Normative Evolution in Europe: Small States and Republican Peace

Abstract

Understanding today's EU requires a prism which is attentive to the interactions between the polity-building and world-inhabiting facets of the emerging polity. We cannot separate developing a theory of the EU as a polity from determining its placement in the world. Norms of cooperation become crucial in this endeavour: as they search for credible tools to interpret and master a changing Europe in a changing world, actors distil their experience in close and repeated cooperation with a view to enhancing their knowledge of and influence over complex games of advanced hyper-dependence. The normative underpinnings of today's European construction can be approached in three steps. First, drawing inspiration from Thucydides, we demonstrate that the norms that count are neither religious in origin nor based primarily on custom and tradition. Next, we point to the significance of small states in norm development by explaining that the norms in question have been influenced by the practices and rationalizations associated with small-states behaviour, adaptability and survival. Finally, we suggest that the norms in question have evolved in interaction with a powerful current in Euro-Atlantic political thought and sensibility: republicanism. The paper identifies two main sets of norms in today's EU: one stemming from previous experiences within the international system and the other developing with the new polity-in-the-making.

The Transformations of Social Democracy

“…These three stages can be explained using the three-phase pattern, which is more broadly applicable to the influence of rules and values. The first stage, according to Lavdas (2010), is the emergence of a new rule (which actually means the reappearance of a transformed/mutated form of a rule or value); the second stage includes the phase of widespread acceptance of the value rule; and the third stage includes its internalization. The first two stages are separated by a critical 'tipping point,' at which a critical mass of relevant actors adopts a particular strategy.…”

Small states and the EU: Does the EU promote secession within EU Member States?

“…Bearing in mind that no organization can turn upside down the world's power relations, small states understand that "within the EU they can exert more influence and achieve more than they would outside it" (Antola, 2002: 74). Small states in Europe have seen that "their relative standing on the international scene has been strengthened (as a result of EU membership and its amplifying effects for a member's voice) while norms they have championed (emphasis on the civilian and cultural projection of identity, on international law and institutions, and so on) have to a large extent become distinguishing features of the Union's own international identity" (Lavdas, 2010). According to Wivel, "[s]mall state influence is protected by formal EU institutions making traditional power capabilities less important and by codifying what is deemed acceptable behaviour within the EU" (Wivel, 2010: 23).…”

“…According to Wivel, "[s]mall state influence is protected by formal EU institutions making traditional power capabilities less important and by codifying what is deemed acceptable behaviour within the EU" (Wivel, 2010: 23). The strengthening of their voice (Lavdas, 2010) is due also to "the formal equality of small and big Member States, including the lack of a European equivalent to the UN Security Council" (Wivel, 2005: 399), which ensures a unique voice opportunity for everyone in the decision-making process. Particularly because in the EU most of the decisions are reached through consensus.…”