Abstract
The introduction will describe the constant evolving global political context correlated to the events occurring, specifically, in the trade environment and the unprecedented challenges they pose for the EU Trade Policy. These identified and introduced challenges will be addressed in detail in the following book chapters. It will also introduce the reader to the individual contributions of the book and briefly present and anticipate the results attained.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For more detail on these challenges see the subsequent chapter by Wolfgang Weiß.
- 2.
The first TBT agreement, the so-called Standards Code, preceding the present one, was adopted in 1979 as a result of the Tokyo Round; services trade regulation became a topic in Part II of the Punta del Este Ministerial declaration instigating the Uruguay Round (http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/punta_e.asp).
- 3.
See Alasdair Young, John Peterson, Parochial Global Europe. 21stCentury Trade Politics (Oxford University Press 2014).
- 4.
Marise Cremona, ‘A Quiet Revolution – The Changing Nature of the EU’s Common Commercial Policy’ (2017) in Marc Bungenberg and others (eds) European Yearbook of International Economic Law 2017 (Springer International Publishing 2017) p. 3, 11.
- 5.
Angelos Dimopoulos, ‘The Effects of the Lisbon Treaty on the Principles and Objectives of the Common Commercial Policy’ (2010) 15(2) European Foreign Affairs Review p. 153-170.
- 6.
See the subsequent chapter in this volume and John Ikenberry, ‘The End of Liberal International Order?’ (2018) 94(1) International Affairs p. 7-23; Karen Smith, ‘The European Union in an Illiberal World’ (2017) 116 Current History p. 83-87.
- 7.
Cf. Joris Larik, Foreign Policy Objectives in European Constitutional Law (Oxford University Press 2016) p. 250, 262 ff; Bruno De Witte, ‘The European Union as an International Legal Experiment’ in Grainne de Burca, Joseph H.H. Weiler (eds), The Worlds of European Constitutionalism (Cambridge University Press 2012) p. 19-56.
- 8.
Commission Communication, Shared Vision. Common Action: A stronger Europe - Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy (2016). <http://eeas.europa.eu/archives/ docs/top_stories/pdf/eugs_review_web.pdf>
- 9.
Ibid p. 8, 39 ff.
- 10.
Ibid p. 10.
- 11.
Implementing the EU Global Strategy Year 2 (2018), p. 5 <https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/eugs_annual_report_year_2.pdf> accessed 24 July 2019.
- 12.
Heather Conley, ‘The Birth of a Global Strategy amid Deep Crisis’ (2016) 51(3) The International Spectator p. 12-14.
- 13.
Ana Juncos, ‘Resilience as the New EU Foreign Policy Paradigm: a Pragmatist Turn’ (2017) 26 European Security p. 1-18; Nathalie Tocci, ‘The Making of the EU Global Strategy’ (2016) 37 Contemporary Security Policy p. 461-472.
- 14.
The Council decided to sign the trade and the investment protection agreements with Vietnam on 25th June 2019, see <https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2019/06/25/eu-vietnam-council-adopts-decisions-to-sign-trade-and-investment-agreements/?utm_source=dsms-auto&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EU-Vietnam%3a+Council+adopts+decisions+to+sign+trade+and +investment+agreements> accessed 24 July 2019.
- 15.
For the political agreement on EU Mercosur see <http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=2039> accessed 24 July 2019. For the current state of play of the concluded and negotiated FTAs see European Commission, ‘Negotiations and Agreements’ <http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/negotia tions-and-agreements/> accessed 28 July 2019.
- 16.
General Council, Communication from the European Union, China, Canada, India, Norway, New Zealand, Switzerland, Australia, Republic of Korea, Iceland, Singapore and Mexico to the General Council, WT/GC/W/752, 26 November 2018 <http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2018/november/tradoc_157514.pdf> accessed on 28 June 2019; General Council, Communication from the European Union, China and India to the General Council, WT/GC/W/753, 26 November 2018 <https://www.southcentre.int/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/EU-Proposal-2.pdf> accessed on 28 June 2019.
- 17.
See for example EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström’s Speech, ‘Saving the WTO’, 13 November 2018 <http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2018/november/tradoc_157494.pdf> accessed on 28 June 2019 (‘International trade without the WTO would be anarchic.’).
- 18.
Commission Communication Global Europe: Competing in the World. A Contribution to the EU’s Growth and Jobs Strategy, COM (2006) 567 final.
- 19.
On the EU’s deep trade agenda and its development since 2006, see e.g. Billy Melo Araujo, The EU Deep Trade Agenda (Oxford University Press 2016); Boris Rigod, ‘The EUs New Trade Policy in Legal Context’ (2012) 18(2) Columbia Journal of European Law p. 277-306.
- 20.
Anu Bradford, ‘The Brussels Effect’ (2012) 107(1) Northwestern University Law Review p. 1-67; Anu Bradford, ‘Exporting Standards: The Externalization of the EU’s Regulatory Power via Markets’ (2015) 42 International Review of Law and Economics p. 158-173.
- 21.
The escalation of restrictive trade measures, that will be detailed in the subsequent chapter, puts the existence of the multilateral trading system under threat and raises serious concerns about the future of the international trade law; see Geraldo Vidigal, ‘Westphalia Strikes Back: The 2018 Trade Wars and the Threat to the WTO Regime’, Amsterdam Law School Research Paper 2018/31.
References
Bradford A (2012) The Brussels Effect, 107(1) Northwestern University Law Review, pp. 1-67
Bradford A (2015) Exporting Standards: The Externalization of the EU’s Regulatory Power via Markets, 42 International Review of Law and Economics, pp. 158-173
Conley H (2016) The Birth of a Global Strategy amid Deep Crisis, 51(3) The International Spectator, pp. 12-14
Cremona M (2017) A Quiet Revolution – The Changing Nature of the EU’s Common Commercial Policy. In: Marc Bungenberg and others (eds) European Yearbook of International Economic Law 2017, Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 3-34
Dimopoulos A (2010) The Effects of the Lisbon Treaty on the Principles and Objectives of the Common Commercial Policy, 15(2) European Foreign Affairs Review, pp. 153-170
Ikenberry J (2018) The End of Liberal International Order? 94(1) International Affairs, pp. 7-23
Juncos A (2017) Resilience as the New EU Foreign Policy Paradigm: a Pragmatist Turn, 26 European Security, pp. 1-18
Larik J (2016) Foreign Policy Objectives in European Constitutional Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford
Rigod B (2012) The EUs New Trade Policy in Legal Context, 18(2) Columbia Journal of European Law, pp. 277-306
Smith K (2017) The European Union in an Illiberal World, 116 Current History, pp. 83-87
Tocci N (2016) The Making of the EU Global Strategy, 37 Contemporary Security Policy, pp. 461-472
de Witte B (2012) The European Union as an International Legal Experiment. In: de Burca G, Weiler J H H (eds) The Worlds of European Constitutionalism, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 19-56
Young A and Peterson J (2014) Parochial Global Europe. 21st Century Trade Politics, Oxford University Press, Oxford
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Weiß, W., Furculita, C. (2020). Introduction: EU Trade Policy Facing Unprecedented Challenges. In: Weiß, W., Furculita, C. (eds) Global Politics and EU Trade Policy. European Yearbook of International Economic Law(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34588-4_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34588-4_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-34587-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-34588-4
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)