Class Notes (834,244)
Canada (508,434)
POL327Y5 (40)
Jurgensen (20)
Lecture

February 4th.docx

7 Pages
141 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Political Science
Course
POL327Y5
Professor
Jurgensen
Semester
Winter

Description
February 4 th European Union, transformation of European politics from the establishment of EU, that represents a departure from the corner stones of the international system described as the Westphalia system Idea of sovereign states within their jurisdiction, maintain absolute authority, monopoly of the legitimate use of force and coherision. Integrating some of the major players, EU is a major departure interestith incorporates within its territories the key players in the international system prior to 20 century, France Germany GB. Beginnings of the EU were humble, mostly economic, cool & steel community integrated the European markets for coal, steel most notably were major players within that France & Germany. Upshot from that, was essentially an aim at making conflicts between these two powers less likely, if not impossible. From that gradually, to incorporate more and more the economic affairs of European and, make a common market. That integrated the economy of western Europe, and those economic forms of integration were enhanced through political integration, meaning the creation of political institutions Europe could be governed. This includes the European commission, European parliament, court systems, and European central bank. One of the last steps, most interesting the integration of their foreign policies. Officially the purpose of the EU: Kenneth Smith outlines objections: 1) regional cooperation and regional integration or political and economic and increasing cultural, 2) the promotion of human rights, 3) promotion of good governance and democracy; democracy prerequisite for integration of EU, Greece and Italy good governance is questionable not readily described as good governance4) prevention of violent conflict, good record, little violent conflicts, and to 5) fight international crime. The main obstacles are sovereignty the diminishing of sovereignty, the pooling of sovereignty into EU, & the existence of separate national identities (cultural differences). While much has been done to diminish the barriers between states, integrate markets, free flow of capital and goods within the EU, and to allow the free flow of labor across former political boundaries, lots left to be achieved. True all Europeans carry a European passport, not a French or German passport, but these passports are issued by their countries, to signify any member of the EU they can freely travel across the borders, seek employment anywhere in the EU..freeing the flow of labor is more apparent then real. Main reason: linguistic and cultural obstacles that seek employment out of their country of origin. Lots of work to facilitate skills from one region to the other, if you want to practice as a doctor in Germany but you studied in Spain, than your going to have a lot of trouble. Realm of foreign policy, these differences;cultural and the differences between national identity, represent a obstacle in integration of foreign policy. National identities determine members of a political community recognize the world and understand the interest in the world, in so far these national identities diverge, history of country diverge, countries will continue to seek their interest in many ways, critics of European policy argue that foreign policy has been unified its been unified only conformed the lowest common denominator, objects of that policy is limited, but its very difficult to go beyond, value & interests are not shared across borders, no European polity. For that reason, member states control their region to a extent, differences are evident with respect to the dissolution of Yugoslavia, where German played a different role from France & Britain, in regard to Rwanda where France backed Hutu government longer than any one else, Iraq war: France & Germany didn’t support, Britain, Spain, Italy joined the coalition of the willing. Iraq:A) different countries have different interests, as such some of the reluctance of France & Germany to go in may have a great deal to do with the fact both France & Germany had trade ties with Iraq, both exported capital goods to Iraq, reluctant to give up those connections, Poland Spain, Italy far less so. Great deal of reluctance of joining the coalition was because ofAmerican government & the attitude towards Europe, and the attitude towards coalitions and international community in general. Bush: your with us or with the terrorist, low approval ratings were far worse in Europe (France/Germany). France singled out- US declared the French an enemy, taking measures like renamed French fries to “freedom fries”. Why Germany was not singled out, not entirely sure. Situation towards a common foreign policy has improved with change of one key variable: replacement of Bush to Obama. Obama enjoys far greater popularity than Bush, notable that their doesn’t seem distance towards European countries andAmerican foreign policy. Worked similar playbook in Libya intervention, US majority of arms, on the ground in terms of directing attacks was France. Syria: gradually emerging in Europe that US may have pushed too hard trying to push to hard,Arab states pushing a little to hard to backing opponents to theAssad Regime, most investigations say Syria opposition 50,000 members of resistance, 40,000 are linked to Europe considers to be extremist groups (jihad). Only 10,000 seen as moderates. Essentially, gradual realization better withAssad. Obama administration greater role in pushing Europeans in isolating Iran, don't share same atomicity towards Iran due to Iran Embassy. Iran Embassy Crisis: why Iran is in a similar category with Cuba, official enemy to US long after the reasons have disappeared. Despite 30 years, US still hostile. Europeans have viewed Iran not positively, but not completely negative. State that does not threaten its neighbors, European interest and potentially a large market to European exports, despite these interests, that would push Europe nicer attitude towards Iran..successful in getting the European member states so support sanctions regime. Temporary to greater integration.. or merely Obama better selling the policy, Europeans may be still extremely divided. Realist: understandably skeptical at integrating foreign policy in EU. Peter: European Union will only take difficult decisions if gains of a common action are so great that sacrificing their own sovereignty is worth it.. or if interests converge to an extent that no loss of sovereignty will exceed. These conditions have not held in the past, unlikely to in the future. Common interest cannot overcome those basic interest. Different interest at stakes, no controversy has erupted, evident in bubble of NorthAfrica. North Africa, France has substantial interest.. long history of colonial domination.. rest of Europe doesn’t share those interests.. Reluctant to intervene in that region such if an intervention would be really costly. Liberals more positive: arguing while limits exist, true to note cup is half empty, half full. Limits can be overcome, they can particularly overcome if larger states within the European union, can be forced to accept outcomes that are contrary to their interests. That is the case in foreign policy, more case in economics. So long as Germany, central player in EU continues to defend its national interest, unlikely EU will survive the current economic crisis. In order to survive needs to accept it has to bail out the weaker players within the EU in order to prevent the disintegration of the EU. Britain is holding a referendum again for its EU membership. when they fit their interests. Germany Fragment of region of Europe, lacking in core identity. The reason for that is that German speaking peoples in Center of Europe, form the largest ethnic group within continental group, from roman empire and on, potential threat to other regions in Europe. Didn’t play much of a role in first outgrowth of Holy Roman Empire In Europe, holy roman empire, governed most of today whats known as Germany,Austria and Switzerland. Holy Roman Empire slowly disintegrated govern through various lose ties of various noble families, made up holy roman empire that fell apart to multitude of states. Identity emerged late, is that Germans have generally suffered from a cultural inferiority in respect to their neighbors, in particular in respect to neighbors of south and west, meaning France & Italy. Immediate out growth, no common German literature, high literature within Germany tended to be about cultures other than German, glorify the Mediterranean cultures, high culture. Fragmentation came about during reformation period, which followed by 30 years war. reformation: was primarily theological development which began with a roman catholic priest, bishop Martin Luther, nailing 95 principles criticizing the teachings of the catholic church, he set off a religious war, not first to criticize the catholic church: unleash reactions. Criticisms prior, practice of Catholic church and Jesus, distribution of wealth, new testament Jesus did not teach that wealth should be retrieved for, the enormous wealth of the church and people living in jurisdictions, those folks got killed. Luther strayed away, questioned the idea of justification by good dead, ability of nobilities to buying themselves positions in heaven by providing money to the church. His critics didn’t threaten the feudal elites in Europe, those elites that resented the church for taxing them, supported Luther to gain autonomy and more wealth. 30 yrs war nobles of gaining autonomy from church and those church wanting the territory to tax them. In process 2/3 of population Germany disappeared. Civil war that included armies, and the civilians. Settled in peace of Westphalia, religion of the prince is religion of the people. Draw, end it by allowing political authority to impose their religion on the people that lived in their territory. Cynical way to settle theological issue. Greater freedom it unleashed in Germany in regards to science & technology. Didn’t contribute of greater unity or national identity, further divided different principalities where different th religions were dominate. Real identity didnt happen till 19 century, real signs within the German culture. Guddis writing: German Renaissance. Virtue that the Guudis book the suffering of young Verter, first book within Germany. To considerable extent, leader of philosophy, Kant etc. Germany became philosophically one of the first European regions where there were support for move towards democracy and away from monarchy. First attempts to unify Germany took this form, attempt to create German parliament to eclpise the power of the separate noble families that ruled the small states that ruled Germany, revolution of 1848 uprising, which was unsuccessful. Unification of Germany didn’t take place through the establishment of German parliament, but rather through the expansion of one of the key states within Germany of Prussia. That of Prussia. Prussia is often seen as a useful example to illustrate the process of state making, in Tilly example, in that Prussia expanded its regional power through extraction coercion cycle. Extract resources of the territory they have control using those resources to expand their power, to expand their military, usi
More Less

Related notes for POL327Y5

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit