This book takes up traditional approaches to political science. It aims to offer a mixture of conventional and specific analyses and insights for different groups of readers. In view of the European Union's multi-level and multi-actor polity, the book highlights the complex procedural and institutional set-up of nation states preparing and implementing decisions made by the institutions of the European Community (EC). In looking at the emerging and evolving realities of the European polity, it shows how European institutions and Member States (re-)act and interact in a new institutional and procedural set-up. It explores how governmental and non-governmental actors in different national settings adapt to common challenges, constraints and opportunities for which they are mainly themselves responsible. The book discusses the Belgian policy toward European integration as a significant demonstration of its commitment to multilateralism and international co-operation in security and economic affairs. Attitudes to European integration in Denmark, Germany, Finland, Greece, and Spain are discussed. Tendencies towards 'Europeanisation' and 'sectoralisation' of the ministerial administration during the process of European integration and the typical administrative pluralism of the Italian political system seem to have mutually reinforced each other. Strong multi-level players are able to increase their access and influence at both levels and to use their position on one level for strengthening their say on the other. German and Belgian regions might develop into these kinds of actors. A persistent trend during the 1990s is traced towards stronger national performers, particularly in terms of adaptations and reactions to Maastricht Treaty.
The impact of EU membership and advancing integration
first negotiated accession to the EuropeanCommunity in 1961–62, it also made a strong point of accommodating the interests of its own former colonies. This would be repeated during the second
round of its accession negotiations in the early 1970s (Tulloch, 1975: 37,
101–3; Grilli, 1993: 16; Todd, 1999: 62–3). As a result, when the UK finally
joined the EuropeanCommunity in 1973, the group of recipients of EC development assistance was drastically expanded to include a large number of the
UK’s Commonwealth cooperation partners in Anglophone Africa, the
A discourse view on the European Community and the abolition of border controls in the second half of the 1980s
W HAT KIND
OF order did the EuropeanCommunity (EC) and later the European Union
(EU) become by deciding to abolish border controls between the member
states in the second half of the 1980s? The EU has been celebrated as a
postnational entity which has been able to overcome old enmities between
European states that resulted in so many wars in the past. Against this
Wolfgang Wessels, Andreas Maurer and Jürgen Mittag
complex procedural and institutional set-up of nation states preparing
and implementing decisions made by the institutions of the EuropeanCommunity (EC).
Unlike volumes on the general structure and culture of European political systems, this volume focuses on reactions and adaptations to a
challenge which is common to all – i.e. the policy-cycle of the Union. We
thus intend to explore structural commonalities and differences with a
common point of reference. Fifteen traditional systems and their variations may be better explained when the comparison is based on the
The role of France and French interests in European development policy since 1957
enlargement, the French language was the only medium of reflection and decision within the EuropeanCommunity. It was even suggested that the French
President Pompidou conditioned the EC membership of the United Kingdom
to the arrival at the Commission of bilingual English civil servants (Guérivière,
1992: 54)! Progressively, the use of the English language has taken over that
of French, which was still prevailing in DG VIII/DG DEV until the nomination
of Danish Commissioner Nielson in 1999.
The financial channel
Maria João Seabra
Portugal: one way to Europeanisation
Introduction: from enthusiasm via Euro-pessimism towards active
Portugal joined the EuropeanCommunities in 1986, following a process
of negotiations that had lasted eight years. The request for membership
was made in March 1977, at a time when the country was still deeply
engaged in the process of democratic transition. Internally, the European
option was considered to be decisive to the consolidation of democracy.
Shortly after the 25 April 1977 coup d
11 Katzenstein (ed.), 1997, op. cit., pp. 49–79.
12 See the coalition agreement of the CDU/CSU–FDP government of November
1994 and its paragraph on the ‘Guidelines of European Policy’.
13 See the coalition agreement between the SPD–GREENS government entitled
‘Aufbruch und Erneuerung – Deutschlands Weg ins 21. Jahrhundert’,
20 October 1998.
14 See Leon N. Lindberg and Stuart A. Scheingold, Europe’s Would-Be Polity.
Patterns of Change in the EuropeanCommunity (Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
European and foreign policy
of the Länder
At first it would appear that this chapter is misnamed. Surely “European
and Foreign Policy” are themes that belong to the federal government.
They do, of course, but the Länder are not irrelevant in these areas.
Indeed, European policy is now to a considerable extent domestic policy,
and many responsibilities that have traditionally belonged to the Länder
have been and are today the subjects of EuropeanCommunity – now EU
– regulations and legislation. The efforts
EuropeanCommunities 1998: 26)
Sport and EU competition law
As such, the Commission has indicated that in some circumstances collective
selling does have a place in sport. This view was confirmed in the Formula
One investigation (see below) in which the Commission indicated that collective selling was appropriate due to the specific characteristics of motor
sport and in particular Formula One.17
Exclusivity is closely connected to collective selling. By denying a competitor access to broadcast a particular sporting event, the purchaser of the
This book brings together a number of contributions that look into the political regulation of movement and analyses that engage the material enablers of and constraints on such movement. It attempts to bridge theoretical perspectives from critical security studies and political geography in order to provide a more comprehensive perspective on security and mobility. In this vein, the book brings together approaches to mobility that take into account both techniques and practices of regulating movement, as well as their underlying infrastructures. Together the contributions inquire into a politics of movement that lies at the core of the production of security. Drawing on the insight that security is a contingent concept that hinges on the social construction of threat – which in turn must be understood through its political, social, economic, and cultural dimensions – the contributors offer fine-grained perspectives on a presumably mobile and insecure world. The title of the book, Security/Mobility, is a direct reference to this world that at times appears dominated by these two paradigms. As is shown throughout the book, rather than being opposed to each other, a great deal of political effort is undertaken in order to reconcile the need for security and the necessity of mobility. Running through the book is the view that security and mobility are entangled in a constant dynamic – a dynamic that converges in what is conceptualised here as a politics of movement.