Links:
[1] http://www.iesabroad.org/study-abroad/programs/milan-italy-today
[2] http://www.osce.org/publications/handbook/
[3] http://www.europa.eu.int/enlargement/opinion/index/htm#eurobarometer
[4] http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/we/doc/com03_104_en.pdf
[5] http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guesten.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&doc=SPEECH/02/619
[6] http://european-convention.eu.int/docs/Treaty/cv00848.en03.pdf
[7] http://europa.eu.int
[8] http://www.nato.int
[9] http://www.osce.org
[10] http://www.euobserver.com
[11] http://www.uaces.org
The Eu And The Process Of European Integration
This course will explore the process of European integration in its historical dimension and will analyze its cultural, social, political and economic causes and effects as well as the obstacles it still faces. The aim of the course is to give students a clear-cut view of the complex European institutional fabric and its advancement or eventually paralysis. The puzzling nature of the EU – supranational state or rather a post- modern conglomerate of states – will be thoroughly explored.
Comparisons between the EU system and the US will be made in order to clarify the nature of the EU. The seminar not only will review the existing body of theory in the field, but it also will apply individual theories to understanding the origin and functioning of more recent common European projects such as European Defense Identity, European Monetary Union, and the EU’s next enlargement. The course will not only discuss institutional implications of enlargement for both parts of Europe, but will also tackle broader conceptual questions such as cultural identity, national sovereignty, power politics, economic interdependence, transatlantic relations and democratic legitimization.
None
The course will use an inductive approach by stimulating students to actively intervene in view of fostering critical thinking. Emphasis placed on discussions of the required readings for each class session.
Students will be required to give an oral presentation (15-20 minutes) based on a written paper, on a topic among those outlined in the syllabus, that they will have to investigate more thoroughly. There will be a mid-term examination (multiple-choice text) and a written final examination: candidates will be required to answer three questions from a choice of six. The six questions will reflect the material covered in lectures and seminars.
Grade Breakdown:
Attendance and participation (25%);
oral presentation on the basis of a written paper (25%);
mid-term exam (25%);
final exam (25%).
Week 1
From Rome to Rome: history, constitutional/institutional development and structure of the EEC/EU and the other organizational frameworks (Council of Europe NATO, CSCE/OSCE, OECD)
• Dinan, D. Ever Closer Union. Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1999, pp.1-55.
• Laffan, B. Integration and cooperation in Europe. London: Routledge, 1992, pp.1-19.
• Hyde-Price, A. “The Antinomies of European Security: Dual Enlargement and the Reshaping of European Order.” Contemporary Security Policy, Vol.21, No. 3, December 2000, pp.139-167.
• The Economist. Special Report: The Future of NATO, May 4th, 2002.
• OSCE Handbook, Vienna, OSCE Secretariat, pp.1-15. (http://www.osce.org/publications/handbook/ [2])
Week 2
Beyond Neofunctionalism and Intergovernmentalism: contemporary approaches to European integration
• Ash, T.G., “Europe’s Endangered Liberal Order.” Foreign Affairs, Vol.77, No. 2, March-April, 1998, pp.51-65.
• Hoffmann, S. “Obstinate or Obsolete? The Fate of the Nation State and the Case of Western Europe.” Daedalus, 95, 1966, pp.892-908.
• Moravicsik, A. “Preferences and Power in the European Community: A Liberal Intergovernmentalist Approach.” Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol.31, No.34, December 1993, pp.473-519.
Week 3
Introduction to the EU’s institutional setting: Commission, Councils, European Council
• Hix, S. "Explaining the EU Political System." In The Political System of the European Union, S. Hix, Introduction, Palgrave Macmillan, 1999.
• Gozi, S. “Does the EU Institutional Triangle have a Future? The International Spectator, Vol.36, No.1, January-March 2001, pp.39-49.
• Wallace, H. “The Institutional Setting: Five Variations on a Theme.” In Policy-Making in the EU, H. and W. Wallace (eds.), 4th Edition, Oxford University Press, pp.3-37.
• Dinan, D. Ever Closer Union. Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1999, pp.205-265.
• Italian Presidency, Address by the Presidency of the Council on the Priorities of the Italian Presidency, Strasbourg, July 2nd, 2003.
Week 4
The EU’s institutional setting: The Parliament. The decision-making process
• Dinan, D. Ever Closer Union. Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1999, pp.267-300.
• Scharpf, F. “Community and Autonomy: Multilevel Policy Making in the EU.” Journal of European Public Policy, 1994, pp.219-242.
Week 5
The EU’s institutional setting: The European Court of Justice. Elements of European Law
• Dinan, D. Ever Closer Union. Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1999, pp.301-312.
• Mancini, F., Keeling, D. "Democracy and the European Court of Justice." Modern Law Review, Vol. 57, No. 2, 1994, pp. 175-190.
Week 6
European Policies: The European Monetary Union
• Dinan, D. Ever Closer Union. Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1999, pp.453-481.
• Artis, M., Bladen-Hovell, R. "European Monetary Union." In The Economics of the European Union, Nixson, Oxford University Press, 2001 (third edition), Chapter 12.
Week 7
The Transatlantic Relations and the European Defense Identity
• Kagan, R. “Power and Weakness.” Policy Review, N.113, June 2002.
• Kupchan, C.A. “In Defense of European Defense: An American Perspective.” Survival, vol.42, No.2, Summer 2000, pp.16-32.
• Lindley-French. “Terms of engagement: The Paradox of American Power and the Transatlantic Dilemma Post-11 September.” Chaillot Papers, No.52, Institute for Security Studies, Paris, 2002.
• Moravcsik, A. “Striking a New Transatlantic Bargain.” Foreign Affairs, Vol.82, No.4, July/August 2003, pp. 74-89.
• Nye, J.S. Jr. “U.S. Power and Strategy After Iraq. ” Foreign Affairs, Vol.82, No.4, July/August 2003, pp. 60-73.
Week 8
The EU’s Enlargement and the EU’s Proximity Policy
• Kok, W. “Enlarging the European Union – Achievements and Challenges.” Report of Wim Kok to the European Commission, Florence, European University Institute, 26 March 2003.
• European Commission, Second Eurobarometer Report from candidate countries, March 2003. http://www.europa.eu.int/enlargement/opinion/index/htm#eurobarometer [3]
• Schimmelfennig, F., Sedelmeier, U., “Theorising EU Enlargement: Research Focus, Hypotheses, and the State of the Research.” Journal of European Public Policy, Vol.9:4, 2002, pp.500-528.
• New Neighbourhood Instrument, COM(2003) 393 final, Brussels, July 1st, 2003. http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/we/doc/com03_104_en.pdf [4]
• European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, Wider Europe - Neighbourhood: A New Framework for Relations with our Eastern and Southern Neighbours, COM (2003) 104 final, Brussels, March 11th, 2003. http://europa.eu.int/comm/external_relations/we/doc/com03_104_en.pdf [4]
• R. Prodi, “A Wider Europe – A Proximity Policy as the Key to Stability.” Speech delivered to the Sixth ECSA – World Conference, Brussels, December 5-6, 2002. http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guesten.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&doc=... [5]|0|AGED&lg=EN& display=
Week 9
A Constitution for Europe?
• The European Convention, Draft Constitution, Volume II, CONV848/03, Brussels 9th July 2003. http://european-convention.eu.int/docs/Treaty/cv00848.en03.pdf [6]
• The Economist. Where to file Europe's New Constitution? June 21st - 27th 2003.
• De Witte, B. (Ed.). Ten Reflections on the Constitutional Treaty for Europe, Florence, European University Institute, RSCAS, April 2003.
Week 10
The United States and the European Union: Differences and Similarities. How democratic is the EU?
• Nicolaidis, K., Howse, R. The Federal Vision- Legitimacy and Levels of Governance in the United States and the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001, Selected chapters.
Week 11
Overview and Conclusion
• Caporaso, J.A. “The European Union and form of State: Westphalian, Regulatory or Post-Modern?” in Journal of Common Market Studies, n.34, pp.29-52.
• Friedrichs, J. “The Meaning of New Medievalism” in European Journal of International Relations, Vol.7(4), pp.475-502, 2001.
• Chanona, A. “A Comparative Perspective between the European Union and NAFTA.” J.Monnet/R.Schuman Paper Series, Vol.3 No.5, University of Miami, August 2003.
Dinan, D. Ever Closer Union. Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1999.
Laffan, B. Integration and Cooperation in Europe. London: Routledge, 1992.
A course packet will be made with the required readings that are listed in the syllabus. Some required readings also are available on the Internet, in which case links are provided.
http://europa.eu.int [7] http://www.nato.int [8]
http://www.osce.org [9]
http://www.euobserver.com [10]
http://www.uaces.org [11]