Was European Political Cooperation a failure?

Résumé du document

Tsakalloyannis has described the European Political Cooperation (EPC) in 1991 as ?Two decades of slow progress and immobilism'....Even the federalists have blamed and pointed fingers at the EPC for its inefficiency and described its intergovernmental process as a failure. However, these tough assessments need to be further investigated and studied. A rigorous methodological framework has been put into action. This paper does not aim at highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of the EPC in accordance with personal criteria or beliefs. What is to be considered in this situation is the extent to which the outcomes have been met or in other words, whether the initial goals have been realized. If the majority of the objectives have been met, then EPC will be viewed as a success. If a majority of the objectives have not been realized, one has no choice but to accept that EPC was and is a constant failure. In this report, I will first focus on the initial expectations of the players that formed the EPC through the process of a detailed analysis of the declared aims of EPC since its initial launch. Secondly, I will focus on determining if EPCS's outputs, from 1970 to 1992 have been achieved based on the expectations. In other words, whether the pre-determined goals have been realized. In this regard, it is essential to note that two kinds of outputs will be addressed. The outputs are:
a. Procedural outputs and
b. Policy outputs.

My report will focus on demonstrating the fact that most of the EPC outputs did match the stated goals. In conclusion, EPC was all but a failure.

Extraits

[...] An additional difficulty lies in the fact that, in the policy realm more than in any other, one should remember that EPC was not operating in a vacuum. In a changing international context, characterized by the succession of rather calm periods and crises, EPC was certainly subject to its moving environment. There is no denying that EPC underwent several crises landmarked by episodic public disclosure of its relative inability to deal efficiently with delicate international situations. For example, the Arab- israeli conflict wreak havoc on EPC; the sanctions decided on South Africa were more than once said to run the risk of seeing EPC fall apart, especially after the British unilateral decision to dismantle sanctions. [...]

[...] the San Jose process). In addition to that, the EPC positive role into the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) in the 1970s has been largely praised throughout EPC literature (Nutall, 1992). The Member States have also been able, within the EPC framework, to reach common positions on Middle Eastern issues and to institute a dialogue with Arab countries. By doing so, Member States succeeded in determining harmonized views, concerted attitudes, joint action, and aligned positions. As far as failures are underlined, the EPC policy towards South Africa is often cited as an example of relative reverse for EPC to the extent that the code of conduct and the communitarian sanctions agreed on had limited impact on apartheid. [...]

[...] On this ground, it was too often quickly concluded that EPC was a failure. However, the intergovernmental basis of EPC had been agreed on since the very begining. There was no surprise about it. And when considering the initial objectives of exchange and consultation, there is no denying that EPC was a success. In terms of exchange and consultation, EPC widely overcome the initial minimum standards that had been set. Øhrgaard describes the “early emergence of a coordination reflex” among Member States. [...]

[...] EPC's outcomes faced with the stated aims First, EPC outcomes from 1970 to 1992 will be considered and assessed in their organizational dimension, through the lense of “procedural objectives”. Second, a brief review of what member States concretely produced in terms of policies in the framework of EPC will be made and compared with the “policy objectives”. Procedural objectives Concerning EPC organizational dimension, many criticisms have been formulated, in particular from those who expected a truely integrated political Europe, relying on supranational institutions. [...]

[...] It did result in a socialization process and raised political solidarity among Member States. As described by Øhrgaard, EPC moved from being a "communauté d'information" to a "communauté de vue", and in some rare but existing cases, even a "communauté d'action". Of course, one can disagree with the processes initially chosen for EPC. It is true that EPC came out to disclose little more than a declaratory policy, and little more than a reactive policy. It is true that EPC focused more on peripheral issues. [...]