising Politics on the European Stage, Luuk van Middelaar argues that recent crises since 2010 have transformed the European Union, which has moved from a politics of technocratic rule-making to a politics of improvisation in response to uncertainty and events. This is a sharp and refreshing analysis of European crisis politics, writes Zbigniew Truchlewski, that deserves to be read alongside other classic studies of the EU

Beyond the North–South divide: transnational coalitions in EU reforms

The literature on fifteen years of European crises leaves the reader with a puzzle. Prominent accounts of the longest crisis–that of the euro area (EA)–assert that the EA is deeply divided between North and South, with Central Eastern European (CEE) member states being ignored. This makes it hard to explain how the union has managed to reform since 2008 and especially during the Covid-19 pandemic. Scholars have started to talk of transnational coalitions, but they equate coalition-formation with bringing together the like-minded, typically over solidarity versus sovereignty and more or less integration. However, coalitions of the like-minded are typically too small to sustain reforms and compromise has to be sought with others who have different preferences. To establish empirically how stable or fluid transnational coalitions are, we exploit the EMU|Choices database (Wasserfallen, Leuffen, Kudrna, and Degner 2019) [Analysing European Union decision-making during the Eurozone crisis with new data. European Union Politics, 20 (1), 3–23] on EA reforms and our own original data on Covid-19 reforms. Our findings show a stable pattern but no geopolitical divide–coalitions have varying CEE members. These findings can provide a basis for developing a more plausible conceptualisation of transnational coalitions

Bounded solidarity? Experimental evidence on cross‐national bonding in the EU during the COVID crisis

Most studies on European solidarity (‘bonding’) during COVID-19 lack a baseline comparison with outside states. We, therefore, cannot say whether European solidarity is universal or geared towards European Union (EU) insiders (‘bounding’). We thus ask whether European solidarity is ‘bounded’, that is, whether it relies on differentiation between European insiders and outsiders. We argue that if existent, bounded solidarity constitutes a long-term and thick basis for institutional building. To explore this ‘bonding–bounding’ dynamic, we use a vignette experiment embedded into an original survey collected in eight European countries (n ∼ 8900), covering all European regions. Our design varies the countries receiving solidarity, and the channels (EU level vs. member state level), policy domains (health vs. economy) and instruments (loans, grants, medical equipment, vaccines) through which solidarity is provided. Regarding bounding, we find that most countries are more solidaristic with EU countries than an outsider, baseline state (Peru), Italy excepted. There is, nonetheless, a strong heterogeneity between countries: France, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden mostly want to help themselves and Southern member states, but not Central Eastern European member states, which we show is due to their perceived obstructionism related to the Rule of Law debate. Concerning the nature of solidarity, we find that most respondents prefer solidarity to be channelled through the EU and loans, with evidence suggesting a freeriding mechanism behind this preference. All in all, our results indicate that EU citizens form a distinct community of solidarity which, in line with a Rokkanian understanding of polity formation, plays a key role in political development and consolidation

Généalogie des perceptions Est-Ouest

This article deals with perception issues of Western Europe towards Eastern Europe. À vast and abundant literature already tackles this issue, putting forward the mental construction of representations concerning Eastern and Western Europe. Encompassing as it may be, this literature suffers two limits. First, it lacks an analytical framework which would help treating the question rigorously. Second, it does not draw political conclusions of this biased perceptions for the real world. This article uses hermeneutics to offer analytical tools (the comprehension circle in particular) and to understand political crises that the European Union (EU) faced recently. Such an approach gives the possibility to understand the weight of perceptions and the structures of comprehension, and their role in the failures experienced by the EU.Cet article fait face aux problèmes des perceptions et des préjugés de l'Ouest à l'égard de l'Est. Ce sujet a déjà été traité dans une littérature de plus en plus abondante, mettant en avant la construction mentale des représentations de l'Europe de l'Ouest et de l'Europe de l'Est. Cette littérature a pourtant deux limites. D’abord, elle ne fournit aucun cadre analytique pour traiter rigoureusement la question. Ensuite, elle ne tire pas les conséquences politiques des perceptions biaisées. Cet article fournit les outils analytiques nécessaires en puisant dans la philosophie herméneutique (le cercle de la compréhension en particulier) et l'applique aux crises politiques récentes qu'a traversées l'Union européenne (UE). Une telle approche permet d'expliquer le poids des préjugés et des structures de compréhension et leur rôle dans les échecs politiques que connaît l'UE

Understanding fiscal politics in times of austerity: tax linkages in Britain and France

Why do national fiscal pathways diverge in times of austerity? Since the late 1970s, most of the OECD countries have either responded to such episodes by cutting spending and keeping taxes low, or by increasing taxes to match growing public spending. The UK and France are two striking examples of this divergence. Zbigniew Truchlewski explains how tax linkages can account for these opposing approaches

What's in a crisis? How frames change citizens' support for solidarity

Does the framing of a crisis change the willingness of citizens to provide support to neighbouring countries? Drawing on a new study, Waltraud Schelkle, Zbigniew Truchlewski and Federico Ferrara find a clear link between the way a crisis is framed and citizens’ support for solidarity

Beyond the economics of the euro - analysing the institutional evolution of EMU 1999-2010, September 2011

This Occasional Paper examines how and why the institutional framework governing EMU has evolved since the creation of the euro. Building on theories of institutionalism, the paper in particular investigates to what extent functional spillovers from the single currency into other policy domains, like macroeconomic policies or financial regulation, met with an adequate institutional response, and to what extent the existing institutional framework conditioned the response to the financial crisis. The interaction between policy requirements and institutional capabilities is examined both in “ordinary times” (1999-2007) and under “crisis conditions” (2007-10). The paper uses a typology of change which helps to put into perspective both the resilience of the institutional framework of EMU and its capacity to adapt. In this respect, it allows for a better understanding and framing of the current reforms of EMU economic governance. It concludes that even though the crisis will accelerate institutional development, it will do so only gradually, as path dependence and an inbuilt bias towards incremental change will prevent policy-makers from pursuing a “clean slate” strategy. JEL Classification: E52, E31, D84EMU institutional architecture, historical institutionalism, institutional change., rational choice

Bypassing democracy or buying time for democracies? The EU and COVID

Some have warned that EU crisis politics undermines democracy. But European policymaking during the early months of the pandemic reveals a different picture, argue Zbigniew Truchlewski, Waltraud Schelkle and Joe Ganderson (LSE)

What difference does the framing of a crisis make to European Union solidarity?

Does the framing of crises shape public support for inter-state solidarity? We focus on three dimensions that have been salient in the characterisation of European Union crises and may affect public support for solidarity more generally: (a) how country-specific or common a crisis is; (b) whether policymakers are seen as responsible for the crisis or not; and (c) how existential or manageable the threat posed by a crisis appears. We employ a pre-registered factorial vignette experiment conducted in 15 European Union countries to assess how characterising a hypothetical crisis affects voter support for fiscal and financial solidarity. Our results show that exposure to different crises frames shapes public support for risk-sharing in the European Union. Changes in solidaristic attitudes vary significantly with the means of fiscal risk-sharing proposed

A missing link? Maintaining support for the European polity after the Russian invasion of Ukraine

Recent research argues that external threats like war spur EU polity formation (Kelemen & McNamara, 2022). One key mechanism of this process is public support for policy responses designed by policymakers. However, like the ‘rally-round-the-flag’ effect (Mueller, 1970), public support wanes over time and we decompose this decrease into two elements: salience and polarisation at the domestic level for national and European policies in both soft and hard security (aid and sanctions). We show that while salience can sustain public support for European policy innovations, polarisation about national and (unexpectedly) European policies accelerates its decline. We thus qualify the story of EU polity formation through external security crises