Abstract
This chapter begins from the premise that – with regard to external democracy promotion – while certain traits the new EU member states share can be detected, these states certainly do not constitute a homogeneous block. To reflect the differences that exist between the new member states with regard to how they perceive and implement their external democratization policies, an analytical framework taking the shape of an external democratization matrix is constructed and put forward. This speaks directly to the Normative Power Europe framework, arguing that it is necessary to problematize the EU’s actorness by acknowledging intra-EU struggles about what the EU is, enabling one to subsequently assess what it does. This opens up new research venues, where one of the most important questions is the role the individual member states (and separate regional clusters) play in the EU’s external democratization policy. In a first attempt to uncover these roles, the empirical part of the chapter focuses on the Czech Republic, seeing how it understood democracy promotion in 2004–2008 and whether, and how, it attempted to shape the EU’s policy to be in line with its own understanding.
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.
Equally, scholars were also interested in the effects the EU membership perspective has had on the foreign policy of both Larnaca and Valetta, but as these do not form part of the CEECs (plus Croatia), these two are omitted in this contribution.
- 2.
The current Multilateral Financial Framework for the EU budget (2014–2020) foresees €96.7 billion to be spent (Donor Tracker, available via http://donortracker.org/donor-profiles/european-union, accessed April 4, 2016).
- 3.
In 2014, the EU collective ODA represented 0.42% of the EU Gross National Income (European Commission 2013). Please note that the new EU member states’ contribution to achieving the overall EU target lies in pledging to reach a national ODA/GNI ration of 0.17%, reflecting their incremental change from being an aid recipient to becoming an aid donor.
- 4.
“Interview B,” (Prague: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, March 19, 2010): 6.
- 5.
This chapter is concerned with all thirteen countries that joined in 2004, 2007, 2013 apart from Malta and Cyprus.
- 6.
Note that since the Lisbon Treaty entered into force, the newly created Foreign Affairs Council is the only one of the ten existing Council constellations that is no longer subject to the rotating Council Presidency. The entire remaining structure of the Council of the European Union – including all the working groups dealing with foreign policy matters and both COREPER and COPS – continue to be headed by a representative of the presiding country. As such, further research into whether the member states’ ability to co-shape the EU’s foreign policy agenda has remained intact is necessary. However, this is irrelevant to the present study as the Czech Republic held its Council Presidency before the Lisbon Treaty entered into force on December 1, 2009.
- 7.
Recognizing the role moral authorities, in the vast majority linked to the Communist dissent, play within Prague’s foreign policy formation with regard to external democracy promotion, brings to the fore the question of whether, and how, the Czech Republic’s foreign policy will be reoriented once the voices of these authorities are no longer heard. It can thus be reasonably hypothesized that also the promotion of democracy in third countries may increasingly be seen as a means to achieving other, overarching, foreign policy goals, as a result of which the country would drop on the vertical axis of the matrix.
- 8.
Russia’s importance for the Czech Republic’s overall international trade in the years 2004 to 2008 has been 2.69%, 2.58%, 3.80%, 3.50%, and 4.78% respectively. Vice versa, thus looking at the Czech Republic’s importance to Russia’s overall international trade in the same period has been 1.21%, 1.03%, 1.49%, 1.40%, and 1.60% respectively. As such, while we observe a significant increase in Russia’s relevance to Czech exports and imports, we observe a much more incremental growth of the Czech Republic’s relevance to Russia’s economy, with the gap widening over the scrutinized 5 years (Observatory of Economic Complexity, available at http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/cze/, accessed April 15, 2016).
- 9.
For the data table on establishing the Czech Republic’s place within the External Democratization Matrix’ horizontal line, please refer to Appendix A at the end of this chapter.
- 10.
“Interview X,” (Prague: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, January 17, 2011): 4.
- 11.
“Interview V,” (Brussels: Permanent Representation of the Czech Republic to the European Union, November 27, 2010): 6.
- 12.
“Interview Q,” (Prague: DEMAS Association for Democracy Assistance and Human Rights, April 16, 2010): 3–4.
Bibliography
Ackrill, R. W. (2003) ‘EU Enlargement, the CAP and the Cost of Direct Payments: A Note’, Journal of Agricultural Economics, 54, 1.
Balducci, G. (2008) Inside Normative Power Europe: Actors and Processes in the European Promotion of Human Rights in China, EU Diplomacy Paper 8 (Brugge and Natolin, Department of EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies).
Baldwin, R. E. (1995) ‘The Eastern Enlargement of the European Union’, European Economic Review, 39, 3–4.
Baldwin, R. E., Francois, J.F. and Portes, R. (1997) ‘The Costs and Benefits of Eastern Enlargement: The Impact on the EU and Central Europe’, Economic Policy, 12, 24.
Bartovic, V. (2008) ‘Limited Resources, Global Ambitions’, in Kucharzcyk, J. and Lovitt, J. (eds) Democracy’s New Champions: European Democracy Assistance after EU Enlargement (Prague, Policy Association for an Open Society).
Berti, B., Mikulova, K. and Popescu, N. (eds) (2016) Democratization in EU Foreign Policy: New Member States as Drivers of Democracy Promotion (Abingdon and New York, Routledge).
Bílková, V. and Matějková, Š. (2010) ‘Šíření demokracie jako národní zájem? Legitimizace české transformační politiky’, in Drulák, P. and Horký, O. (eds) Hledání českých zájmů: Obchod, lidská práva a mezinárodní rozvoj (Prague, Ústav mezinárodních vztahů).
Breuss, F. (2001) Macroeconomic Effects of EU Enlargement for Old and New Members, Working Paper 143 (Vienna, Austrian Institute for Economic Research).
Council of the European Union (2009) Joint Paper – Commission/Council General Secretariat on Democracy Building in EU External Relations (Brussels, Council of the European Union).
Daugbjerg, C. and Swinbank, A. (2004) ‘The CAP and EU Enlargement: Prospects for an Alternative Strategy to Avoid the Lock-in of CAP Support’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 42, 1.
Dieringer, J., Lindstrom, N., Bajaczek, J. and Moisa, I. S (2002) ‘The Europeanization of Regions in EU-Applicant Countries. A Comparative Analysis of Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovenia’, in 7th EACES Conference: Globalization and Economic Governance, Forli, 6–8 June 2002.
Diez, T. (2005) ‘Constructing the Self and Changing Others: Reconsidering ‘Normative Power Europe”, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 33, 3.
Diez, T. (2013) ‘Normative Power as Hegemony’, Cooperation and Conflict, 48, 2.
Dlouhá, G. and Šnaidauf, J. (2011) Toward a Common Approach to the Global Pro-Democracy Agenda and a Revival of Democracy Promotion in the Arab-Muslim World, Policy Brief (Prague, Ministry of Foreign Affairs).
European Partnership for Democracy (2009) Report from the Conference Building Consensus about EU Policies on Democracy Support (Prague, European Partnership for Democracy).
European Commission (2008) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: Eastern Partnership (Brussels, European Commission).
European Commission (2013) The European Commission Calls on EU Member States to Fulfil Their Commitments Towards the World’s Poorest (Brussels, European Commission).
Gordon, N. and Pardo, S. (2015) ‘Normative Power Europe Meets the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict’, Asia Europe Journal, 13, 3.
Gower, J. (2000) ‘EU-Russian Relations and the Eastern Enlargement: Integration or Isolation?’, Perspectives on European Politics and Society, 1, 1.
Gower, J. (2007) ‘The European Union’s Policy on Russia: Rhetoric or Reality?’, in Gower, J. and Timmins, G. (eds) Russia and Europe in the Twenty-First Century: An Uneasy Partnership (London and New York, Anthem Press).
Grabbe, H. (2001) ‘How Does Europeanisation Affect CEE Governance? Conditionality, Diffusion and Diversity’, Journal of European Public Policy, 8, 4.
Haukkala, H. (2008) ‘The European Union as a Regional Normative Hegemon: The Case of European Neighbourhood Policy’, Europe-Asia Studies, 60, 9.
Hyde-Price, A. (2006) “Normative’ Power Europe: A Realist Critique’, Journal of European Public Policy, 13, 2.
Jonavičius, L. (2008) The Democracy Promotion Policies of Central and Eastern European States, Working Paper 55 (Madrid, Fundacion para las Relaciones Internacionales y el Dialogo Exterior).
Juncos, A. E. and Pomorska, K. (2007) ‘The Deadlock That Never Happened: The Impact of Enlargement on the Common Foreign and Security Policy Council Working Groups’, European Political Economy Review, 6.
Kaminska, J. (2007) ‘New EU Members and the CFSP: Europeanization of the Polish Foreign Policy’, Political Perspectives, 2, 2.
Kucharczyk, J. and Lovitt, J. (2008a) New Kids on the Block: Can the Visegrad Four Emerge as Effective Players in International Democracy Assistance?, Policy Brief 2 (Prague, Policy Association for an Open Society).
Kucharczyk, J. and Lovitt, J. (2008b) ‘Re-Energising Europe to Champion Democracy’, in Kucharzcyk, J. and Lovitt, J. (eds) Democracy’s New Champions: European Democracy Assistance after EU Enlargement (Prague, Policy Association for an Open Society).
Kvist, J. (2004) ‘Does EU Enlargement Start a Race to the Bottom? Strategic Interaction among EU Member States in Social Policy’, Journal of European Social Policy, 14, 3.
Lovitt, J. and Řiháčková, V. (2008) Is the EU Ready to Put Democracy Assistance at the Heart of European Foreign Policy?, Policy Brief 1 (Prague, Policy Association for an Open Society).
Manners, I. (2002) ‘Normative Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 40, 2.
Manners, I. (2006a) ‘Normative Power Europe Reconsidered: Beyond the Crossroads’, Journal of European Public Policy, 13, 2.
Manners, I. (2006b) ‘The European Union as a Normative Power: A Response to Thomas Diez’, Millenium: Journal of International Studies, 35, 1.
Manners, I. (2008) ‘The Normative Ethics of the European Union’, International Affairs, 84, 1.
Melia, T. O. (2010) ‘Supporting Democracy Abroad: Transatlantic Cooperation at the Crossroads’, in Hamilton, D. S. and Burwell, F. G. (eds) Shoulder to Shoulder: Forging a Strategic US-EU Partnership (Washington, D.C., Center for Transatlantic Relations).
Merlingen, M. (2007) ‘Everything Is Dangerous: A Critique of ‘Normative Power Europe”, Security Dialogue, 38, 4.
MZV ČR (2005) Zpráva o zahraniční politice České republiky za období od ledna 2004 do prosince 2004 (Prague, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic).
MZV ČR (2006) Zpráva o zahraniční politice České republiky za období od ledna 2005 do prosince 2005 (Prague, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic).
MZV ČR (2007) Zpráva o zahraniční politice České republiky za období od ledna 2006 do prosince 2006 (Prague, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic).
MZV ČR (2008) Zpráva o zahraniční politice České republiky za období od ledna 2007 do prosince 2007 (Prague, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic).
MZV ČR (2009) Zpráva o zahraniční politice České republiky za období od ledna 2008 do prosince 2008 (Prague, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic).
MZV ČR (2010) Transition Policy Concept (Prague, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic).
Missiroli, A. (ed) (2002) Bigger EU, wider CFSP, stronger ESDP? The View from Central Europe, Occasional Paper 34 (Paris, European Union Institute for Security Studies).
Missiroli, A. (2003) ‘EU Enlargement and CFSP/ESDP’, Journal of European Integration, 25,1.
Morozov, V. (2009) Rossiya i drugie (Moscow: Novoe Literaturnoe Obozrenie).
Neuman, M. (2011) ‘The Nexus between Czech Non-State Actors and Domestic Foreign Policy Making in the EU Presidency Context’, Perspectives, 19, 1.
Neuman, M. (2012) ‘The Czech Republic’s EU Accession: A Shift-Producing Variable in the EU’s Foreign Policy towards Russia?’, in Arcidiacono, B., Milzow, K. and Marion, A. (eds) Europe Twenty Years after the End of the Cold War: The New Europe, New Europes? (Brussels, Peter Lang).
Neuman, M. (2015) Too Small to Make an Impact? The Czech Republic’s Influence on the European Union’s Foreign Policy (Frankfurt am Main, Peter Lang).
Neuman, M. (2017) ‘Prague on a Mission: Emphasizing Democracy Promotion in EU Foreign Policy’, in Hashimoto, T. and Rhimes, M. (eds) Reviewing European Union Accession: Unexpected Results, Spillover Effects, and Externalities (Leiden, Brill).
OECD (2008) Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide (Paris, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development).
Orav, A. (2006) ‘Measuring Foreign Relations’, in Estonian Ministry of Foreign Relations Yearbook (Tallin, Ministry of Foreign Relations).
Pardo, S. (2015) Normative Power Europe Meets Israel: Perceptions and Realities (London and New York, Lexington Books).
Petrova, T. (2014) From Solidarity to Geopolitics: Support for Democracy among Postcommunist States (New York, Cambridge University Press).
Petrova, T. (2015) ‘International, National or Local? Explaining the Substance of Democracy Promotion: The Case of Eastern European Democracy Promotion’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 28, 1.
Pospieszna, P. (2014) Democracy Assistance from the Third Wave: Polish Engagement in Belarus and Ukraine (Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh Press).
Raik, K. (2007) ‘A Europe Divided by Russia? The New Eastern Member States and the EU’s Policy towards the East’, in Gower, J. and Timmins, G. (eds) Russia and Europe in the Twenty-First Century: An Uneasy Partnership (London and New York, Anthem Press).
Raik K. and Gromadzki, G. (2006) Between Activeness and Influence: The Contribution of New Member States to EU Policies towards the Eastern Neighbourhood, Policy Study (Tallin, Open Estonia Foundation).
Romanova, T. (2009) ‘Normative Power Europe: A Russian View’, in Gerrits, A. (ed) Normative Power Europe in a Changing World: A Discussion (The Hague, Clingendael).
Řiháčková, V. (2008) EU Democracy Assistance through Civil Society – Reformed?, Research Study (Prague, Policy Association for an Open Society).
Sadurski, W. (2004) ‘Accession’s Democracy Dividend: The Impact of the EU Enlargement upon Democracy in the New Member States of Central and Eastern Europe’, European Law Journal, 10, 4.
Schimmelfennig, F. and Sedelmeier, U. (2004) ‘Governance by Conditionality: EU Rule Transfer to the Candidate Countries of Central and Eastern Europe’, Journal of European Public Policy, 11, 4.
Smith, K. E. (2005) ‘The Outsiders: The European Neighbourhood Policy’, International Affairs, 81, 4.
Sturm, R. and Dieringer, J. (2005) ‘The Europeanization of Regions in Eastern and Western Europe: Theoretical Perspectives’, Regional and Federal Studies, 15, 3.
Tallberg, J. (2003) ‘The Agenda-Shaping Powers of the EU Council Presidency’, Journal of European Public Policy, 10, 1.
Tocci, N. (2009) ‘Firm in Rhetoric, Compromising in Reality: The EU in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict’, Ethnopolitics, 8, 3–4.
Whitman, R. G. (1999) ‘The Common Foreign and Security Policy after Enlargement’, in Curzon-Price, V., Landau, A. and Whitman, R. G. (eds) The Enlargement of the European Union: Issues and Strategies (London and New York, Routledge).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix A: 2004–2008 Data Determining the Quality of the Czech Republic’s Relations with Post-Soviet Russia
Appendix A: 2004–2008 Data Determining the Quality of the Czech Republic’s Relations with Post-Soviet Russia
2004 | 2005 | 2006 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Political | Inter-institutional cooperation | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Defense cooperation | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
High-level official visits | 1 | 0 | 1 | ||||
Economic | Interdependence | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 |
Cultural | Cultural cooperation through cultural centers | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Yearly average | 0.33 | 0.22 | 0.33 | ||||
Average 2004–2006 | 0.30 |
2007 | 2008 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Political | Inter-institutional cooperation | 1 | 0.33 | 1 | 0 |
Defense cooperation | 0 | −1 | |||
High-level official visits | 0 | 0 | |||
Economic | Interdependence | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 |
Cultural | Cultural cooperation through cultural centers | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Yearly average | 0.11 | 0 | |||
Average 2007–2008 | 0.06 |
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Neuman, M. (2019). The Role of New Member States in the European Union’s External Democratization Policy: Towards an Analytical Framework. In: Neuman, M. (eds) Democracy Promotion and the Normative Power Europe Framework. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92690-2_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92690-2_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-92689-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-92690-2
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)