In this essay the aim was to investigate how the EU is trying to function as a democracy promoter in three particular countries, the so called candidate-countries Croatia, Macedonia and Turkey. The aim was also to analyze if there exist any differences in how the EU functions in these countries as a democracy promoter with a focus on how acts of democracy promotion is taken place. In order to fulfil the purpose of the essay two questions were addressed, how does the EU perform in promoting democracy in the three candidate-countries Croatia, Macedonia and Turkey? And also, is it possible to identify any differences in how the EU functions as a democracy promoter in those three countries? The method used to fulfil purpose and answering research-questions was qualitative text-analysis.  The results of the study were that the EU does perform in a number of ways to promote democracy in the three countries. The main differences are that the EU is using primarily political tools in Croatia and Macedonia which are channelized top-down and economic tools in Turkey channelized mainly top-down to promote democracy. The extent between the tools used differs.

The thesis aims to unravel the relationship between the EU's enlargement strategies and democratization in the Western Balkan countries by looking on the impact of the strategies on changing democracy levels in two empirical cases: the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Serbia. Over more than a decade, the effect of the conditionality tool on democratization has been curbed by an insufficient emphasis placed on pro-democratic reforms and by the role of security concerns which were often prioritized over aims directly linked to democracy promotion. Grounded in the conflicting objectives theory, the thesis demonstrates that the recently employed strategy appropriately sequencing goals while prioritizing democratic transition over security concerns is more effective in inflicting domestic democratic change. Subsequently, the following necessary and sufficient conditions for a successful sequencing strategy were defined: strong emphasis on democracy-related goals combined with clearly outlined temporal perspective, and corresponding action of international actors.

Presidents of the United States and other American policymakers have throughout history cited democracy promotion as one of the chief goals of American foreign policy, and the current administration of George W. Bush has been no exception. However, and notwithstanding the habitual endorsement of this objective by US administrations, the subject of democracy promotion has received relatively little academic attention. This study aims to correct this gap in the literature by considering two questions relating to United States democracy promotion. First, have the efforts of the US to spread democracy to other countries met with success? Second, is promoting democracy truly a priority of American policymakers, or is it rather window dressing cynically aimed at winning public and congressional support for foreign policy? I begin by defining the terms democracy and democracy promotion. I then use three recent case studies to answer the two questions outlined above, the first of which focuses on President Reagan’s policy towards Nicaragua. In the second case study I consider President Clinton’s policy towards Haiti, while the third deals with President George W. Bush’s policy towards Colombia. The evidence I present points to the conclusion that the United States has not been successful in its efforts to promote democracy in other countries, and that spreading democracy abroad is at best a secondary goal of American foreign policy. The evidence presented in the thesis also demonstrates the utility of foreign policy analysis-based approaches to the study of international relations.

The aim of this Thesis is to analyse Türkiye’s progress and setbacks withinits association process and quest for EU membership. By examining Chapter23 in annual reports released by the European Commission for the years2013, 2018 and 2023, the role of the EU as a democracy promoter isdiscussed and questioned. In order to do this, this Thesis basis it’s theoreticalframework around Samuel Huntington’s (1991) theory of democratisation,which is applied and questioned. This Thesis uses a qualitative methoddesign to comprehensively analyse how the European Union (Commission)perceives Türkiye’s progress, and to be able to answer if over the last tenyears even any progress is made.

Partant du constat de la constitution de la promotion de la démocratie comme enjeu des relations internationales et de politique étrangère, la présente recherche s’interroge sur les politiques menées en la matière par l’Union européenne dans le cadre des relations avec ses voisins méditerranéens, particulièrement le Maroc et la Tunisie. L’analyse se concentre sur l’Instrument européen pour la démocratie et les droits de l’homme, sur la période 2007-2012.<p>L’objectif est de comprendre et d’expliquer les pratiques des différents groupes d’acteurs impliqués dans ces politiques, au sein de la Commission (DG Relex/SEAE, DG Devco, délégations) et du Parlement (sous-commission DROI).<p>La position défendue est la suivante :les pratiques européennes de promotion de la démocratie au Maroc et en Tunisie sont fonction de l’identité des groupes institutionnels qui les mettent en œuvre. Pour chaque groupe institutionnel, peuvent être mis en évidence des normes, intérêts et ressources qui contribuent à défendre et renforcer l’identité institutionnelle. Dès lors, des pratiques qui peuvent paraître incohérentes au premier abord (pourquoi agir au Maroc et pas en Tunisie ?pourquoi créer l’IEDDH et, parallèlement, évincer l’objectif de promotion de la démocratie de la coopération bilatérale avec la Tunisie ?) prennent tout leur sens lorsqu’on parvient à restituer la fonction sociale qu’elles assurent.<p> / Doctorat en Sciences politiques et sociales / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished