This article analyses the extent to which the European Union (EU) constitutes a normative power in its response on the Syrian Conflict. Normative power Europe is examined along principles, actions and impact. The empirical analysis focuses on two norms: democracy and human rights. According to analysis, taken measures by the EU have been moderate and
less influential on the national level while the value promotion on the reginal level could prove its normative power.
For several decades EU foreign policy analysis is concerned with the question of European Union (EU) actorness and the role of EU in international politics. Analysts are talking of the EU as a Military Power, Civilian Power, Soft Power or Cultural Power. General discussion of conceptual frameworks of the Normative Power Europe has become immensely popular in the EU studies and has provoked substantial debate. At the same time, the EU has been experiencing a dramatic change in its direct neighborhood. Syrian Arab Republic, the country located in the heart of Middle East, turned into a new hybrid war and the region was overwhelmed with one of the worst humanitarian crises the world has faced in the 21st century. About 5.6 million Syrians are recent refugees in neighboring countries, 11.7 million Syrians are in need of humanitarian assistance internally and over 560.000 became victims of the Syrian war. The extent and continuation of the conflict also has a destabilizing impact and turned the neighborhood into a “ring of fire”. The displacement of people, the exacerbation of political and sectarian differences and the spread of terrorism are forming a new threat to the democratic institution of the EU.
EU a Normative Power?
Case study Syria
Abstract: This article analyses the extent to which the European Union (EU) constitutes a normative power in its response on the Syrian Conflict. Normative power Europe is examined along principles, actions and impact. The empirical analysis focuses on two norms: democracy and human rights. According to analysis, taken measures by the EU have been moderate and less influential on the national level while the value promotion on the reginal level could prove its normative power.
Keywords: normative political theory, norms, democracy, human rights, Syrian Conflict Introduction
For several decades EU foreign policy analysis is concerned with the question of European Union (EU) actorness and the role of EU in international politics. Analysts are talking of the EU as a Military Power, Civilian Power, Soft Power or Cultural Power. General discussion of conceptual frameworks of the Normative Power Europe has become immensely popular in the EU studies (Manners, 2002) and has provoked substantial debate. At the same time, the EU has been experiencing a dramatic change in its direct neighborhood. Syrian Arab Republic, the country located in the heart of Middle East, turned into a new hybrid war and the region was overwhelmed with one of the worst humanitarian crises the world has faced in the 21st century (EEAS, 2019). About 5.6 million Syrians are recent refugees in neighboring countries, 11.7 million Syrians are in need of humanitarian assistance internally and over 560.000 became victims of the Syrian war (Statista, 2019). The extent and continuation of the conflict also has a destabilizing impact and turned the neighborhood into a "ring of fire”. The displacement of people, the exacerbation of political and sectarian differences and the spread of terrorism are forming a new threat to the democratic institution of the EU.
In some way, the EU has reacted to the “wildfire“ since the beginning of the conflict in 2011. This paper discusses the EU crisis management and its diplomatic response. It will showcase which approach the EU is following by addressing the conflict. Due to lack of space, the paper only focuses on the normative approach and analyzes the EU as a normative power. In the first part, the normative concept of Ian Manners will be discussed (2002, 2009). Secondly, the methodology by Manners (2002) must be explained and directly applied on the case study: the diplomatic response of the EU on the Syrian conflict. A brief analysis of the challenges of the normative approach should be done and finally, a conclusion from the findings will be drawn. My paper follows the question: Is the EU acting as a normative power in its response on the Syrian conflict?
The paper is taking the timeframe of legislation period of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR), Federica Mogherini from 2011 till 30th November of 2019 into account. The HR and the diplomatic service of European External Action Service (EEAS) are playing key roles in managing foreign relations, security, and defense policies and representing a united foreign policy of EU diplomatic missions (EEAS 2019). In order to answer the research question, primary (statements, Joint Declarations, reports from various European institutions as the EAAS, UN Resolutions) and secondary sources (journal and newspaper articles, think tank reports) will be used. The analysis goes beyond an "inside-out” perspective by analyzing from an EU point of view.
Normative theory by Ian Manners
The idea of normative power was not new (Carr 1962, Galtung 1973, Duchène 1973 cited in Manners 2002) but is was significantly coined by Ian Manners. Manners stressed out that the concept of normative power is based on ideational rather than material or physical power. This means that its use involves normative justification rather than the use of material incentives or physical force (Manners, 2009). The Normative Power Europe (NPE) is still largely undertheorized (Sjursen 2006 cited in Johansson-Nogués) which leads to the conceptual lack of clarity shrouding the definition of the NPE. Manners defines normative power as "the ability to define what passes as normal in world politics” (Manners, 2002).
The NPE can be distinguished from the concept of Civilian Power and Military Power. One of the problems with these concepts is their unhealthy concentration on how much like a state the EU looks (Manners, 2009). Also, Civilian Power seems to be a rather status-quo-oriented concept. Duchène already stressed the maintenance of the European system (of states) and the fixed nature of the nation-state (Duchène, 1972 cited in Manners 2002). On the contrary, NPE is about change. The overlapping with the civilian approach is expressed in a substantial base of Soft Power, the ability to shape what others want through attraction rather than coercion or payment (Nye 2004 cited in Niemann & Wekker 2010). Normative Power and exercise of Soft Power are linked in the sense of external dimensions of policies, enlargement, trade, and development policies. The power to shape discourses has created the term of the EU as a force for good in the world (Bicchi 2006 cited in Trott 2010). The normative concept becomes an increasingly important practice of European identity construction (Diez, 2005 cited in Trott 2010).
Methodology and Case Study: Syrian Crisis
In many works, a systematic formulation of indicators of NPE is missing. This section follows the question: what instruments should be used in order to determine whether the EU is truly a normative power or not? In the case of Syrian Conflict, normativity of the EU will be proved by looking at the norm democracy and human rights.
The normative base
The concept is based on the importance of values and principles. The normative basis of the EU is founded in historical post World war II context and was shaped by a series of declarations, treaties, policies, criteria, and conditions (Niemann & Wekker, 2010). According to Manners, one can identify five ‘core’ norms from the body of EU law and policies: peace, liberty, democracy, the rule of law, and respect for human rights. Four additional ‘minor’ norms can be derived from the acquis communautaire and acquis politique: social solidarity, antidiscrimination, sustainable development, and good governance (Manners, 2002).
The further section will give an overview of the EU-Syrian relations before 2011 and its principles. The normative and legal basis for the bilateral EU-Syria relations were founded in the Cooperation Agreement signed in 1977, which served as a cooperation in the areas of economy and financial dimensions (EEAS, 2016). The Participation of Syria in the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) was assumed in the Association Agreement "but does not yet benefit from all its instruments and incentives” (EEAS, 2012 cited in Seeberg 2012) because Syria hasn't signed and ratified it. The ENP aims to achieve closer relations by fostering peace, stability and security next through the value promotion like democracy and human rights (European Commission, 2015). Syria is one of the 48 partners forming the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM, 2019).
The promotion of principles must be seen as legitimate, as well as being promoted in a coherent and consistent way (Manners, 2009). Coherence and consistency in the international promotion of these principles is intended to come from the role of a HR envisaged in the Lisbon Treaty.
Action
How are the EU norms diffused in world politics? Which actions promote EUs principles? EU actions cover a full spectrum of practices and policies, encouraging a more holistic, or comprehensive approach to the many challenges of world politics (Manners, 2009). Manners states that there are six principal substantives and symbolic ways in which the EU promotes values (Manners, 2002). The promotion and diffusion of human rights and democracy has to be analyzed on conflict management strategy in Syria.
Contagion: Diffusion and promotion of ideas could be emphasized in the dialogue with other political actors (Whitehead, 1996 cited in Manners 2002) through attraction.
Human rights and democracy are a central aspect of EU foreign relations and this focus is expressed in political dialogues with Syria. At the beginning of the conflict, the EU voiced their concern of "the ongoing repression in Syria" (Council of the European Union, 2011) and called for implementing political reforms in the sense of „initiating a peaceful transition to democracy and providing stability for Syria in the long term" (ibid.).
As the violence continued, "the EU has called on President Assad to step aside and allow a peaceful and democratic transition” (European Commission, 2012). In order to facilitate toppling down the Assad regime, the EU recognized opposition forces like the Syrian National Coalition as legitimate representatives of the Syrian people.
The EU participates continuously in the Interactive Dialogue with the Commission of Inquiry (COI) during the Human Rights Council session, most recently in September 2019. In its statement, the EU condemns in strongest terms the widespread and systematic violations of i nternational humanitarian and human rights law, especially focusing on gender-based violence (EEAS, 2019). It expressed its support for the mandate of the COI, which was a call for the Syrian regime to cooperate with the Commission and grant it unhindered access (EEAS, 2018).
The EU strategy highlights the human rights and democracy through the engagement upon regional key actors with the objective to make a broad-based transition of Syria possible. The III Brussels Conference in March 2019 on "Supporting the Future of Syria and the Region" focuses on the role of civil society (European Council, 2019). The conference, led by the EU and co-chaired by the UN, aimed to identify common ground on the post-conflict arrangements for Syria and to maximize the effectiveness of value promotion in future reconstruction process.
These actions, declining the legitimizing power of Assad, political dialogue, organizing conferences etc., are advertising norms by constantly integrating human rights and a democratic government in the public debate.
Informational diffusion is the result of a range of strategic communications, declarations, statements etc.
The EU is the strongest supporter of the UN-led political process (EU Global Strategy, 2019) in line with Security Council Resolution 2254 (UNSCR, 2015). The Resolution 2254 is a crucial element for a political transition. The Resolution aims at establishing credible, inclusive and non-sectarian governance, setting a schedule and process for drafting a new constitution, and further expressing its support for free and fair elections within 18 months. The Resolution 2254 is based on its full implementation of the Geneva Communiqué (point 1, ibid.).
Several other EU global strategy papers (2015, 2017, 2019) are referring to the accomplishment of sustainable peace on Syria through long-term support for political reforms and “strengthening Syrian civil society organizations to promote democracy, human rights and freedom of expression” (Global strategy 2019).
Procedural diffusion is the institutionalization of a relationship between the EU and a third party.
The EU’s strong criticism towards the Syrian government escalated in the suspension of the Cooperation Agreement under the European Neighborhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) and froze the draft of the Association Agreement (Council of the European Union, 2012). Several diplomats from EU member states decided to recall the activity of their embassies in Damascus (EEAS, 2019). On the other hand, Syria consequently recessed its membership and participation in the UfM.
The suspension of relations between the authoritarian repressing government of Assad and the EU could be interpreted as a symbolic act with normative character. If Assad is not willing to follow the norms, he is no longer allowed to cooperate and benefit from the EU. At this point it could be criticized that Syria has not previously met EU standards.
Transference: The EU exchanges goods, trade, aid or technical assistance with third parties through largely substantive or financial means and by using political conditionality. Such transference may be the result of the exportation of community norms and standards (Cremona, 1998 cited in Manners 2002).
Next to the suspension of Syrian regional programs, the provision of loans and technical assistance through the European Investment Bank under ENPI (2007-2013) was ceased in November 2011 (European Commission, 2018). The EU established and then expanded targeted sanctions on the Syrian government including an arms embargo, asset freeze of the Syrian central bank and a travel ban on government members, an oil embargo, export restrictions on equipment and technology that might be used for internal repression (Council of the European Union, 2017). Currently, the Council extended EU sanctions until 1 June 2020 (Council of the European Union, 2019).
The use of negative conditionality of the EU has the intention to weaken the Assad regime politically and financially and at the same time, it assumes that the regime is going to change its behavior and adapt to the norms.
[...]
-
-
-
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X. -
-
¡Carge sus propios textos! Gane dinero y un iPhone X.