The EU, migration and contestation: the UN Global Compact for migration, from consensus to dissensus

Abstract

The 2015 migration crisis has shaken the EU system to the point that no agreement on the matter was possible. In this line, it was decided to bring to the international level the need to agree on a migration norm: the UN Global Compact for Migration. This article analyses the EU and Member States dynamics of dissent vis-à-vis substantive and procedural norms. It shows the existence of four structural factors within EU foreign policy that enhances consensus. That is the existence of a common position on the matter, the expert culture constraining the behaviour of parties, the EU community of practices and the role of the chair. The presence of these factors explain why the EU contained Hungary's objections to the Compact, but its absence also explains the domino effect triggered by the Austrian withdrawal. At the end, EU norms such as effective multilateralism and sincere cooperation were contested.

Conclusions on contestation of EU foreign policy: diverse causes, various modes and multiple effects?

“…The vast majority of articles in this Issue demonstrate a rather deleterious effect of contestation on the EU's ability to engage in policy-making (formulation and/or implementation) in the global arena. Indeed, the cases of the Global Compact on Migration or nuclear non-proliferation policyrespectively developed in this Special Issues by Badell (2021) and Herrera (2021) show that the internal disagreement between EU Member States results in a lack of clarity of the EU's policy position and norm promotion on the international level. Consequently, the absence of cohesion amongst Member States to push forward a common position on the global stage leads to a weakening of norms internationally.…”

“…A similar parallel of external and internal factors leading to contestation of EU foreign policy can be observed in the case of migration governance. Badell (2021) shows how the contestation of the United Nations Global Compact on Migration increased both due to external relations with the fierce criticism from the US President on the Global Compact (somewhat parallel to the Paris Agreement's contestation), as well as a lack of internal consensus amongst EU Member States on the issue of migration.…”

“…In most contributions of the Special Issue, the substance of contestation actually lies in the formulation of the policy within the EU and among its various actors (Badell, Eliasson & Garcia-Duran, Herrera, Lecocq, Petri & Biedenkopf, Terzi). Some analyses combine the formulation dimension with its implementationfor example when Badell (2021) analyses how both the internal policy formulation or consensus-building on the EU's stance of the global compact for migration is contested as well as the EU's policy stances enacted in the international arena (similar in Terzi/Arctic policy ( 2021) and Herrera/non-proliferation policy ( 2021)). This hints at the entangled nature of internal and external contestation practices.…”

“…CSOs (Eliasson & Garcia-Duran 2021), local stakeholders in third countries (Hasić, Džananović, & Ramić Mesihović (issue)) and national and EU institutions with their communication on particular policies (e.g. Council of the EU in Badell, 2021). Above that, several contributions stressed that internal contestation is often linked to populist actors and parties (e.g.…”

The Return of Intergovernmentalism? De-Europeanisation and EU Foreign Policy Decision-making

“…This conclusion has implications well beyond academic debates. The EU's ability to exert influence abroad is already weakened by the member states' reluctance to transfer greater foreign policy competences to the EU level and by the diversity of values and regime types among the member states (Meunier and Vachudova 2018;Badell 2021). If de-Europeanisation is real and not reversed, and the theoretical expectations outlined above are correct, then it will be increasingly difficult for the EU to build a foreign policy identity based on shared interests and values, to act coherently, and thus to achieve the 'strategic autonomy' sought by many political leaders across Europe.…”