Study Guides (400,000)
CA (160,000)
POLI (30)
Quiz

POLI-1007EL Study Guide - Quiz Guide: Reflection Group, Common Foreign And Security Policy, Europeanisation


Department
Political Science / Science politique
Course Code
POLI-1007EL
Professor
Michael Johns
Study Guide
Quiz

This preview shows pages 1-3. to view the full 20 pages of the document.
1
WHAT WERE THE SHORTCOMINGS OF PREVIOUS TREATIES THAT LED TO THE
MAASTRICHT TREATY?
- Aftermath of Cold War + collapse of USSR + fall of the Berlin wall
o The need for change of conceptions of international relations
- SEA
o Intergovernmental conference (IGC) was established to negotiate and prepare
treaty reforms
o Signed in 1986
o Goal: completion of the internal market by 1992
o New policy areas
o Increased role of EP and influence in community it strengthened the treaty
base for policy activity and Community’s institutional system
o Was seen as a disappointment by many
- Increasing interest to complete the internal market by removing all physical, technical
and fiscal barriers
- Need for economic and monetary policies (w/in the free market of the EU)
- There had to be further INTEGRATION was decided by the decision-making
elite
(1) INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL FACTORS THAT LED TO THE TREATY
INTERNAL
EXTERNAL
stimulus for further integration provided by
“relianceof mid 80s
arose from breakup of communist bloc and
USSR
Single European Market (SEM) only
effective w/ economic and monetary Union
collapse of communism meant Community
had to consolidate
need for a social dimension to offset
deregulatory implications of SEM
unification of GER = increased potential
for German domination
dismantling of border controls = pressure
for improved jurisdiction
breakup of USSP added sense of
uncertainty about stability of Europe
problem of “democratic deficit” only
partially addressed by SEA
end of Cold War disappearance
unsuitably of preliminary frameworks
breakup of former Yugoslavia
Community itself became international
actor EC = 1 global actor
Processes led to the Maastricht treaty
(2) OPPOSING VIEWS OF COUNTRIES HOW DID THEY COME TO A
COMPROMISE?
- Check Minutes!!
(3) THREE PILLARS OF THE EU
(1) PILLAR 1 - THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
- Most important pillar as it incorporated most of the EU’s responsibilities
- Rights of existing three Communities was preserved or extended and strengthened
- EEC was renamed EC became part of the European Communities which then
became part of the EU
- Treaty Establishing European Community (TEC): incorporated principle of
subsidiarity and Union citizenship right to live and work anywhere in the territory
of the MS, vote and stand as Candidate in EP elections, local elections, etc.
- TEC also covered institutional and policy changes:
o institutional: designed to improve efficiency and democratic nature (QMV in
Council of Ministers, increased power of EP through a veto right)

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

2
o policy: laid down plan and schedule for EMU (Economic and Monetary
Union) based on a single currency
(2) PILLAR 2 - A COMMON FOREIGN & SECURITY POLICY (CFSP)
- TEU specified that EU and its MS “shall define and implement a common foreign
and security policy” shall include all questions related to the security of the Union
(common defence policy which might in time lead to a common defence) Defence
is now on political agenda
- Objectives of CFSP were defined in general terms, elaborations were responsibility of
the European Council
- 3 principal ways in which objectives were pursued:
o systematic cooperation between MS on any matter of foreign and security
policy of general interest
o Council should determine implementations and decisions by QMV regarding
the decisions of joint action
o The western European Union (WEU) was requested to “elaborate and
implement decisions and actions of the Union w/ defence implications”
- 2nd pillar put pre-existing European Political Cooperation (EPC) w/in the broader
framework of a Common Foreign and Security Policy
- 2 new elements into west European Integration Process:
o some foreign policy decisions became subject to QMV
o defence appeared on political agenda
- Council got right to decide on joint actions
(3) PILLAR 3 - COOPERATIONS IN THE SPHERE OF JUSTICE AND HOME
AFFAIRS
- Matters of common interest:
o Asylum policy, rules governing, controls on the crossing by persons of
external borders, immigration policy, residence rights of third country
nationals, combating drug-addiction and international fraud, juridical
cooperation in civil and criminal matters, customs and police cooperation,
combating drug trafficking and terrorism
o Through an EU-wide policy intelligence office (Europol)
- Legal base was given to cooperation in areas of activity that in the past had either
been to loose and informal cooperation
- Small element of supranationality appeared w/ possibility of qualified majority
decisions on certain aspects of policy implementations
(4) Pillars were meant to be held together by an institution: European Council
(4) WHAT PROBLEMS AROSE DURING THE RATIFICATION PROCESS? AND HOW
WERE THEY SOLVED?
- Check Minutes!!
(5) WHAT WERE THE OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS OF THE MAASTRICHT TREATY?
- It included an “umbrella treaty” on EU (TEU)
- Created a new organization: the EU based on the three pillars
- Important institutional provisions:
o New legislative procedure
o Revision of policy areas subject to cooperation procedure
o Extension of scope of the assent procedure
o Committee of the regions to advice Council and Commission
- Further introduction of QMV
- New power to the EP: can tale the Commission to task and legislative co-decision
procedure

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

3
- Common foreign and security policy
- Social protocol
- European citizenship = confirmation of the right to settle, circulate, eave, vote
- Provision of further intergovernmental conferences
- Birth of EMU and €
- Easier to implement foreign relations
ASSIGNMENT 2
(1) TREATY OF AMSTERDAM (1997)
- Preceding reflection group (1994) should focus on 3 main areas:
o Making Europe more relevant to its citizens
o Enabling the EU to work better and prepare for enlargement
o Giving the EU greater capacity for external action
- UK as an obstacle was removed w/ the election of Tony Blair and his policy of
“constructive engagement”
- Not as important or innovative as SEA or Maastricht Treaty
o A revision rather than pioneering treaty
o Enlargements still some way off: lack of pressure to reach agreement
o No great driving force
- Helped to pick up integrationist progress
- Signalled the wish of the UK government to enter EU mainstream
- Institutional changes:
o Co-decision procedures extended to 23 new areas
o Cooperation procedure abandoned
o Increased provision for the use of QMV in Council
o EP’s right to approve European Council nominee for Commission President
treaty status
- Political changes:
o Number of policies transferred to EC/ 1st Pillar
o Schengen acquis integrated into EU framework
o New device of “constructive abstention” (not blocking a vote, but not
participating)
- External relations:
o QMV established as norm
o New post of CFSP High Representative
o Security issues now w/in the EU Petersberg Tasks
- Closer cooperation - trying something new
o MS cooperate about policies
- QMV - majority has to agree MS have to vote themselves
- Significance:
o Less commitment for MS
o Added to the previous treaties
(2) TREATY OF NICE (2001)
- IGC opened in February 2000 and closed at the December 2000 Nice European
Council
- Remit initially limited to the “Amsterdam leftovers”
o Composition of Commission, weighting the votes among the members of the
Council, further extension of QMV to new policy areas
- Additional: strengthening and simplifying of the closer cooperation procedure
- IGV focused on institutional issues
- Ratifications relatively straightforward
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version