POLS 237-01 European Union
| Pablo Toral |
| Fall 2008, MWF9:00-9:50 AM; T 8:00-8:50AM |
| Room MI 10 |
| Phone, x2166 |
| Email, toralp@beloit.edu |
| Office hours: MI 112A |
| MTWF: 3:00-4:30PM by appointment and when you catch me on campus |
Course Content and Objectives
This course provides an overview of the European Union, focusing on its institutions, history and main areas of policy-making, especially issues related to the economy, security, society, foreign policy, enlargement and development. We also discuss issues of identity, such as the meaning of being European and the challenge of nationalism, treaty law and integration theories such as federalism, functionalism and neofunctionalism, liberal intergovernmentalism and historical institutionalism. Students also become familiar with the official documents generated by the EU, including those regularly published in the internet. An integral part of the course is the ability to do original research on an EU-related topic.
Structure of the course:
The course is divided into four sections. In the first section we will review the history of the EU, since its creation in the 1950s. We will look at the six waves of enlargement to date, the rationale for the creation of different institutions within the EU, the periods of crisis (Eurosclerosis) and the periods of progress (Europtimism). The second section of the course reviews the institutions that integrate the EU. Unlike states, where the role of the executive, the legislative and the judiciary is clear, in the EU these functions are sometimes shared by more than one institution, generating many opportunities for gridlock, but also for creative policy-making. We will pay special attention to the Council, the Council of Ministers, the Coreper, the Commission, the Court of Justice and the Parliament.
The third section of the course will provide an overview of some integration theories. Students of the EU have been challenged to explain the reasons why states decide to cooperate, to the point that they are willing to give up a great degree of sovereignty in many areas. We will review federalism, functionalism and neofunctionalism, liberal intergovernmentalism and historical institutionalism. In the last section of the course we will study some of the main areas of policy-making at the EU: the economy, cohesion, social issues, the environment, security, foreign policy, and enlargement. We will also think about the future of the EU. We will read the work of some experts on the EU. Some believe the future of the EU will be stronger if the member states agree to merge into a single European superstate, while other experts believe that the strength of the EU lies in its decentralized nature and its respect for national identities and preferences. Throughout the semester we will see how the apparent success of the European Union in achieving a certain degree of political, economic and social cohesion conceals many challenges, such as the problem of democratic deficit, the incorporation of Turkey, internal religious and ethnic conflicts, disputes between its members, nationalism, relations with North Africa, internal redistribution of wealth, etc.
Course goals:
One of the main goals of this course is to learn how the EU has come to be and how it works. Students of the EU estimate that the EU has already been given decision-making powers by its member states over 75% of issues areas, including monetary policy, trade, law, the environment, transportation, energy and health, among others. In spite of the power of the EU to make decisions that affect the lives of citizens in almost all spheres of social life, the EU remains largely unknown to most of the citizens of its member states, as well as to the citizens of other states who fail to understand the European drive to supranationalism.
Students will learn about the institutions of the EU and their efforts to bring peace to its members, to stimulate the economic growth of the poorer member states and to create a single market and a monetary union. However, we will also review the EU’s inability to create a single foreign policy and a single security policy, its poor record as a peacemaker and peace-builder in the former Yugoslavia and Cyprus, the challenges of enlargement in Central and Eastern Europe and Turkey, and the impact of its trade policies. We will not see European integration as a mere process of transfer of sovereignty from the state level to a new supranational political entity. We will see the challenges of turning the EU into a social and cultural space.
The European Union has emerged as a strong global political, economic and social institution. We will study how the EU legislates in all of these areas and how it projects its power beyond its borders. We will pay special attention to the implications of European integration for democracy, development, international trade, investment and security in Europe and around the world.
By reviewing some of the main approaches to regional integration, students will be able to understand the reasons why Europe has taken such a dramatic turn in the last fifty years. They will understand how from the ashes of war has emerged the largest economic area of the world. Since regional integration has become one of the most important characteristics of international politics since the 1990s, they will also be able to draw lessons for other regional blocs, such as NAFTA, ASEAN, MERCOSUR or OAU.
Course readings
There are five texts for this course, available at the bookstore. They are also on reserve in the library. In addition to the books, I assigned a few additional articles. These are available via Moodle. They are also on reserve in the library (full citation is provided in the syllabus).
Dinan, D. (2005), Ever Closer Union: Dilemmas of Regional Integration, Boulder, Lynne Rienner, (978-1-58826-208-0).
Gillingham, John (2006), Design for a New Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (10: 0521686644).
McCormick, John (2006), The European Superpower. New York, Palgrave Macmillan Ltd (1-4039-9846-9).
Morgan, Glyn (2005), The Idea of a European Superstate: Public Justification and European Integration. Princeton, Princeton University Press (0691122466).
Zielonka, Jan (2006), Europe as Empire. The Nature of the Enlarged European Union. New York: Oxford University Press (0199292213).
EU official sites
EU online, http://europa.eu/
EU Commission in the United States, http://www.eurunion.org/
EU academic
EU Centers in the U.S. (academic), http://www.eurunion.org/infores/eucenter.htm
EU news
EU Newsletter, http://www.euobserver.com
Euractive, http://www.euractiv.com/ (EU news, policy positions, EU actors online)
The Economist, www.economist.com
In addition, I will post some articles in Moodle.
Course Requirements
3 research essays, 75% (25% each)
Group project: Model EU, 25%
Take-home essays
5 double-spaced pages each. Each essay will allow you to take a theme from the readings and apply it to a case study of your interest.
Group project: Model EU.
This assignment has several goals. The first goal is to allow you to understand how the different institutions that integrate the EU work, by participating in this simulation of one of the biannual meetings of the European Council. In the previous sections we studied the main actors, institutions and policy areas. With this exercise, we will see how the actors come together within the institutions to discuss a particular policy area. You will be assigned a role within the European Union, such as President of the Commission or head of government of a member country. You need to familiarize yourself with the goals of your actor and participate successfully in a EU summit.
The second goal is to learn how to write a policy paper. Policy papers are documents in which individual actors spell out their policy goals and provide a strategy to achieve them. These documents require a very good understanding of the interests of the actor, as well as an analysis of the constraints and the resources at their disposal to achieve their goals.
The third goal is to familiarize the students with some of the main sources of information generated by EU institutions and states. To complete this assignment successfully, the students will need to base their work on the information provided by their actors, so that they can play the role that they are assigned as truthfully as possible.
The timeline for this group project will be the following. Your country’s Coreper will write a policy paper prior to the summit, stating your actor’s main goals and the strategy, which should include an analysis of your “friends” and “enemies” at the negotiating table. Since you will conduct negotiations with the students who represent other countries’ Corepers through the semester, by now it will become evident who your allies/enemies will be. Each report should be no longer than 10 pages, double-spaced. This report will be due at least a week before the summit (no later than Nov. 16). It will be available through Moodle, so that all of the delegations can study them prior to the summit to prepare their strategy.
On Nov. 21st you will “attend the Lisbon summit” (4:00PM, Moore Lounge), where you will negotiate with other actors. Every group will be evaluated on their ability to defend their actor’s interests as close as possible, as well as on the ability of all of the groups to reach a compromise that is acceptable by all, within a reasonable amount of time. Keep in mind that at the biannual meetings the delegates cannot leave the room until they reach consensus on every issue. To be a good negotiator, you will need to work together with the other actors to reach a compromise that will be deemed as “fair” by your constituents, as well as theirs.
The last part of the assignment is a reflective piece (5 pages maximum) in which you will discuss your strategy during the Lisbon summit. The goal of this essay is not to prove that you were a great negotiator. Rather, you should reflect critically about your strategy and that of the other actors. Think about what part of your strategy worked well and why, and what aspects did not work. What would you do differently? You also need to evaluate how the other groups defended the interests of their actors. How could all of the actors modify their strategies and goals, in order to facilitate common gains at the Ljubljana summit in June 2008? Submit on Nov. 25th.
Submissions will only be accepted through Moodle. Let’s save some trees! Make sure you activate your account ASAP.
Extra credit
You can help boost your grade by turning in up to three assignments for extra credit. These assignments are just a one-page critique of a talk you attend at the college (it could be one of the student presentations at student symposium.) In your assignments, you need to address the following: summarize the main arguments provided by the speaker, relate them to our class readings, and provide your own critique (strengths and weaknesses of the presenter’s argument and suggestions to make the presentation stronger).
Class attendance and participation (+-30%)
Your involvement in class will make your
final grade go up or down by as much as +-30%. This offers a great opportunity for those who feel you have not done as well as you could in your assignments. If you work hard in class, you can make up! I expect you to participate in class discussions actively. Learning is not a passive exercise, in which you listen to your professor lecture on a particular topic. I expect you to participate in class discussions by asking questions about the readings, by analyzing the topics critically and by questioning the views of the authors, the professor, and those of your own peers. Critical thinking is an ongoing process of continuous assessment and reassessment of the dominant views in a field of study. My goal of is to engage everybody in a permanent dialogue with the readings and with each other. I value the quality of your comments. Do not just repeat what has been said in class. Provide an analysis of the readings. I will also ask you to give presentations in class, in which you will analyze the readings critically. I will also expect you to participate in online debates. We will be using Moodle on a regular basis for submissions and debates. Take some time to familiarize yourself with it.
Grading policy
Your grades will be a reflection of your ability to develop original arguments. I expect you to be able to understand the material that we study in class, analyze it critically, and develop original views, by building upon the ideas of the authors discussed in class or by rejecting them.
A - An original essay. The students’ arguments are supported by references to the reading assignments and class discussions, as well as by additional research. The paper has a clear focus, is well written, and has a good structure. It is rooted in one or some of the main debates in the field, provides a new and original approach and has enough evidence to support the student’s claims.
B - The paper addresses an original argument. It shows a good understanding of the main debates in the discipline and is based on a clear understanding of the reading material. It is supported by original research, but fails to make a compelling argument for lack of evidence or poor structure.
C - The student does not develop an original argument but shows a good understanding of the reading assignments and the discussions.
D- The student does not develop original ideas well and only shows a partial understanding of the reading material.
F - No original argument and poor understanding of the reading material. Use of poor or no bibliographic references (this is normally the main reason to fail an assignment). Plagiarism (to appropriate for use as one's own passages or ideas from another).
Late assignments
I will accept assignments up to a week after the deadline, but the grade will fall by half a letter grade each day.
If you need help with your research in the library, try the “Ask a Librarian” link on the library home page, http://www.beloit.edu/~libhome or contact Chris Nelson at ext. 2544 or via email at nelsoncn@beloit.edu.
If you have a disability and would like to speak to someone about possible accommodations, please visit the LSSC (Learning Support Services Center) located on the first floor of 635 College St. You will need to provide appropriate documentation of your disability to Diane Arnzen, Director of the LSSC (arnzend@beloit.edu). If you wish to receive accommodations in my class please provide me the LSSC Accommodation Verification Letter dated for this semester as soon as possible so your learning needs may be appropriately met.
Free individual peer tutoring is available for most courses through the Learning Supports Services Center, 635 College Street, X 2572. Professors recommend all tutors who are then trained by the LSSC staff. Contact the LSSC to find out more.
Course Outline
| Week 1: Introduction Aug. 28-31 |
| Dinan, 1 |
| History of the European Union |
| Week 2: EU history: 1957-1984 Sept. 3-7 |
| Dinan, 2-4 |
| McCormick |
| Week 3: EU history: 1985-present Sept. 10-14 |
| Dinan, 5-7 |
| McCormick |
| Institutions and Decision-making |
| Week 4: Legislative: Council and Council of Ministers Sept. 17-21 |
| Dinan, 9 |
| Jeffrey Lewis, “National Interests: Coreper” (in John Peterson and Michael Shackleton (eds.) The Institutions of the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. The book is on reserve. There are also two photocopies of each assigned chapter.) |
| Week 5: Executive: the Commission Sept. 24-28 |
| Dinan, 8 |
| John Peterson, “The College of Commissioners” (in Peterson & Shackleton) (reserves), |
| Neill Nugent “The Commission’s Services” (in Peterson & Shackleton) (reserves) |
| Week 6: Judiciary: the Court of Justice Oct. 1-5 |
| Kieran St. Clair Bradley, “The European Court of Justice” (in Peterson & Shackleton) (reserves) |
| Essay # 1 due on Friday at 5:00PM: Council - Commission |
| Week 7: The Parliament, the European Central Bank and other bodies Oct. 8-12 |
| Dinan, 10-11 |
| Kathleen McNamara, “Managing the Euro: The European Central Bank” (in Peterson & Shackleton) (reserves) |
| Theories of European Integration |
| Week 8: Federalism and Functionalism Oct. 22-26 |
| Spinelli and Rossi “The Ventotene Manifesto” |
| Jacques Delors, “A Necessary Europe” |
| Fishcher, J., “From Confederacy to Federation. Thoughts on the Finality of European Integration”: http://www.jeanmonnetprogram.org/papers/00/joschka_fischer_en.rtf |
| David Mitrany, “A Working Peace System” |
| Jean Monnet, “A Ferment of Change” |
| Robert Schuman, “The Schuman Declaration” |
| Ernst Haas, The Uniting of Europe” |
| (all readings in Brent F. Nelsen and Alexander Stubb (eds.), The European Union. Readings on the Theory and Practice of European Integration. Boulder, Lynne Rienner, 2002. The book is on reserve. There are also three photocopies of each assigned article.) |
| Week 9: Intergovernmentalism Oct. 29-Nov. 2 |
| Stanley Hoffmann, “Obstinate or Obsolete?” |
| Charles de Gaulle, “A Concert of European States” |
| (both in Nelsen & Stubb, on reserve.) |
| Wofgang Schäuble and Karl Lamers, “Reflections on European Policy” (http://www.cdu.de/english/eulamers.htm and Moodle) |
| Essay # 2 due on Friday at 5:00PM: integration theory |
| Policy, Politics, Debates and Dilemmas |
| Week 10 EU enlargement Nov. 5-9 |
| Dinan, 5 |
| Zielonka |
| Week 11 The policymaking process: an economic union? Nov. 12-16 |
| Dinan, 12-14, 16 |
| Group project: pre-summit report due on Friday at 5:00PM |
| Week 12 The policymaking process: an economic fiasco? Nov. 19-21 |
| Gillingham |
| Model EU exercise |
| Week 13 The policymaking process: Foreign and security policy Nov. 26-30 |
| Dinan 17-18 |
| Jochen Lorentzen, “Keep Out! Protectionism, Migration Control, and Globalization”, (in Ronald Tiersky (ed.), Europe Today. National Politics, European Integration, and European Security. Oxford, Rowman & Littlefield, 2004, article on reserve.) |
| Group project: post summit report due on Monday at 5:00PM |
| Week 14 The policymaking process: a social union? Dec. 3-7 |
| Dinan, 15 |
| Charlie Jeffery, “Social and Regional Interests: ESC and Committee of the Regions” (in Peterson & Shackleton) (reserves) |
| Alberta M. Sbragia, “Environmental Policy. Economic Constraints and External Pressures” (in Helen Wallace and William Wallace (eds.), Policy-Making in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000, book on reserve. There are also three photocopies of the article) |
| European Union, Constitution, http://www.europa.eu.int/constitution/index_en.htm |
| Essay # 3 due on Friday at 5:00PM: the future of the EU |
| Week 15 The Future of the EU: a European suprastate? Dec. 10-12 |
| Morgan |
Congratulations! You made it!
