The Number and Geographical Scope of the EU Foreign Policy Initiatives of Small Member States: Does „smallness“ matter?

• Authors: Đana Luša , Petar Kurečić
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Due to the complex voting and decision-making mechanisms of the EU, the size-factor has long been present within EU studies as a relevant and significant variable in explaining member states’ activism. Despite the aim of small states to achieve equal representation, there is a huge discrepancy between the power of big and small states within the EU. Therefore, the expected behavior of small states is different from that of the big ones. However, there are also significant differences in foreign policy activism within the group of small EU states and those are analysed in this article. In order to differentiate small states’ activism within EU foreign policy, the article explores the correlation between the scope and number of small states’ leadership initiatives in EU foreign policy and different quantitative criteria used to define these small states (population, total GDP, GDP per capita)

Keywords

EN

small states; quantitative criteria; EU foreign policy; activism; foreign policy initiatives

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Croatian International Relations Review
• Year: 2015
• Volume: 21
• Issue: 72
• Pages: 47-80

Dates

published

2015-02-01

online

2015-03-11

Contributors

author

Đana Luša

author

Petar Kurečić

References

• Baillie, S., 1998. The Position of Small States in the EU.In: Goetschel, L. ed. Small States inside and outside the European Union. Interests and Policies.Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Buchowski, C., Šabič, Z., eds.,2002. Small States in the Post -Cold World, Slovenia and NATO Enlargement. London: Praeger: 1-24.
• Benko, V., 1992. O vprašanju prioritet v zunanji politiki Slovenije. Teorija in Praksa, 29 (1/2): 3-11.
• Benko, V., 1997.Znanost o mednarodnih odnosih. Ljubljana: FDV.
• Bojinovic, A., 2005. Geographical Proximity and Historical Experience as a Basis for Active Foreign Policy Strategy of Small European States - the Case of Austria and Slovenia regarding the Western Balkans. Politics in Central Europe, 1(1): 8-29. Available at: http:/nbnresolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-61231.
• Braveboy-Wagner, J., 2010. Opportunities and Limitations of the Exercise of Foreign Policy Power by a Very Small State: The Case of Trinidad and Tobago. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 23(3): 407-425.[WoS]
• Czina, V., 2014. Small Member States as policy actors in the EU: defining a new strategy through the case of Hungary, submitted to the UACES conference: New Horizons in European Studies, held in Auston University, Birmingham, UK, 24-25 April 2014, available at: http:// www.uaces.org
• European Foreign Policy Scorecard 2012, European Council on Foreign Relations, http:// www.ecfr.eu
• European Foreign Policy Scorecard 2013, European Council on Foreign Relations, http:// www.ecfr.eu European Foreign Policy Scorecard 2014, European Council on Foreign Relations, http://www.ecfr.eu
• Goetschel, L., 2000.Power and identity: Small states and the common foreign and security policy of the EU. Bern: Universität Bern, Institut für Politikwissenschaft, National Research Program Foundations and Possibilities of Swiss Foreign Policy, available at http://www.snf.ch/NFP/nfp42/synthese/33Goetschelsynthesis42.pdf (accessed 8 March 2014).
• Hanggi, H., Regnier, P., 2000. The Small State and the Triad: the Case of Switzerland’s Foreign Policy Towards East Asia, Study in NRF Policy. National Foreign Policy Program.
• Hill, C., 2003. The Changing Politics of Foreign Policy. Houndmills: Palgrave.
• Holm, H -H., 2002. Danish Foreign Policy Activism: The Rise and Decline. In: Heurlin, B. and Mouritzen, H., eds. Danish Foreign Policy Yearbook 2002. Kbh:DUPI: 19-46.
• Howard Grøn, C., Wivel, A., 2011. Maximizing Influence in the European Union after the Lisbon Treaty: From Small State Policy to Smart State Strategy. Journal of European Integration, 33(05): 523-39.
• Keating, M., McEwen, N., Harvey, M., 2014. The Role of Small States in the European Union: lessons for Scotland, Evidence Presented to the Scottish Parliament Europe and External Affairs Committee, 16 January 2014, available at: http://www.futureukandscotland.ac.uk/papers/role-small-states-european-union-lessons-scotland.
• Lehne, S., 2012. The Big Three in EU Foreign Policy, The Carnegie Papers, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, available at: http:// www.CarnegieEndowment.org/pubs.
• Lindell, U.,Persson, S., 1986. The Paradox of Weak State Power: A Research and Literature Overview. Conflict and Cooperation, 21(2): 79-97.
• Luša, Đ., Mijić, P., 2012. Vanjska politika malih država - normativna moć kao faktor utjecaja u međunarodnim odnosima. Političke perspective, 3:39-67.
• Luša, Đ., Kurečić, P., 2014. The Economic Growth of Small States and Small Economies in Regional Economic Integrations: Similarities and Differences. Journal of Education Culture and Society,14(1):261-285.
• Mix, Derek E., 2013. The European Union: Foreign and Security Policy, CRS Report for Congress, Congressional Research Service, 8 April 2013, available at http://www.crs.gov.
• Mouritzen, H., 1998.Theory and Reality of International Politics. Aldershot: Asgate.
• Mouritzen, H., Wivel, A., 2005.The Geopolitics of Euro-Atlantic Integration. London: Routledge.
• Nasra, S., 2010.Weak Power, Great Influence: Small States in EU Foreign Policy. The Case of Belgium and Greece. EUIA 2010 Conference. Brussels, 22-24 April 2010, available at: http://www.ies.be/files/Nasra-E1.pdf.
• Panke, D., 2010. Small States in the European Union: Structural Disadvantages in EU Policy Making and Counter - Strategies. Journal of European Public Policy, 17(6): 799-817.[Crossref][WoS]
• Pastore, G., 2013. Small New Member States in the EU Foreign Policy: Toward “Small State Smart Strategy”? Baltic Journal of Political Science, December (2): 67-84.
• Rolenc, J.M., 2013. Means, Goals and Sources of Foreign Policy: The Case of Sweden, Paper draft for the ISA 2013 convention, 3-6 April, San Francisco, available at http://iles.isanet.org/ConferenceArchive/94e642011ab54.
• Scheldrup, M., 2014.Lilliputian Choice: Explaining Small State Foreign Policy Variation. Undergraduate Honors Thesis. Paper 191, available at http://scholar.colorado.edu/honr_theses.
• Šabič, Z., 2002. Small States Aspiring for NATO Membership: Some Factors Influencing the Accession Process.In: Buchowski, C., Šabič, Z., eds. Small States in the Post - Cold World, Slovenia and NATO Enlargement. London: Praeger: 1-24.
• Thorhallsson, B., 2011. The Icelandic Economic Collapse: Incompetence or the Small Size? Reykjavik, Iceland: Faculty of Political Science. School of Social Science, University of Iceland.15 May 2011, available at: http://uni.hi.is.
• Thorhallsson, B., Wivel, A., 2006. Small States in the European Union: What Do We Know and What Would We Like to Know?, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 19(4): 651-668.
• Vilpišauskas, R., 2011. National Preferences and Bargaining of the New Member States Since the Enlargement of the EU: The Baltic States - Still Policy Takers? Lithuanian Foreign Policy Review, 25:9-32.
• Vital, D., 1967. The Inequality of States: A Study of the Small Power in International Relations. Oxford: Clarendon Press. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tps00001&plugin=1(accessed 28 May 2014) http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/ (accessed 29 September 2014) http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/GDP_per_capita,_consumption_per_capita_and_price_level_indices#Further_Eurostat_information (accessed 29 September 2014) http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DatasetCode=SNA_TABLE1

Identifiers

DOI

10.1515/cirr-2015-0002