Professor Richard G Whitman
Professor Richard G. Whitman is Professor of Politics and International Relations in the School of Politics and International Relations. He joined the University of Kent in September 2011.
Professor Whitman is also a Visiting Fellow at Chatham House (formerly known as the Royal Institute of International Affairs) and an Academic Fellow at the European Policy Centre. He regularly writes and researches for think tanks.
He was Professor of Politics at the University of Bath 2006-2011. Senior Fellow, Europe (April 2006-April 2007) and Head of the European Programme at Chatham House (April 2004 to April 2006). Prior to arrival at Chatham House he was Professor of European Studies at the University of Westminster and where he was also Director of the Centre for the Study of Democracy from 2001-2003.
Richard Whitman is a contributor to leading journals, and has presented many papers and keynote addresses. His current research interests include the external relations and foreign and security and defence policies of the EU, and the governance and future priorities of the EU. He is a lead editor of the Journal of Common Market Studies on the editorial boards of European Security and Studia Diplomatica. He was an ESRC Senior Fellow on its UK in a Changing Europe initiative and leading a project on The interrelationship of UK and EU foreign policy: costs and benefits in 2016.
Professor Whitman is a regular media commentator, working with print and broadcast media at home and overseas. He has been interviewed widely on Europe and European integration. Recent coverage has included BBC radio and television, CNN, Bloomberg, CNBC, Newsweek, Reuters, the International Herald Tribune and the Wall Street Journal. Professor Whitman was elected a Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences in October 2007 and from 2009-2012 the elected Chair of the University Association for Contemporary European Studies (UACES). He was a Chair of the British International Studies Association (BISA) 2017-2018.
Professor Whitman's current programme of research being conducted falls into three main areas:
1. Conceptualising the international role and presence of the EU
Projects in this area are focused on:
- European foreign policy analysis and the 'normative turn'
- English School and the wider Europe
2. The EU foreign policy within a wider European and global context
Projects in this area are focused on:
- EU and its near abroad
- EU as a global conflict manager
- EU and ‘significant’ powers
3. Comparative foreign policy making and European Foreign Policy analysis
Projects in this area are focused on:
- Impact of the Lisbon Treaty on EU foreign policy
- Comparative analysis of impact of EU membership on member state foreign policy and policy-making processes
- UK Foreign and European policy
Professor Whitman is interested in supervising research degree students who wish to explore the external relations and foreign and security and defence policies of the EU. He is also interested in PhD applications on the foreign policies of European nation states and the enlargement and governance of the EU.
I am currently supervising the following PhD research projects:
Hugo Hansen, The Land of Maybe: Faroese Foreign Policy Decision-Making at the European Crossroads
Lukas Aleksander Janulewicz, The Impact of EU Membership on Poland's Foreign Aid Policy
Whitman, R. (2019). The UK’s European diplomatic strategy for Brexit and beyond. International Affairs [Online] 95:383-404. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiz031.The UK’s departure from the European Union (EU) is a major point of departure for the European strategy of one of Europe’s leading economic, diplomatic and security players. This article limits its focus to the UK’s European diplomatic strategy. The article argues that the UK’s future relationship with the EU will be conditioning of the UK’s broader diplomatic approach to Europe. But in exiting the EU the ambitions and modalities of the UK’s other bilateral and multilateral relationships in Europe undergo a recalibration. As the UK government has struggled since June 2016 to provide comprehensive detail on its ambitions for its future economic, political and security relationship with the EU, the development of the broader aspects of the UK’s post-Brexit European diplomatic strategy has been retarded. However, through references to key speeches, Government White Papers and other supporting documents and statements (and the experience of negotiating Brexit with the EU27) the outlines of a post-Brexit UK European diplomatic strategy can be discerned. Whether this strategy will be adequate to provide the UK with a significant degree of influence on Europe’s international relations and whether it gives the UK sufficient ability to addresses the key challenges that it will face in Europe is less certain.
Bergmann, J., Haastrup, T., Niemann, A. and Whitman, R. (2018). Introduction: The EU as International Mediator – Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives. International Negotiation [Online] 23:157 -176. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718069-23021158.In this introductory article, we conceptualise EU mediation practice and identify different conceptual and empirical perspectives from which EU mediation practice can be analysed. First, we briefly present different understandings of mediation in research and practice, and offer a definition and terminological/conceptual clarification of EU mediation practice that both covers EU mediation efforts and mediation support activities. Second, we present the institutional architecture for EU mediation activities. Third, we specify the focus of the special issue and derive a number of research questions that have not been sufficiently addressed in EU foreign policy studies and mediation research, yet. Based on these questions, we propose some tentative avenues for studying EU mediation along three key concepts: (1) drivers of EU mediation, (2) EU mediation roles and strategies, and (3) EU mediation effectiveness. Finally, we provide an overview of the contributions to this special issue.
Whitman, R. (2017). Avoiding a Hard Brexit in Foreign Policy. Survival: Global Politics and Strategy [Online] 59:47-54. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2017.1399724.It cannot be assumed that the United Kingdom and European Union’s current shared foreign-policy interests will be saved from the broader disruption of Brexit.
The current public image of the Brexit process is of a British government negotiating with itself while simultaneously making little progress in Article 50 talks with the EU. It is perhaps inevitable that disputes over money, borders, citizens and a future trading relationship should overshadow other areas where the EU and UK could develop an effective post-Brexit partnership. Foreign, security and defence policy are areas where a departure from the existing intertwined relationship between the UK, the EU and the 27 other member states would have mutually detrimental effects.
The 13 October joint statement by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Theresa May was a timely reminder of the shared security interests of the EU's member states and the UK. In response to US President Donald Trump's declaration that he would not seek congressional recertification of Iran's compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the leaders of the EU's three largest member states together asserted that preserving nuclear diplomacy with Iran was a shared national-security interest. However, despite the shared interests and decades-long experience of EU–UK diplomatic cooperation, defence and security could be jeopardised by inflexibility in the design of the structures of the post-Brexit relationship.
Whitman, R. (2017). Epilogue: European Security and Defence in the Shadow of Brexit. Global Affairs [Online] 2:521-525. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2017.1300066.This piece provides an epilogue to the Forum on European security following the UK EU Referendum. The EU has been a centrepiece in Britain’s foreign policy. The piece argues that Brexit presents the prospect of a major rethink in the aims, ambitions and conduct of British diplomacy and defence. From the perspective of third parties – and most especially for the EU and its member states – the reaction to the prospect of Brexit has been no less clear and the impact on European security no less certain. The piece highlights how contributors to this Forum all share the assessment of an uncertain future whether discussing bilateral relationships, the impact on the EU and NATO or the political economy of European defence. This Forum illustrates that it will be a European security and defence future of considerable uncertainty. A central issue to be resolved will be whether the EU and the UK are able to build a strategic partnership that encompasses issues of foreign policy, security and defence. The UK will also need to recalibrate its key bilateral relationships in Europe and with the United States. This creates an ambitious agenda for practitioners alike.
Whitman, R. (2016). The UK and EU foreign, security and defence policy after Brexit: integrated, associated or detached?. National Institute Economic Review [Online] 238:43-50. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002795011623800114.None of the existing models for the future trade policy relationship between the UK and the EU come with a predetermined foreign and security policy relationship. This article assesses how the future EU-UK foreign and security policy relationship might be organised post-Brexit. It provides evaluation of the current EU-UK interrelationship in the fields of the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and assesses the degree to which the UK is presently integrated into EU decision-making and implementation. It highlights that the UK needs to determine the degree to which it wants autonomy or even divergence from existing EU policies. The article concludes by rehearsing the costs and benefits of three possible future relationships between the UK and EU foreign, security and defence policy: integrated, associated or detached.
Whitman, R. (2016). The UK and EU foreign and security policy: an optional extra. The Political Quarterly [Online] 87:254-261. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.12249.Foreign and security policy were not areas in which Prime Minister Cameron was seeking to renegotiate the relationship between the UK and the European Union (EU) but security may be a key issue in the EU referendum. The untangling of Britain’s foreign and security policy from the EU following a Brexit vote would be relatively uncomplicated. The EU’s arrangements for collective foreign and security policy, the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP), are conducted on an intergovernmental basis which allows the UK to preserve independence in its diplomacy whilst allowing for the coordination of policy where interests are held in common with other member states. The UK retains substantial diplomatic and military capabilities which would allow it to continue to pursue a separate national foreign, security and defence policy, in the case of either a ‘Leave’ or ‘Remain’ outcome.
Whitman, R. (2016). Brexit or Bremain: What future for the UK’s European Diplomatic Strategy?. International Affairs [Online] 92:509-529. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12607.A major public debate on the costs and benefits of the United Kingdom’s membership of the European Union is presently under way. The outcome of the referendum on 23 June 2016 will be a pivotal moment in determining whether the EU has a future as a component of the UK’s European diplomatic strategy or whether there is a major recalibration of how the UK relates to Europe and more widely of its role within international relations. Since accession to the European Economic Community the UK has evolved an uncodified, multipronged European diplomatic strategy. This has involved the UK seeking to reinforce its approach of shaping the security of the continent, preserving a leading diplomatic role for the UK in managing the international relations of Europe, and to maximize British trade and investment opportunities through a broadening and deepening of Europe as an economically liberal part of the global political economy. Since accession the UK’s European diplomatic strategy has also been to use membership of the EU as facilitating the enhancement of its international influence, primarily as a vehicle for leveraging and amplifying broader national foreign and security policy objectives. The strategy has been consistent irrespective of which party has formed the government in the UK. Increasing domestic political difficulties with the process of European integration have now directly impacted on this European strategy with a referendum commitment. Whether a vote for a Brexit or a Bremain, the UK will be confronted with challenges for its future European strategy.
Whitman, R. (2016). Another Theory is Possible: Dissident Voices in Theorising Europe. Journal of Common Market Studies [Online] 54:3-18. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12332.The article argues that dissident voices which attempt to theorise Europe differently and advocate another European trajectory have been largely excluded and left unheard in mainstream discussions over the past decade of scholarship and analysis. Dissident voices in European Union studies are those that seek to actively challenge the mainstream of the study of Europe. As all the contributors to the special issue make clear, there is a rich diversity of alternatives to mainstream thinking and theorising the EU on which to draw for different ways of theorising Europe. The introductory article briefly examines the discipline of mainstreaming, then surveys extent of polyphonic engagement in EU studies before setting out how the special issue contributors move beyond the mainstream. The article will argue the merits of more polyphonic engagement with dissident voices and differing disciplinary approach for the health and vitality of EU studies and the EU policy field itself. The article sets out the wide range of contributions which the special issue articles make to theorising the EU. It summarises the special issue argument that by allowing for dissident voices in theorising Europe another Europe, and another theory, is possible indeed probable.
Rodt, A., Whitman, R. and Wolff, S. (2015). The EU as an International Security Provider: The Need for a Mid-range Theory. Global Society [Online] 29:149-155. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1080/13600826.2015.1046422.
Juncos, A. and Whitman, R. (2015). Europe as a Regional Actor: Neighbourhood Lost?. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies [Online] 53:200-215. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12281.
Whitman, R. and Juncos, A. (2014). Challenging Events, Diminishing Influence? Relations with the Wider Europe. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies [Online] 52:157-169. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12171.
Whitman, R. (2013). The neo-normative turn in theorising the EU’s international presence. Cooperation and Conflict [Online] 48:171-193. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0010836713485538.Introduced by Ian Manners in an article published in 2002, the idea of 'normative power Europe' has been very widely debated by scholars in the fields of European studies and international relations. This article marks the first decade of scholarship on normative power Europe through a critical engagement with the concept, its influence and the wider normative turn within the literature on the European Union's role beyond its borders. The article reviews the strands of literature that have drawn on the concept of normative power and outlines the contours of the international debate on the concept. It provides an assessment of the impact of normative power and its application through the variety of ways it has been used via engagement, reaction and counter-reaction. © The Author(s) 2013.
Whitman, R. and Juncos, A. (2011). Relations with the wider Europe. Journal of Common Market Studies [Online] 49:187-208. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2011.02189.x.
Diez, T., Manners, I. and Whitman, R. (2011). The changing nature of international institutions in Europe: The challenge of the European union. Journal of European Integration [Online] 33:117-138. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2011.543522.The European Union is often compared to other political systems in order to better understand its basic features and how they structure politics. This article argues that this focus on comparative politics instils a domestic bias into the study of the EU, which also ignores the impact of enlargement. To remedy this, a comparison is suggested between the order of the EU as a regional international society and the order of the traditional, global international society as analysed by the English School of International Relations, and in particular by Hedley Bull. It is argued that the primary goal of the international order of the society of states, the preservation of states as its fundamental units, has been replaced by the goal of the preservation of peace in Europe. Consequently, the five core institutions of international order identified by Bull (balance of power, international law, diplomacy, war and great powers) have been modified or replaced. The new institutions of the European order are identified as the pooling of sovereignty, the acquis communautaire, multi-managerialism, pacific democracy, member state coalitions and multiperspectivity. These sustain and enlarge a regional international society that not only combines international and domestic elements, but transforms politics to such an extent that it should better be called a multiperspectival society, confounding Bull's expectation that the European integration will either lead to a European state or falter. This has potential ramifications for the organisation of international society at large, although whether the transformative potential of the EU can be realised remains to be seen, and will be decided above all in the EU's treatment of its own borders. Â© 2011 Taylor & Francis.
Whitman, R. (2010). The EU: Standing aside from the changing global balance of power?. Politics [Online] 30:24-32. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9256.2010.01391.x.The EU has developed its global role in recent years. This has taken place by developing procedures for foreign policy and in the deployment of civilian and military missions internationally. However, the EU suffers from weaknesses that limit its ability to exercise significant global influence and that are apparent in the EU's relationship with the rising powers. The article analyses these limitations which encompass the EU's 'hardware'- its capacity to deploy fully the capabilities of all its constituent Member States - and failings in its 'software'- incoherence and inconsistency in the definition and application of its ideas guiding the EU's global role. Â© 2010 The Author. Politics Â© 2010 Political Studies Association.
Whitman, R. (2010). The calm after the storm? Foreign and security policy from Blair to Brown. Parliamentary Affairs [Online] 63:834-848. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsq028.This article examines the main aspects of the UK's foreign and security policy across the 2005-2010 Parliament. It begins by discussing the highpoint of foreign policy during the period, and goes on to consider the evolution of the UK's foreign policy doctrine, looking in particular at whether Brown established a world view that was distinctive from his predecessor. The analysis then turns to the key foreign policy actors in the period and in particular the extent to which changes of foreign secretary impacted on the UK's foreign and security policy. The article assesses the foreign and security policy issues that predominated from after the 2005 General Election, through Brown's anointment as Prime Minister in 2007 and until the 2010 General Election. The final part of the article considers the minimal role that foreign policy played in the 2010 General Election campaign. There was a considerable convergence of views between each of the three main political parties in their foreign policy platforms. Labour faced criticism for its resourcing of the war in Afghanistan, rather than objection to continuing engagement. The renewal of the Trident weapons system was one of the few substantive issues dividing the Conservatives and Labour from the Liberal Democrats. Â© The Author 2010.
Whitman, R. and Wolff, S. (2010). The EU as a conflict manager? the case of Georgia and its implications. International Affairs [Online] 86:87-107. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2346.2010.00870.x.This article offers an analysis of the EU's engagement in Georgia as a standpoint from which to assess the EU's role as a conflict manager. The article begins with a brief narrative account of the development of EU - Georgia relations in the context of the country's two unresolved conflicts over Abkhazia and South Ossetia. It then proceeds to the analysis of two sets of factors - those within, and those external to, the EU - that are crucial for understanding the nature and impact of EU efforts to manage the two Georgian conflicts. On the basis of this case-study analysis, the authors offer a wider analysis of the EU's potential for assuming a wider role as an international security actor. This is undertaken by considering both the limitations of the EU's existing capabilities for conflict resolution and the new developments contained within the Lisbon Treaty. The final part of the article asserts that the EU has suffered from two key weaknesses that have prevented it from living up to its aspirations of becoming a globally significant and effective conflict manager. The first is structural - the lack of, to date, a permanent External Action Service; the second is conceptual - the lack of a coherent and comprehensive conflict management strategy. The article concludes with five substantive principles that should guide the EU's approach to conflict management. Â© 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/The Royal Institute of International Affairs.
Manners, I. and Whitman, R. (2003). The ’Difference Engine’: Constructing and Representing the International Identity of the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy [Online] 10:380-404. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1350176032000085360.The purpose of this article is to develop more fully the notion of the international identity of the European Union (EU) in world politics. We will attempt to balance our previous focus of work on the 'active dimension' of the EU's attempts to 'assert its identity on the international scene' by looking at the 'reflexive dimension' of the EUs international identity from a more sociological perspective. Our article will argue that the distinctive polity perspectives and role representations of the EU can be thought of as a form of 'difference engine' which drives the construction and representation of the EUs international identity. Like Babbage's original difference engine, the EU's international identity is not a multiplier of difference, exaggerating the dissimilarities between the EU and the rest of the world through the generation of a new European supranational identity, but functions on the basis of addition - by adding an international EU element to Europeans' complex and multifaceted identities.
Diez, T. and Whitman, R. (2002). Analysing European integration: Reflecting on the English School - Scenarios for an encounter. Journal of Common Market Studies [Online] 40:43-67. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-5965.00343.The English School of international relations has rarely been used to analyse European integration. But, as we argue in this article, there may be considerable value in adding the English School to the canon of approaches to European integration studies in order to contextualize European integration both historically and internationally. The concepts of international society, world society and empire in particular may be used to reconfigure the current debate about the nature of EEl governance and to compare the EU to other regional international systems, as well as to reconceptualize the EU's international role, and in particular the EU's power to influence affairs beyond its formal membership borders. Conversely, analysing the EU with the help of these English School concepts may also help to refine the latter in the current attempts to reinvigorate the English School as a research programme.
Whitman, R. (1998). Creating a foreign policy for Europe? Implementing the common foreign and security policy from Maastricht to Amsterdam. Australian Journal of International Affairs [Online] 52:165-178. Available at: http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-0031693384&partnerID=40&md5=341452bf90600dc8d62d39d240f413a6.
Whitman, R. (1998). From Civilian Power to Superpower? The International Identity of the EU. [Online]. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Available at: http://www.palgrave.com/products/title.aspx?PID=252271.From Civilian Power to Superpower? asserts that a new, distinctive and significant actor has entered the international system. The text explores how the European Union has become a significant international actor without transforming itself into a nation-state. The international context, within which the Union now operates, and the instruments, now available at its disposal, have undergone a convergence to create circumstances in which the relative significance of the Union and its uniqueness in the international system has been enhanced.
Haastrup, T. and Whitman, R. (2013). Locating the EU’s strategic behaviour in Sub-Saharan Africa: an emerging strategic culture?. In: Carbone, M. ed. The European Union: Incoherent Policies, Asymmetrical Partnership, Declining Relevance?. Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp. 57-76.This chapter argues that sub-Saharan Africa is an important component of the European Union's strategic behaviour. By analysing EU missions in Africa, the chapter locates the evolution of Europe's strategic culture in 3 frames: human security, security-development nexus and support for local preferences
Whitman, R. (2016). Theorising the European Union As an International Security Provider. [Online]. Whitman, R. G., Wolff, S. and Peen Rodt, A. eds. Oxford, UK: Routledge. Available at: https://www.routledge.com/Theorising-the-European-Union-as-an-International-Security-Provider/Peen-Dodt-Whitman-Wolff/p/book/9781138659667.The European Union has increasingly taken on a role as international security provider that extends beyond the geographical scope of its membership. This is clear from the wide range of military and civilian crisis management missions that the Union has undertaken, but also identifiable through its other policies, such as the European Neighbourhood Policy and development assistance, which have also to some extent become security focused. Yet, the role of the EU as an international security provider remains under-theorized and weakly understood.
The book analyses the Union’s role as an international security provider in a comprehensive way developing theoretical as well as empirical grounding for the understanding of the making and implementation of EU security policy. The contributions in this book cover actors involved in the policy making process, the dynamics of this process itself, its outcomes (strategies and policies) and their impact on the ground. They examine the relevance of, and apply, existing theories of international relations, international security and foreign policy analysis to the specific case of the EU, investigate empirically how particular policies are formulated and implemented, and study the impact and effectiveness of the Union as an international security provider in a variety of cases compared. This book was previously published as a special issue of Global Society.
Whitman, R. (2013). Italy’s Foreign Policy in the 21st Century: A Contested Nature?. [Online]. Marchi, L., Whitman, R. G. and Edwards, G. eds. London: Routledge. Available at: http://www.taylorandfrancis.com/books/details/9780415538343/.Italy’s foreign policy has often been dismissed as too idiosyncratic, inconsistent and lacking ambition.
This book offers new insights into the position Italy has attained in the international community in the 21st century. It explores how the country has sought to take advantage of its passage from a bipolar to a multipolar system and assesses the ways in which it has engaged internationally, its new responsibilities, and the manner in which it conducts its policies in the pursuit of its interests, whether political or commercial. It argues that although Italy is engaged internationally, there is a gap between its actions and what it actually delivers, and as long as this gap continues Italy is likely to remain a partial and unreliable foreign policy actor. Divided into three parts, this book explores:
the context and processes which characterise Italy’s external action
its relations with crucial countries and regions such as the US, the EU, and the BRICs
its security and defence policies.
Whitman, R. (2012). The Routledge Handbook of European Security. [Online]. Whitman, R. G. and Biscop, S. eds. London: Routledge. Available at: http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415588287/.This Handbook brings together key experts on European security from the academic and policy worlds to examine the European Union (EU) as an international security actor.
In the two decades since the end of the Cold War, the EU has gradually emerged as an autonomous actor in the field of security, aiming to safeguard European security by improving global security. However, the EU’s development as a security actor has certainly not remained uncontested, either by academics or by policy-makers, some of whom see the rise of the EU as a threat to their national and/or transatlantic policy outlook.
While the focus of this volume is on the politico-military dimension, security will also be put into the context of the holistic approach advocated by the EU. The book is organised into four key sections:
• Part I – The EU as an International Security Actor
• Part II – Institutions, Instruments and Means
• Part III – Policies
• Part IV – Partners
Whitman, R. (2012). The European Union As a Global Conflict Manager. [Online]. Whitman, R. G. and Wolff, S. eds. London: Routledge. Available at: http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415528726/.In recent years the European Union has played an increasingly important role as a manager of global conflicts. This book provides a comprehensive assessment of how the EU has performed in facilitating mediation, conflict resolution and peacebuilding across the globe. Offering an accessible introduction to the theories, processes and practice of the EU’s role in managing conflict, the book features a broad range of case studies from Europe, Asia and Africa and examines both institutional and policy aspects of EU conflict management. Drawing together a wide range of expert contributors, this volume will be of great interest to students of European Foreign Policy, the EU as a global actor and conflict resolution and management.
Whitman, R. (2012). The European Neighbourhood Policy in Perspective: Context, Implementation and Impact. [Online]. Whitman, R. G. and Wolff, S. eds. Basingstoke: Macmillan Palgrave. Available at: http://www.palgrave.com/products/title.aspx?pid=595432.In implementing the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) the European Union offers a deeper political and economic relationship to its neighbours - but without a promise of EU membership. The ENP is intended to be a strategic approach to the post-enlargement situation which redraws boundaries between the EU 'insiders' and the 'outsiders' on the EU's borders.
This volume presents an empirical exploration of the ENP, in which the main emphasis is on an assessment of the impact the ENP has had so far and the factors that have shaped its implementation since 2003. The volume also provides a perspective on how to study this relatively new policy area. It contends that the ENP represents a distinctive challenge for scholars studying the European Union and that the development of a structured relationship that embraces neighbouring states represents a 'coming of age' for the Union.
Whitman, R. (2011). Normative Power Europe: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives. [Online]. Whitman, R. G. ed. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Available at: http://www.palgrave.com/products/title.aspx?pid=347055.Since it was first introduced in 2002 the concept of Normative Power Europe (NPE) has been actively and intensively debated by scholars in the fields of European Studies and International Relations. The theory of NPE promotes the idea of the European Union as an 'ideational' actor in global politics characterised by its attempts to promote a set of common principles, and acting to diffuse norms in International Relations.
This volume brings together an international group of scholars to examine the methodological, theoretical and empirical challenges in the study of the European Union through NPE. Contributors assess the impact that NPE has had to-date. Collectively the contributions offer new theoretical and methodological perspectives on one of the most widely used and influential ideas in the study of the EU of the last decade.
Whitman, R.G. and Manners, I. eds. (2000). The Foreign Policies of European Union Member States. [Online]. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Available at: http://www.manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk/cgi-bin/indexer?product=9780719057793.This comparative analysis of the foreign policies of European Union member states includes comprehensive coverage of the post-Maastricht period and the three newest members of the EU. In the only comparative study of its kind since 1976, the book analyzes the dual impact of the Maastricht Treaty on the European Union, and the post-Cold War environment on the foreign policy processes of the EU’s member states. The book argues for a new approach to the foreign policy analysis of EU states that recognizes the fundamental changes that membership brings after the Cold War, but also acknowledges the diverse role of policies which states seek to retain or advance as being “special.”
Whitman, R.G., Landau, A. and Curzon Price, V. eds. (1999). The Enlargement of the European Union: Issues and Strategies. [Online]. London: Routledge. Available at: http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415202923/.This volume looks at the process of enlargment which the European Union is currently undertaking, focusing on both the economic and political dimensions of the subject. The volume examines how enlargment has evolved and looks at the roles and relations of the different actors - member states, applicant states and EU institutions. With contributors coming from different disciplinary backgrounds, the volume offers an unusually rich array of perspectives on one of the most significant political developments of recent years.
Whitman, R.G. and Landau, A. eds. (1996). Rethinking the European Union: Institutions, Interests and Identities. [Online]. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Available at: http://www.palgrave.com/products/title.aspx?pid=257158.Rethinking the European Union draws together contributors from across Europe to reflect upon methods of conceptualising the European Union within both changing global and European contexts. The book takes the themes of institutions, interests and identities as its organising framework within which each contributor offers a distinctive commentary on the EU. The outcome is a text that goes beyond an exploration of the existing methods of conceptualising the European integration process and reflects upon the nature of the EU itself.
Haastrup, T. (2015). Mapping Perspectives on the EU As Mediator. GEC/CARC. Available at: https://www.kent.ac.uk/politics/carc/eu-mediation/documents/eu-mediation-workshop-report.pdf.Research on the European Union’s role as a meditator is nascent. It predominantly focuses on case studies
or is cursorily embedded within wider research on the European Union (EU) as a crisis manager.
Moreover, there is a significant disconnect between the established studies on mediation based in Conflict
Analysis Studies and the EU’s foreign and security policy situated in Security Studies. Thus, there is a
dearth of systematic engagement on the issue of EU mediation, although the EU often uses the language
of mediation as a key component of its external commitments to conflict prevention, transformation and
resolution. While advancements in mediation research suggest that there are certain determinants of
mediation, and highlight key features that support and impede actors during conflict, this has not been
systematically applied to the EU. Consequently, a key task of this workshop was to establish conceptual
clarity and practical information about on the EU’s mediation roles.
As a starting point, this workshop took stock of EU mediation knowledge from the perspective of different
actors including academics, civil society and policy practitioners. In particular, it explored the limited
academic engagement with this particular aspect of EU foreign and security policy. Additionally, the
workshop critically interrogated how the EU understood its role in international mediation practice by
exploring its capabilities and infrastructure and thereby locating opportunities and constraints to it
performance. By bringing together various perspectives these discussions generated critical insights into
where the remaining gaps in knowledge lay and the possibilities of academic partnerships with
practitioners and policymakers to create new knowledge for Security and Conflict Analysis Studies.
Korosteleva, E., Casier, T. and Whitman, R. (2014). Building a Stronger Eastern Partnership: Towards an EaP 2.0. Global Europe Centre, University of Kent. Available at: http://www.kent.ac.uk/politics/gec/research/index.html?tab=policy-papers.The European Union has been working to deepen the economic and political relationship with its Eastern neighbouring countries over the recent years. A set of formal agreements are intended for signature between the EU and Ukraine, Moldova and the South Caucasus states at the Eastern Partnership (EaP) summit scheduled for 28-29 November 2013. These agreements have provoked a response from the Russian Federation which is seeking to offer an alternative set of economic relationship to the exclusion of the EU.
In the first Policy Paper to be published, the recently created Global Europe Centre (GEC) sets out a reform agenda that the EU needs to adopt towards the EaP states to enable a more binding relationship. The paper argues that the EU needs to define a ‘next generation’ objective for the EaPas it enters the implementation phase of the current set of Association Agreements (AAs). The proposal is that the EU should set a European Partnership Community (EPC) statusas a bilateral and multilateral goal for the EaP. The paper contends that there is urgency for the EU to think more strategically vis-à-vis its neighbourhood, and create a more clear-cut place for Russia to avoid the current situation of divisive competition.
Further, the EU needs to reform aspects of its current EaP policy. The EU needs to define a clearer, and measureable set of objectives for its role in the resolution of the ‘frozen’ conflicts of its Eastern neighbourhood; refresh its policy towards Belarus; speed up visa liberalisation to ease travel for citizens of the EU’s neighbouring states; and deepen and broaden civil society engagement by investing more in deep democracy, linkage and people-to-people contacts.
Casier, T., Whitman, R. and Korosteleva, E. (2013). Global Europe Centre Policy Paper. Building a Stronger Eastern Partnership: Towards an EaP 2.0. Global Europe Centre. Available at: http://www.kent.ac.uk/politics/gec/GEC%20Policy%20Paper.pdf.
Research report (external)
Whitman, R. (2017). Devolved External Affairs: The Impact of Brexit. [Online]. Chatham House. Available at: https://www.chathamhouse.org/publication/devolved-external-affairs-impact-brexit.Brexit will have significant political and institutional implications for the external affairs of the devolved administrations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. This is a consequence of the devolution of power that has taken place within the UK since it joined the EU.
Merheim-Eyre, I. (2017). Extending EU Governmentality to the Eastern Neighbourhood: A Study of Knowledge Production, Governing Technologies and Micro-Practices in the EU Management of Cross-Border Mobility.Based on Foucault's work on the rationalities of government (governmentality) and Bourdieu's study of practices (philosophy of action), this thesis seeks to examine the case of cross-border mobility by way of analysing knowledge-production, instruments of governing and practices in the EU's relations with the states of the Eastern Partnership (EaP). The thesis shows that EU attempts at governing cross-border mobility do not merely aim to foster regulated mobility between the EU and its neighbours, but are also inherently linked to the EU's efforts to shape the EaP states to its own standards and practices of governing.
Using the case studies of i) border management capacity-building, ii) facilitation of short-term travel and iii) labour migration, the study argues that while the EU's rationalities of governing remain largely controlling and disciplinary, the study of the microcosm of daily practices reveals some emergent rationalities of 'governing at a distance', which increasingly draw on the interplay of both the EU's interests and partners' needs. To this end, it does not merely present issues of cross-border mobility from the perspective of either 'inclusion' or 'imposition of constraints', but rather by way of seeking to govern the external space by making the Other 'capable of bearing a kind of regulated freedom' (Rose & Miller; 2008: 53).
The thesis' key contributions are (i) conceptual involving ontological examination of the wider changes in the EU management of (in)security, and focus of a paradigmatic shift from the EU directly-controlling 'governance' to a more nuanced form of diffused 'governmentality', or governing at distance, and its effectiveness; and (ii) methodological, combining the study of knowledge-production and instruments of governing with daily practices, hitherto applied separately, but in this research proving instrumental for understanding the EU management of insecurities and its sustainability. Empirically (iii), the thesis provides new data on the three case studies, particularly, highlighting the extent to which the EU's attempts at governing are transposed to the micro-level of daily practices.
In the context of the on-going migration crisis, the eastern neighbourhood provides some important lesson-drawing for the management of cross-border mobility in the wider neighbourhood and beyond.
Hansen, H. (2017). The Land of Maybe and International Actorness: Evaluating Faroese Paradiplomacy.Thesis Abstract
This thesis presents a single-country study of the Faroe Islands as a sub-state entity in international relations, asking specifically 'why and how do the Faroes conduct paradiplomacy?' Identifying the both the absence of an extensive, systematic evaluation of Faroese external relations, and the rarity of tools to study this agency, the thesis nonetheless identifies and applies a preciosely such comprehensive explanatory framework. Indeed, the thesis adopts, contextualises and completments Kuznetsov's 2015 framework, and applies it to three empirical key case studies, examining Faroese participation in UN, Nordic and Arctic for,
as well as trade promotion and marine resource management.
Thus, the original academic contribution of the thesis rests on the dual contribution of the empirically substantiated findings, triangulated across the three case studies. A wholly new, in-depth analysis of Faroese paraiplomacy, the first contribution is empirical, adding to the comparative literature within the cannons on Paradiplomacy and Island Studies. The second contribution is theoretical, testing Kuznetsov's explanatory framework and demonstrating how it can be amended for in-depth analysis.
Overall, the thesis shows that successive Faroese governments have expanded external, paradiplomatic activity significantly since the mid-1990s in particular, and have built a foreign service in a process of pragmatic and principled state building. Drawing on the specificities of the three case studies, the thesis identifies and examines causes driving Faroese paradiplomacy; jurisdiction, the motivations, institutionalisations, attitudes of the Danish government, and considers the consequences of Faroese paradiplomacy for the Realm.
Van Gils, E. (2016). Establishing the Rules of the Game: Bargaining Power in Relations Between the European Union and the Republic of Azerbaijan.The European Union (EU) has had a range of policy objectives, many of them transformative, in the countries in its eastern neighbourhood since their independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. However, there appear to be limits to the EU's success in fulfilling the objectives with a transformative character, especially in its relations with Azerbaijan. This thesis examines why the EU faces limits to this fulfilment, by examining Azerbaijan's strategic use of bargaining power as a possible explanation for these hindrances.
This research is premised on the idea that policy-making in bilateral relations can be seen as a form of continuous negotiation, which outcomes are determined by the EU and Azerbaijan's respective negotiation success based on their strategic application of bargaining power. The hypothesis tested in this thesis is that the lack of inclusive policy-making by the EU has led the Azerbaijani government to use bargaining strategies in order to enforce more inclusive policies, where the initial EU objectives are not in line with Baku's interests. This resistance to the EU's transformative objectives could then explain why the latter are only fulfilled in part.
This idea will be tested on three different policy areas: agenda-setting of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict; democracy and human rights promotion policies; and the negotiations over economic and legal approximation. The case studies will corroborate the hypothesis but demonstrate variations in the successful application of bargaining power strategies to the three policy domains. This research will conclude that the current configuration of power considerably limits the fulfilment of EU transformative objectives in the neighbourhood, and requires substantial change in the EU policies and attitudes, through more inclusive forms of policy-making, to be more effective and sustainable.
This study makes three important contributions to the scholarship: it develops the concept of bargaining power in international relations, and links it to the concept of inclusive policy-making to comprehensively ascertain the EU's capacity to meet its transformative objectives. Furthermore, it sheds an empirical light on Azerbaijan as a hitherto understudied country case of international relations.
Brandenburg, N. (2016). Assembling Practices of EU Mediation in Myanmar and Georgia.The objective of this dissertation is to study the practices of mediation of the European Union (EU) in order to explore how the understanding of violent conflicts by EU officials is reflected in their ways of responding to them through practices of mediation. In late 2011 the in-house Mediation Support Team of the Union took office as part of implementing the Concept on Strengthening EU Mediation and Dialogue Capacities, adopted by the Council of the European Union in 2009. The group began to develop new practices of in-house mediation support, thereby engaging with the already existing efforts of the Union. This study sets out to trace the emergence of this loosely knitted web of practices - the assemblage of EU mediation - by drawing on the sociology of translation or Actor-NetworkTheory and on concepts of governmentality studies. It builds on the four moments of translation as developed by Michel Callon and refines them with the notion of political rationality and techne to assess what it is that makes the assemblage relatively durable. This dissertation argues that the seemingly incoherent and to an extent diverging practices of mediation are in fact organized around a reasoning on violent conflict which securitizes conflict. It is challenged by a transformative rationale which is advocated by the Mediation Support Team. However, the common denominator of both concepts is an understanding of how to build peace with sustainable economic development, the eradication of poverty, strong and democratic state institutions and an effective system of multilateralism as its main components. Taken together, this reasoning or political rationality gives rise to a state-centred approach to violent conflict which often plays out at the expense of a detailed conflict assessment as it simplifies the multiple realities and narratives of violent conflict. Two case studies of EU mediation practices in Myanmar and Georgia substantiate this argument. They are assessed through analysing the transcripts of 63 semi-structured interviews and textual artefacts. Moreover, the dissertation discovers an intriguing puzzle pertaining to how the political rationality of the assemblage of mediation is resisting any form of scrutinizing the underlying assumptions of the state-centred understanding of violent conflict. On the one hand, the Mediation Support Team fulfils a supportive role and did not manage to establish itself as an obligatory passage point of the assemblage which would define how to engage in mediation and require all other actors to pass through it. In fact, the codified practices of the Common Foreign and Security Policy authorize the Council of the European Union to determine the Union's foreign policy objectives, including mandating an actor to mediate on behalf of the EU, and calling for all efforts of resolving violent conflicts to be in line with Council policies. Accordingly, European Union Special Representatives or Heads of Delegations engage in those practices that engender a peace process. On the other hand, the study found that the practices of mediation support structure the way of thinking of EU officials on peace and conflict in that they introduce specific concepts such as the transformative approach to violent conflict and blur the boundaries between EU actors and external experts, thereby raising the question whether or not this will challenge the Union's concept of violent conflict in the future.
Janulewicz, L. (2016). An Almost Normal Donor: Polish Foreign Aid Between National Preferences and International Obligations.Scholars of traditional Western donors have frequently asked, 'Why is aid given?' With the emergence of numerous new donors after the end of the Cold War, this question has a new significance. One group of these new donors are the countries of post-communist Central and Eastern Europe. Within the literature that has developed in recent years to analyse their foreign aid programmes, Poland is surprisingly understudied despite being the most significant international actor in the region. This thesis addresses this gap by investigating the origins and development of the Polish foreign aid programme since 1989. This focus on a single country enables a comprehensive longitudinal analysis so far also missing from the literature.
The thesis develops and applies an analytical framework that focuses on the diffusion of international norms and policies into the national policy-making process. Through this framework, the thesis identifies the sources of foreign aid policies, the mechanisms through which sources exerted influence on the policy-making process and Polish opportunities to influence the international agenda. The thesis applies the framework to foreign aid policy-decisions across the post-Cold War period and enables an assessment of the extent to which Poland's 'return to Europe' provided opportunities and constrictions for foreign policy-making. The analytical framework looks beyond the focus on the 'EU factor' prevalent in the CEE donor literature, while maintaining comparability with these studies' findings.
The focus on competing explanations is a central contribution that results in several original findings. The thesis demonstrates the substantial influence of the United States on Polish thinking about aid provision. The evidence also suggests that direct interaction between countries is crucial for the implementation of international norms and policies. Highlighting the importance of interaction between member states contributes a novel perspective not just on EU policy-making about development cooperation, but also on foreign policy. This leads to the conclusion that Poland as a donor has been a 'good pupil of bad behaviour', learning from the examples of traditional donors that non-compliance and national preferences are acceptable. The thesis also introduces the argument that CEE donors are not as different from traditional donors as so far portrayed by the literature. Non-compliance with international commitments is prevalent among Western donors and national foreign-policy considerations motivate their aid flows. However, traditional donors have the advantage that their foreign policy priorities are easier to reconcile with the priorities of development cooperation. The main difference lies in the insufficient domestic capacities of Central and Eastern European donors to use aid as an effective foreign policy tool due to the legacy of the communist era.