Assessing the decennial, reassessing the global: Understanding European Union normative power in global politics

Abstract

This concluding article assesses the past decade of international scholarship on the European Union (EU) and normative power as represented by the contributions to the special issue. It argues that the normative power approach (NPA) makes it possible to explain, understand and judge the EU in global politics by rethinking the nature of power and actorness in a globalizing, multilateralizing and multipolarizing era. To do this, the article assesses the past decade in terms of normative power engagement, internationalization and comparison. The article then argues that rethinking power and actorness involves reassessing global theory and pouvoir normatif in action. The article concludes by setting out three ways of developing the NPA in its second decade: macro-approach, meso-characterization and micro-analysis. Following the suggestion of Emanuel Adler, Barry Buzan and Tim Dunne, the article sets out how studying the normative foundations of power through the NPA combines the normative rethinking of power and actorness with the structural changes of a globalizing, multilateralizing and multipolarizing era.

The EU, ASEAN and Interregionalism

“…Through the empirical analysis of the EU's promotion of its regionalism experience to ASEAN, I determined that 'power' is an inappropriate term with which to describe the EU as an international actor. This is first and foremost due to the fact that the term 'power', as defined and developed by scholars such as Galtung (1973), Etzioni (1961) and Poggi (2001), has often relied on a triad of power types involving political, economic or normative power, or force, reward and ideational power (Manners, 2013), which cannot be applied to the EU's external policies towards ASEAN. This is primarily because the exercise of power and power transference often assume a degree of asymmetry in a relationship which is not present in the EU-ASEAN context (Galtung, 1973).…”

“…The majority of scholarly research on power has presented definitions which involve three types of power (Poggi, 2006;Manners, 2013). These definitions have been variations of the same overarching concept, which has included power exertion involving aggressive, military or coercive behaviours; rewarding or encouraging behaviours; or attractive or ideational behaviours.…”

Bati Balkan Romanlari: Normati̇f Güç Avrupa'nin Turnusol Testi̇?

“…In this framework, he explained that the concept of normative power should be seen more of an ideal type that actors aim to attain, to which the EU comes closest to in real life. Writing on this multi-dimensional understanding of normative power, Manners (2013) himself noted that the concept of normative power referred to a multitude of things at once: a normative form of power exercised by a specific actor; a particular and ideational (i.e., non-material) form of power; and normative power as an ideal type (of actor).…”

The AIIB and China’s Normative Power in International Financial Governance Structure

“…The concept of normative power is formulated by Ian Manners through a series of articles (Manners 2002(Manners , 2006(Manners , 2013. Based on his research of the EU's foreign policy, Ian Manners argues that the EU has 'evolved' into a form of governance which 'transcends Westphalian norms' (Manners 2002: 240).…”