The Importance of Cooperative Leadership in the European Union in the Light of the Theory of Neoliberal Institutionalism
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/HiP.2021.027Keywords
współpraca międzynarodowa, neoliberalny instytucjonalizm, dyplomacja europejska, Wspólna Polityka Zagraniczna i Bezpieczeństwa, przywództwo kooperatywneAbstract
The model of cooperative leadership is an alternative solution to leadership understood in terms of domination, hegemony or imposing its own political will on other entities participating in the system of mutual connections. The specificity of the political system of the European Union gives great importance to both intergovernmental and supranational mechanisms, while the key role in shaping this system is still played by the Member States. Although the treaty provisions ensured formal equality of states, the importance of Germany as an informal leader of the Community is increasingly becoming the subject of political debate about the EU. Taking into account the assumptions of neoliberal institutionalism related to both the key position of states and the great importance of institutions guaranteeing the transparency of their activities, as well as taking into account the long-term benefits of cooperation, the article defines the concept of leadership in the context of state cooperative behavior. The adopted methodological and theoretical framework allowed for a detailed analysis of Germany’s influence in the EU, especially in the field of diplomatic activities.
The aim of the article was to define the main determinants of the role of Germany as the EU leader, which bases its leadership on cooperation with other Member States, recognizing and respecting institutional solutions that limit the possibility of implementing individual priorities and guarantee transparency of actions for common interests, and in the long run legitimize the role of the state as an informal leader who represents a common position negotiated in the forum of the institutions. Using the institutional and legal method, the method of existing research and a case study (peace negotiations under the Normandy format), the main assumptions were verified and it was confirmed that the determinant of Germany’s leadership is not only its political and economic potential, but also the ability to cooperate and provide information to EU institutions on activities in the implementation of the priorities of the Common Foreign and Security Policy. The approach based on respect for common interests and transparency of actions strengthened Germany’s image as a leader.
References
Auswärtiges Amt. (2020). Foreign Minister Maas on the Cabinet Decision Concerning the National Programme for Germany’s Presidency of the Council of the European Union. Pobrane z: https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/en/newsroom/news/maas-programme-german-eu-presidency/2356954.
Avery, G.C. (2004). Understanding Leadership. London: Sage.
Axelrod, R. (1984). The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic.
Baldwin, D.A. (1993). Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate. New York: Columbia University Press.
Clark, I. (2005). Legitimacy in International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
García, A. (2007). Cooperative Leadership for a Sustainable World. Wasan Project, Integral Education for Global Responsibility. Stuttgart: Breuninger Stiftung.
Grieco, J. (1990). Cooperation among Nations. Europe, America and Non-Tariff Barriers to Trade. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Hellmann, G., Wolf, R. (1993). Neorealism, Neoliberal Institutionalism, and the Future of NATO. Security Studies, 3(1), 3–43.
Helwig, N. (2020). Germany in European Diplomacy: Minilateralism as a Tool for Leadership. German Politics, 29, 25–41.
Hohenstedt, M. (2017). The Usefulness of Neoliberal Institutionalism. Establishment of International Organizations. Pobrane z: https://www.grin.com/document/385718.
Kegley, C. (2008). World Politics: Trend and Transformation. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning EMEA.
Keohane, R. (1984). After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Keohane, R. (1990). Multilateralism: An Agenda for Research. International Journal, 45(4), 731–764.
Keohane, R. (2011). Neoliberal Institutionalism. W: C.W. Hughes, L.Y. Meng (red.). Security Studies: a Reader (s. 157–164). New York: Routledge.
Keohane, R., Martin, L. (1995). The Promise of Institutional Theory. International Security, 20(1), 39–51.
Keohane, R., Nye, J. (2001). Power and Interdependence. New York: Longman.
Kozub-Karkut, M. (2015). Liberalizm: charakterystyka teorii w świetle założeń A. Moravcsika. W: E. Stadtmüller, Ł. Fijałkowski (red.). Normy, wartości i instytucje we współczesnych stosunkach międzynarodowych (s. 71–86). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Rambler.
Księżniakiewicz, M. (2015). Niechciany partner. Rola Niemiec w rozwiązywaniu konfliktu na Ukrainie. Biuletyn Niemiecki, 57, 1–16.
Mogherini, F. (2017). Speech by Federica Mogherini at the Munich Security Conference. Pobrane z: https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage_en/20832/Speech%20by%20Federica%20Mogherini%20at%20the%20Munich%20Security%20Conference.
Natorski, M., Pomorska, K. (2016). Trust and Decision-Making in Times of Crisis: The EU’s Response to the Events in Ukraine. Journal of Common Market Studies, 55(1), 54–70.
Packer, G. (2014). The Quiet German. Pobrane z: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/01/quiet-german.
Puglierin, J., Franke, U.E. (2020). The Big Engine that Might: How France and Germany Can Build a Geopolitical Europe – ECFR/332. Pobrane z: https://ecfr.eu/publication/the_big_engine_that_might_how_france_and_germany_can_build_a_geopolitical_e/.
Stein, A. (1990). Why Nations Cooperate. Circumstance and Choice in International Relations. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Sus, M., Wiejski, P. (2020). Siła państw członkowskich Unii Europejskiej. Warszawa: Polska Fundacja im. Roberta Schumana.
Thomas, W. (2001). The Ethics of Destruction: Norms and Force in International Relations. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Wallace, H., Wallace, W. (1995). Flying Together in a Larger and More Diverse European Union. Hague: Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid.
Waltz, K. (1954). Man, the State and War. A Theoretical Analysis. New York: Columbia University Press.
Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Boston: Addison-Wesley.
Waltz, K. (1990). Realist Thought and Neorealist Theory. Journal of International Affairs, 44(1), 21–38.
Wersje skonsolidowane Traktatu o Unii Europejskiej i Traktatu o funkcjonowaniu Unii Europejskiej. (2012). Dziennik Urzędowy Unii Europejskiej, 2012/C 326/01.
Wheeler, N. (2014). Transcript: Theories of International Relations – Liberalism. Pobrane z: https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-social-sciences/government-society/courses/mooc/2014/neo-liberalism.pdf.
Whyte, A. (2020). Neorealism and Neoliberal Institutionalism: Born of the Same Approach?. Pobrane z: https://www.e-ir.info/pdf/22166.
Zawadzka, S. (2020). Przywództwo Niemiec w Unii Europejskiej w świetle teorii ról społecznych oraz wybranych działań minilateralnych. Przegląd Geopolityczny, 34, 80–102.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Historia i Polityka
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Nicolaus Copernicus University fully respects the right to privacy and protection of personal data of all authors. The authors’ personal data is not used for commercial and/or marketing purposes.Stats
Number of views and downloads: 285
Number of citations: 0