European Politics

Il contributo si propone di indagare le tecniche di tutela della sussidiarietà contenute nel nuovo Trattato di Lisbona. Nel corso di questi ultimi anni, il tema è stato al centro di un vivace dibattito che ha evidenziato l'insufficienza del controllo politico e giurisdizionale offerto dalle istituzioni europee e che ha proposto di coinvolgere i parlamenti nazionali nella verifica sul rispetto dei parametri imposti dal principio. Tale soluzione è stata puntualmente recepita dal gruppo di lavoro creato in seno alla Convenzione europea e ha portato ad un nuovo Protocollo sull'applicazione del principio di sussidiarietà. Malgrado l'attenzione della dottrina si sia incentrata sulla procedimentalizzazione del principio realizzata attraverso il nuovo Protocollo, essa non esaurisce il quadro delle novità introdotte in questa materia. Infatti, attraverso la mancata riproduzione dell'art. 2 del vecchio Protocollo di Amsterdam e soprattutto attraverso l'«europeizzazione dei controlimiti» realizzata dall'art. 4 del nuovo Trattato, almeno sul piano normativo, pare plausibile sostenere che il nuovo Trattato legittimi l'attribuzione dell'«ultra vires review» alle corti costituzionali nazionali. PAROLE CHIAVE: sussidiarietà; Trattato di Lisbona; controlimiti; ultra vires review.

In recent decades, civil society organisations (CSOs) have grown both in number and in their impact on policy-making, at European and also non-Member state level. Public institutions, motivated by the need to increase their legitimacy, have increasingly delegated functions to CSOs. Concomitantly, CSOs have expanded their access to public funding. In part because of increased access to public funding, and in part because of a stronger relationship with public powers, CSOs are under pressure to demonstrate that they use the resources they are given in an efficient, accountable and transparent manner, e.g. by adopting policies on fiscal transparency, and by maintaining financial solvency. The EU's interest in regulating CSOs is relatively recent. At present, the legal framework addressing CSOs' financial accountability includes two 'categories' of norms: those that regulate the award of public contracts and the concession of grants, and those norms that address transparency and openness. The first category includes the rules on public contracts and the rules on (co-)financing of CSO projects; whereas the second category includes the Financial Transparency Initiative (FTJ) and the Joint Transparency Register
(JTR). The FTJ gathers all information on EU funding in a single database. The JTR gathers information produced by the various organisations (including CSOs) that are interested in lobbying the EU, and who register voluntarily. Defining the boundaries of CSO fiscal accountability and effectively tackling cases of fraud or financial mismanagement remains a difficult endeavor. On the one hand, the EU still lacks a single overarching understanding (and, consequently, legal definition) of CSOs. This translates into the absence of clear legal definitions, and more generally into
the opacity of the information available on CSOs through EU databases. Moreover, as CSOs are 'private entities', they are not submitted to the same integrity mechanisms and norms that apply to public institutions, including internal and external oversight. Finally, a significant administrative burden imposed on CSOs may, in the end, counter EU efforts to tackle financial mismanagement by CSOs. In many respects, the issue of CSO financial accountability has come to resemble a dialogue of the deaf: EU institution-proposed reforms have been postponed, or have not produced the outcomes expected, or have been fiercely opposed by CSOs. At the same time, the self-regulatory tools (including policies on selecting donors, self monitoring and codes of conduct and standards) developed by CSOs to enhance their
financial accountability have not obtained official recognition from EU institutions.

There are more types of borders today than ever before in history. Borders of all kinds define every aspect of social life in the twenty-first century. From the biometric data that divides the smallest aspects of our bodies to the aerial drones that patrol the immense expanse of our domestic and international airspace, we are defined by borders. They can no longer simply be understood as the geographical divisions between nation-states. Today, their form and function has become too complex, too hybrid. What we need now is a theory of the border that can make sense of this hybridity across multiple domains of social life.

Rather than viewing borders as the result or outcome of pre-established social entities like states, Thomas Nail reinterprets social history from the perspective of the continual and constitutive movement of the borders that organize and divide society in the first place. Societies and states are the products of bordering, Nail argues, not the other way around. Applying his original movement-oriented theoretical framework "kinopolitics" to several major historical border regimes (fences, walls, cells, and checkpoints), Theory of the Border pioneers a new methodology of "critical limology," that provides fresh tools for the analysis of contemporary border politics.

This study examines the role of political factors in attitudes toward World War II in contemporary Ukraine. The question under examination is which factors determine public views of the principal warring sides and their leaders in Ukraine. This paper uses a representative national survey specifically designed for this research project and conducted by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology in 2012. It analyzes the roles of regionalism, political party preferences, ethnicity, language, age, and sex in attitudes toward the Red Army, Soviet partisans, the German Army (Wehrmacht), and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) during the war, as well as toward the wartime leaders of the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, and the UPA. The analysis of the survey data shows that regional values, political party preferences, ethnicity, language, and age have significant effects on views of the Soviet Army and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army during the war and attitudes toward the wartime activities of Joseph Stalin and Roman Shukhevych. Public perceptions of the German Army and Adolf Hitler in Ukraine do not vary much across regions, political parties, and ethnic, language, age, and sex groups.

The European Union (EU) has closely correlated different aspects of the peace process in Bosnia with progress towards European accession. The ‘power of attraction’ of EU membership would presumably induce the Bosnian authorities to accept the adaptation costs of political and economic transformation. However, the Europeanisation approach has not produced the expected results. The track record of the EU’s policies towards Bosnia represents a paradigmatic case of what would happen if almost nothing works as efficiently as in the case of the countries that joined the EU in 2004 and 2007. The article investigates the causes of EU policy failure in Bosnia and claims that the EU has not effectively responded to three challenges: 1) adjust the process to the needs of an ethnically divided post-war state; 2) preserve the credibility of accession conditionality, and 3) convey the proper messages on how to comply with EU rules. Therefore, the article argues for a more cohesive and consistent EU approach towards Bosnia.

In the course of history an interesting evolution has taken place in European gender equality policies. This story started in 1957 when the European Economic Community was founded and the principle of equal pay for equal work for men and women was included in the Treaty of Rome to avoid unfair competition and distortions in the free European market. Soon the Treaty article would evolve into a broader demand for equal rights related to work and result in a series of binding directives. In the eighties and nineties gender equality would increasingly enter other policy domains by means of non-binding soft law and gender mainstreaming. More recently, the EU has turned towards an approach of multiple discrimination which involves other grounds of discrimination, such as race and sexuality. The aim of this article is to review the history of gender equality policy in the EU while distinguishing some general trends, and discuss the implications of the most recent turn towards an anti-discrimination framework. I conclude that despite a continuous broadening of policies and strategies, economic motives continue to be the leitmotiv throughout this history. Also the broadening of EU equality policies with regard to the inclusion of multiple inequalities risks being trapped in the same economic logic. Nevertheless, despite the economic framing of EU equality policies, the pluralist and open nature of the EU’s decision-making process still provides gender activists with multiple access points to attempt to re-frame the way in which gender issues are addressed, as the struggle for a gender-just Europe continues.

The massacre of almost 50 Maidan protesters on February 20, 2014 was a turning point in Ukrainian politics and a tipping point in the conflict between the West and Russia over Ukraine. This mass killing of the protesters and the mass shooting of the police that preceded it led to the overthrow of the pro-Russian government of Viktor Yanukovych and gave a start to a civil war in Donbas in Eastern Ukraine, Russian military intervention in Crimea and Donbas, and an international conflict between the West and Russia over Ukraine. A conclusion promoted by the post-Yanukovych governments and the media in Ukraine that the massacre was perpetrated by government snipers and special police units on a Yanukovych order has been nearly universally accepted by the Western governments, the media, and many scholars. The Ukrainian government investigation identified members of the special company of Berkut as responsible for killings of the absolute majority of the protesters, but did not release any evidence in support, with the exception of videos of the massacre.
              The question is which side organized the “snipers’ massacre.” This paper is the first academic study of this crucial case of the mass killing. It uses a theory of rational choice and a Weberian theory of instrumental rationality to examine actions of major actors both from the Yanukovych government, specifically various police and security forces, and the Maidan opposition, specifically its far right and oligarchic elements, during the massacre.
          The paper analyzes a large amount of evidence from different publicly available sources concerning this massacre and killings of specifics protesters. Qualitative content analysis includes the following data: about 1,500 videos and recordings of live internet and TV broadcasts from mass media and social media in different countries(some 150 gigabytes), news reports and social media posts by more than 100 journalists covering the massacre from Kyiv, some 5,000 photos, and nearly 30 gigabytes of publicly available radio intercepts of snipers and commanders from the special Alfa unit of the Security Service of Ukraine and Internal Troops, and Maidan massacre trial recordings. This study also employs field research on site of the massacre, eyewitness reports by both Maidan protesters and government special units commanders, statements by both former and current government officials, estimates of approximate ballistic trajectories, bullets and weapons used, and types of wounds among both protesters and the police. This study establishes a precise timeline for various events of the massacre, the locations of both the shooters and the government snipers, and the specific timeline and locations of nearly 50 protesters’ deaths. It also briefly analyzes other major cases of violence during and after the “Euromaidan.” This study includes two video appendixes.
            This academic investigation concludes that the massacre was a false flag operation, which was rationally planned and carried out with a goal of the overthrow of the government and seizure of power. It found various evidence of the involvement of an alliance of the far right organizations, specifically the Right Sector and Svoboda, and oligarchic parties, such as Fatherland. Concealed shooters and spotters were located in at least 20 Maidan-controlled buildings or areas. The various evidence that the protesters were killed from these locations include some 70 testimonies, primarily by Maidan protesters, several videos of “snipers” targeting protesters from these buildings, comparisons of positions of the specific protesters at the time of their killing and their entry wounds, and bullet impact signs. The study uncovered various videos and photos of armed Maidan “snipers” and spotters in many of these buildings. The paper presents implications of these findings for understanding the nature of the change of the government in Ukraine, the civil war in Donbas, Russian military intervention in Crimea and Donbas, and an international conflict between the West and Russia over Ukraine.

It is interesting what are the further developments in Daimler AG – Russia’s Kamaz deal? In February 2015 German Daimler entered Joint Venture with Russia’s Kamaz to build vehicles and EU Commission approved this deal. Perhaps this will help Russia to attract funds and to produce not only five Mercedes-Benz car models, including the S, E, GL, ML and A class (final decision about this is pending).

La Corte europea dei diritti dell'uomo ha affermato, sin dalla sua celebre sentenza Mathieu-Mohin et Clerfayt, che l'articolo 3 del primo Protocollo addizionale alla CEDU, il quale consacra il diritto a libere elezioni, riveste un'importanza capitale nel sistema della Convenzione europea dei diritti dell'uomo. Tale disposizione consacra, secondo la Corte, un principio caratteristico di un regime politico effettivamente democratico, quest'ultimo voluto dallo stesso Preambolo della Convezione, sul quale riposa essenzialmente la tutela delle libertà fondamentali. Il principio si rende applicabile non soltanto ai sistemi elettorali nazionali, ma anche agli organi rappresentativi sovranazionali e non puramente interni, come l'ha riconosciuto la Corte nei confronti del Parlamento europeo con occasione della sua nota sentenza Matthews. Il presente lavoro ha per scopo quello di esaminare il trattamento che la summenzionata Corte ha riservato negli anni a tale diritto, con particolare riguardo al diritto di voto, che ne è una componente essenziale, sottolineando la significazione che la sua giurisprudenza ha conferito alla serie di nozioni interdipendenti "libere elezioni -regime democratico -libertà fondamentali". Saranno esaminati i diversi casi che hanno maggiormente contribuito a dargli una definizione ed una precisa portata, attraverso l'esame della nozione di diritto di voto, passivo e attivo, le condizioni di eleggibilità nonché l'ineleggibilità, così come contornati dalla Corte, con riferimento anche agli standard stabiliti dalla stessa in materia di sistemi elettorali. Particolare attenzione meriteranno, infine, i casi in cui, come nel caso Partito comunista russo ed altri c. Russia, la Corte ha esaminato ricorsi in cui si eccepiva la disuguale copertura mediatica che i media avevano dato ai diversi partiti politici durante la campagna elettorale.

revue en ligne Implications philosophiques, mai 2014, http://www.implications-philosophiques.org/semaines-thematiques/europe/patocka-et-leparadoxe-europeen/ Résumé : on peut à la fois considérer Patočka comme un ardent défenseur de l'idée Européenne, qu'il ressaisit à sa source comme idée du « soin de l'âme », et comme un critique particulièrement lucide de la domination européenne du monde, dont le regard est déjà fixé sur un horizon post-européen. L'article s'attache clarifier la singularité de la position patočkienne, en dénouant ce qui constitue pour lui le coeur du paradoxe européen, entre universalisme et particularisme impérialiste. L'article montre ainsi que le point d'hérésie de la phénoménologie de l'histoire patočkienne est de centrer son analyse non seulement sur le rationalisme européen en lui-même, mais sur ce qui en constitue une des spécificités : la lutte contre le monde mythique. Par différence tant avec Husserl qu'avec Heidegger, l'histoire de l'Europe est chez Patočka à resituer dans le cadre du problème de l'opposition du monde naturel et du réflexif.

An easyJet inflight magazine article offers a great example of how ideology – in the Marxist sense of the word, i.e. a mystification of reality which ensures the continuous dominance of the ruling class – works, and why in this day and age it is a much more effective tool for shaping the forces of material and mental production than old-fashioned propaganda.

Europe's Transforming Identity. Part 1 of the book Islam and Tolerance in Wider Europe (ed. Pamela Kilpadi) including the articles:
* 'What Values for Europe?' by Michael Emerson
* 'The Role of Islam in Europe: Multiple Crises?' by Amel Boubekeur and Samir Amghar
* 'The Southern Gate to Fortress Europe' by Rutvica Andrijasevic

The European Parliament (EP) elections are usually a pretext to discuss domestic issues and this is a common feature in most member states. EP election campaigns play a secondary role in terms of political strategies and journalistic practices. Studying newspapers, newscasts and the Web, this article aims to investigate the Italian 2009 EP election campaign, within the wider European context, discussing three main questions: a) Will data relating to the interest of news media, issues discussed by politicians and electoral turnout, allow us to include this campaign among the examples of second-elections? Or does the great lack of interest suggest that it should be counted among the campaigns of third-rate? b) Will news coverage confirm the lack of newsworthiness of Europe and the importance of domestic issues and national political actors? And related to this trend, do several medium specificities stand out (daily press, television and the Web)? c) Studying this campaign, does some evidence support the hypothesis of a slow, but constant "transnationalization" of national public opinion?

This article focuses on the way the European Union acted as a negotiating party during the international negotiations leading to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (1998–2000). Starting from a principal–agent model, the article discusses how the EU participated in these negotiations and how the internal decision-making process developed. It argues that the EU was able to negotiate in a unified and influential way by defending a common position, which was expressed by a flexible negotiation arrangement, at the international level. Three features of the EU decision-making process engendered such a strong EU negotiation arrangement: homogeneous preferences among the actors in the EU, symmetrically distributed information among them and a cooperative and institutionally dense decision-making context. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

The aim of this article is to assess which policies and activities China has been pursuing in seven countries of Southeast. In which sectors is China interested to invest? What is a status of cultural and educational programs? Which diplomatic engagements have taken place? The analysis is placed within the framework of Belt and Road and 16+1 initiative to understand where this region is positioned within a broader context of China's foreign policy. Taking into account that China wants to build stronger economic and people-to-people ties via these initiatives, this paper assesses up-to-date achievements in these sectors and identifies key challenges that lie ahead. Two out of these seven countries are EU member states, the rest candidates and potential candidates for EU membership. Chinese engagement in this region does not pass unnoticed and this paper will also discuss attitudes of the EU towards BRI and 16+1 with respect to this specific region. In terms of the structure and the content, the article in the introduction briefly looks at Chinese relations with post-Yugoslav states (plus Albania), analyses key investment projects and areas of cooperation in the last 20 years. It identifies supporters and opponents of Chinese engagement in SEE. In conclusion, the paper looks beyond this region to understand Chinese engagement in a broader EU context.

The EU is divided between member states that have adopted the euro and those that have not. This article looks at the issue of differentiated integration with particular reference to eurozone integration and the euro-outsiders. I explore the recent public debate in the UK on euro-outsiderness, comparing this with debates in Denmark. The article highlights some striking differences between the UK and Denmark when it comes to the actual management of euro-outsiderness in Brussels as well as some of the dilemmas facing euro-outsiders such as the UK, Denmark, Sweden and Poland as the EU struggles to exit its crises. Finally, I discuss the future of two-speed European integration and the UK's possible exit from the EU. The UK cannot escape the dilemma of favouring either influence or autonomy; whether the UK remains in or leaves the EU, it will need to allow the eurozone to proceed in order to prevent further eurozone crises.

A common European electricity market requires both market integration and transmission grid expansion, including cross-border interconnectors. Although the benefits of increased interconnectivity are widely acknowledged, expansion of interconnectors is often very slow. What are the reasons behind this “grid-lock”? To date, the issue remains discussed largely from the perspective of practitioners. Academic research on interconnectors comes mostly from the discipline of energy economics, offering models that do not necessarily help us explain the dynamic situation in the EU. This paper sketches the problem and its scale, reviews existing approaches and proposes a framework for analysis of interconnector projects, including a set of hypotheses that could account for the stall in interconnector development. The hypotheses relate to inadequate financing, diverging interests, governance and administration problems, as well as political discourses and perceptions. As empirical illustration we use the case of the German–Polish border. Drawing on document analysis and stakeholder interviews, we evaluate the hypotheses. Evidence suggests that at this stage, political and governance-related issues rather than economics and finances might explain the “grid-lock” we are facing. The concluding section sums up the findings, highlights methodological difficulties and gaps, and proposes directions for further social scientific research in this issue area.

Federiga Bindi provides, for the first time, an in-depth analysis of Italy’s role within the European Union (EU) in this inaugural volume of a book series published jointly by the Brookings Institution Press and the Scuola Superiore della Pubblica Amministrazione (Italian National School of Public Administration, or SSPA). Italy and the European Union relates in detail the historical, cultural, and sociological factors that have led to Italy’s incomplete “Europeanization,” or full integration, within the EU. It also brings the reader up-to-date on the steps taken by the country’s leaders to improve Italy’s standing and become a more effective member in the organization it helped to found.

Discussing the author’s extensive research, The Economist notes . . . .

"Federiga Bindi identified a number of barriers to an effective European policy in Italy: a high turnover of governments; coalition partners with conflicting aims; the failure of bureaucrats to learn from other member states; and politicians’ lack of interest in Europe . . . recently however, she found that matters had improved. An interdepartmental body for the coordination of EU policies has been created, Parliament operates an effective scrutiny system . . . , the administration has learnt to learn from others. But the other problems remain, and they are formidable. Her study ends on an exasperated note: 'Italy appears to be stuck in the age of the Guelphs and the Ghibellines, in which the victory of one faction over another is what counts, and the fact that this may be damaging to the country matters little.'"
—from The Economist, July 31, 2010

Obviously, the Europeanization process has not yet brought the expected “common house of Europe” with all the freedoms and values linked to the symbol of 1989. It is true that Europe has been able to give important support to the transformation processes in Central and Eastern Europe. But it is equally
true that the underlying ideas of Europe have not found their way to almost all countries of the former Soviet Union. In this regard Russia stands for an ideologically and power oriented regime, contrasting its authoritarian “model” to the Europeanization process and particularly to all the “coloured” democratic
experiments in its neighbourhood. The eastwards movement of experiments with democracy, as it could be observed in the “colour revolutions” in Ukraine and Georgia, is challenged by a westwards movement of the quasiauthoritarian Russian model. The recent repressions in Belarus followed by the rigged elections in December 2010 obviously stand for the westwards move of the Russian model. And it remains to be seen to what extent the achievements of the “colour revolutions” can be at least partially maintained in Ukraine and in Georgia. Freedom is not an uncontested value in the post-Soviet space. But it has been claimed at its periphery where a lot of hybrid and transitional
situations can still be observed. Typically countries characterised by transitional or hybrid regimes are oscillating somewhere in a grey zone between the democratic and the authoritarian poles. They may have halted, delayed or impeded their transformation process. In order to prevent the risk of an authoritarian
backlash, an European democracy promotion strategy would make sense in those countries that show unclear prospects for democracy. This would be in line with what 1989 was about: overcoming the division of Europe and avoiding new division lines between East and West.
It is precisely the challenges of ambiguous transitions that the contributions to the volume try to address from their various regional and disciplinary perspectives. The book is organized into three larger parts, respectively, (1) covering ambiguities of unfinished transformations, (2) attempting to make sense of the past and its implications for the present, and (3) deliberating over
values and meanings in changing contexts. They do not assemble the countries regionally, but rather attempt to organize various narratives around problems, as there seem to be three large areas of difficulties experienced along the different paths of transformation.

EUrope and Germany face unprecedented crises. Given its role as EUrope's " central power " the article explores how Germany looks at its environment and how the world looks back. I offer five cuts of Germany's world, that is, how its power, place and ambition might be described from different angles. First, I examine a " structural " interpretation of EUrope's setting which shows a certain affinity with German visions of a rules-governed world. Next I reconstruct how Germany's changing role is described from the outside and the inside. The stark contrast between images of overbearing " hegemony " and facilitating German " leadership " lay the ground for a third cut which examines how German leadership has fared in three recent EUropean crises. In a fourth cut I analyse Germany's leadership challenges against the foil of US leadership globally. The difficulties highlighted in Germany's world of " shaping powers " and tough love diplomacy, my fifth cut, leave it, and EUrope, in an unenviable position indeed.

Nei primi cinque lustri successivi al trattato di Roma del 1957, gli organismi europei non hanno tenuto in alcuna considerazione il tema della cittadinanza. L’“Europa dei popoli” non costituiva oggetto né di corpus giuridico ad hoc né di riferimento all’interno di contesti più generali. Questa visione “merceologica” confinava, nel passato che non diventava presente, le grandi personalità culturali e politiche che avevano espresso nei loro scritti e nelle loro azioni l’ideale di un’Europa che teneva al primo posto gli abitanti, considerati protagonisti e non “attori muti”. L’istituzione di una cittadinanza europea, introdotta dal TUE nel 1992, è da considerarsi un apprezzabile passo avanti sul piano dell’integrazione, ma per il futuro bisognerà partire dal presupposto che se gli Stati membri dell’Unione non saranno veramente uniti, difficilmente potranno essere in grado di fronteggiare le grandi sfide poste dal multipolare scacchiere geopolitico e geoeconomico mondiale

Sport annually mobilizes millions of people across Europe: as practitioners in a wide variety of competitive, educational, or recreational contexts, and as spectators, who are physically present or following events through the mass media. This book presents original research into modern sport funded by the Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences. Its aim is to examine the distinctive contribution made by this complex phenomenon to the construction of European identities. Attention is focused on sport's social significance, as a set of mass-mediated practices and spectacles giving rise to a network of images, symbols, and discourses. The book seeks to explore, and ultimately to explain, the processes of representation and mediation involved in the sporting construction, and subsequent renegotiation, of local, national, and, increasingly, global identities. It offers a survey of key developments in sporting Europe - from the mid-nineteenth century to the present, and from the Atlantic to the Urals - presenting findings by acknowledged international experts and emerging scholars at the level of individuals, communities, regions, nation-states, and Europe as a whole, in both its geographical and political incarnations. Its focus on representation offers a broadly conceived, and consciously inclusive, approach to issues of 'Europeanness' in modern and contemporary sport.

"La legge n. 92 del 2012 ha apportato alcune modifiche alla disciplina dei licenziamenti collettivi, consistenti in una serie di cambiamenti alla procedura prescritta dalla legge n. 223 del 1991.
Questa riforma riveste una portata rilevante in termini sia pratici che di sistema. Essa, infatti, da un lato, si colloca all’interno di un’ importante revisione degli ammortizzatori sociali, con abolizione, seppure non immediata, dell’indennità di mobilità, dall’altro interviene su due profili, oggetto di massimo interesse da parte del legislatore comunitario e molto significativi della regolazione: quello della correttezza dello svolgimento della procedura di informazione e consultazione e quello, strettamente complementare al primo, delle conseguenze sanzionatorie in caso di vizi della medesima"