No description available.

This study examines the debates that were held in the LIBE committee between 2018 - 2020 in relation to Polands judicial reforms. EU claims that the reforms are incompliant with the treaty of the european union but Poland have so far not backed down. The situation have exposed problems in how the EU should act when a member state won’t act according to the treaty. And also exposed problems with the practical implementation of article 7. The study utilizes an inductive argumentation analysis and seeks to weigh the evidence, sustainability and relevence of the arguments made by the participants in those debates. The results from this initial analysis will then be analysed from two theoretical standpoints. On Arguments put forward from the EU:s standpoint the theory of normative power will be used. The theory has its focus on EU as a normative power who spreads their values by other means than force or threat of military force. Rather through trade and legally binding agreements that often include human rights commitments. The arguments from Polands standpoint will be analysed using the theory of neoclassical realism. Which goes beyond traditional realism by seeking to explain irrational behavior that don’t correlate with simple utility maximizing theories. The analysis shows that both standpoints of the debate corralates to a large degree with the theories used to analyse them. In doing so it pinpoints a growing problem inside the EU when the big bang expansion of 2004 together with the growing presence of populist opinion makes for a more diversified union compared to the earlier more homogenous one deeply roted in liberal values.

<p>The purpose with this essay was to examine how the European Union is working totransfer norms to states they signed an agreement with and provide support for inframe of the Barcelona process and the Tacis programme. The theory which weused was Ian Manners (PhD in Political Science) theory of "the EU as a uniquenormative power". The aim was to examine whether the EU - which Manners mean- has had a normative power to influence states to change. We used a qualitativeapproach through the use of a multiple case study and qualitative text and contentanalysis. The States which formed the basis of our study were within the BarcelonaProcess; Morocco and Tunisia as well as Azerbaijan and Armenia funded by theTacis programme. To this end, we were to answer the following questions: Can weidentify transfer of norms in the written bilateral agreements with these states, andare there any normative demands? Can we on the basis of our study answerwhether the EU holds a normative power to influence these countries to change, inaccordance with the normative theory? The agreements that we studied was thebilateral agreements that the EU signed with these States. In order to makeManners five norms (peace, freedom, democracy, rule of law and human rights),which he argues that EU is based on measurable; we used the Freedom Housefreedom index, and also by a historical study the development of the country. Theresults we found were the following; in all the studied bilateral agreements wefound clear - but to varying degrees - the transfer of norms. Although it differs indegree of regulatory requirements and also in the formulation of how the country iscommitted to abide by and comply with the normative requirements differaccording to the agreements, we can find the so-called "carrot and stickrelationship" that Manners believes that the EU use in the transfer of norms. Threeof the states that we investigated under the Freedom House freedom index did notdeveloped in a democratic way did, and the positive steps taken cannot be directlytraced back to the EU's efforts. It may also be due to other States or other forcesinfluence. We can’t, through our study confirm that Manners is right in these statesbut we can’t either rule out the possibility that the EU through the writtenagreements has changed the norms of the state in question, although progressseems to go very slowly.</p> / <p>Vi ämnade med denna uppsats undersöka hur den Europeiska Unionen arbetar för att överföranormer till stater man slutit avtal med och ger stöd till inom ramen för Barcelonaprocessenoch Tacis-programmet. Den teori som vi använde var Ian Manners teori om "EU som en uniknormativ makt". Syftet var att undersöka om EU - som Manner menar - har haft en normativmakt att påverka stater till normativ förändring. Vi använde ett kvalitativt angreppssätt medhjälp av en multipel fallstudie och kvalitativ text- och innehållsanalys. De stater som utgjordegrunden för vår studie var inom Barcelonaprocessen; Marocko och Tunisien samtAzerbajdzjan och Armenien inom Tacis-programmet. Följande frågeställningar skullebesvaras; Kan vi se överföring av normer i de skrivna avtalen med dessa stater, ställs detnormativa krav på länderna? Kan vi utifrån vår undersökning ge svar på huruvida EU inneharen normativ makt att påverka dessa länder till förändring? De avtal som vi studerat var debilaterala avtal som EU tecknat med dessa stater mellan 1995 och 1996. För att göra Mannersfem normer, (fred, frihet, demokrati, rättsstat och mänskliga rättigheter) som han menar attEU grundar sig på, mätbara, så använde vi å ena sidan Freedom House frihetsindex, menockså en historisk studie av landets utveckling. De resultat vi kom fram till var att vi i alla destuderade bilaterala avtalen fann tydliga - men i varierande grad - överföringar av normer frånEU till länderna. Vi kan i avtalen se att man ställer krav på att länderna ska utvecklasdemokratiskt och verka för mänskliga rättigheter, fred och rättssamhället. Vi kan även finnaspår av det s.k. "piska och morot förhållande" som Manners menar att EU använder sig av irelationen med andra stater.Tunisien, Armenien och Azerbajdzjan har enligt Freedom House frihetsindex inte utvecklasmot en demokratisk riktning till 2006. I Marocko fann vi att en viss positiv förändring skett ienlighet med EU:s normer och att vi även kan se en marginell utveckling mot demokratiskaprinciper. Resultatet visar även att vi inte kan härleda de få positiva steg som tagits, till EU:sBarcelonaprocess och Tacis-program. Den positiva utveckling vi kan se kan också bero på attandra aktörer eller krafter haft påverkan på landet i fråga. Det vi kan säga är att EU inomramen för Barcelonaprocessen och Tacis-programmet är benägna att verka normativt mot defyra staterna, då de ställer krav på normativ förändring genom de undersökta avtalen. Vad vidäremot inte kunnat bekräfta genom vår studie, är att EU - i enlighet med Manners normativateori - verkligen kunnat förändra normer i de stater vi studerat.</p>

This study aims to examine the EU’s normative power through the Common Commercial Policy (CCP) before and after the Treaty of Lisbon entered into force. The study is a comparative study and was carried out through a document study of official documents and treaties. To pursue the aim the following questions were asked: What are the differences and similarities within the EU's common trade policy before and after the introduction of the Treaty of Lisbon and does the Treaty of Lisbon increased the normative ambition of the EU?   In this study Ian Manners theory Normative Power Europe has been categorized into direct normative actions and indirect normative actions. The empirical material is based on literature, primary document, Official Journal of the European Union and EU: s webpage.   The conclusions of this study show that the Treaty of Lisbon has changed the constitutional basis for the common commercial policy in several ways. The CCP has more room after the Treaty of Lisbon to develop and take on direct normative actions. The major difference is that the CCP now endorse all the Union’s objectives, principles and values which give the CCP more opportunities to set normative requirements and gain normative power.

Since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 the Moldovan government has become both fragile and unpredictable. With a high susceptibility to external pressures, the country has fallen into a limbo between democracy and autocracy and is today classified as a hybrid regime. Since Moldovas entry to the EU's Neighborhood Policy and the Eastern Partnership in 2008, the country's sensitivity to social and political change has become evident. The EU has acted as a normative power in the country in several ways by pursuing a neighborhood policy that seeks to consolidate European norms. This study aims to explain how the EU can be seen as a normative power in Moldova through the theoretical framework of Normative Power Europe (NPE). The thesis also aims to descripture how the EU uses the five basic principles of NPE regarding peace, freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law as normative guidelines for influencing the country's political direction. A conclusion can be drawn that the EU appears to be using the neighborhood policy tools to consolidate European norms through sanctions, association agreements and treaties, thus keeping Moldova's political development in an iron fist.

During the last ten years the European union has faced several new challenges, especially with regards to the democratic backsliding that has been happening in its member states. Poland, which has had a positive democratic development and has been seen as being in the forefront of positive democratic consolidation, has since 2015 changed course towards becoming authoritarian regimes. EU has acted against this development, but this hasn’t stopped Poland in growing even more in an authoritarian direction.The aim of this paper is to examine what actions the European union has taken to stop the democratic backsliding in Poland through normative power, and what are the reasons for the failure of EU’s earlier sanctions against Poland. The conclusion of this thesis is that EU has used all the tools at its disposal to deal with Poland, without much success. What can be seen is that the member states in the union don’t always agree on defending the same values. But also, that the legal procedure to pursue a member which has gone against the core values of the union, are far too complicated. But it is not only dark, but as brighter future might also be ahead of EU, as its latest actions against Poland might be having an effect.

Ever since its inception, the EU’s main goal has always been to spread its values of democracy and freedom. The EU’s success in spreading these values has been great until recently when some of the member states have gone through an autocratization. The clearest case of this is Hungary, which can no longer be seen as a democracy, due to its autocratization. Seeing as the EU has certain demands in democracy for countries that want to join the EU, it is strange that they let Hungary continue to be a part of the EU.  This paper will examine what the EU has done to hinder Hungary’s autocratization through its normative power. The results show that the EU has penalised Hungary in terms of sanctions and an article-7 procedure. Though, the EU is far away from throwing Hungary out of the EU, mostly because it is near impossible for the EU to exclude Hungary from the EU. The only way that Hungary can leave the EU is by their own choice.

The purpose with this essay was to examine how the European Union is working totransfer norms to states they signed an agreement with and provide support for inframe of the Barcelona process and the Tacis programme. The theory which weused was Ian Manners (PhD in Political Science) theory of "the EU as a uniquenormative power". The aim was to examine whether the EU - which Manners mean- has had a normative power to influence states to change. We used a qualitativeapproach through the use of a multiple case study and qualitative text and contentanalysis. The States which formed the basis of our study were within the BarcelonaProcess; Morocco and Tunisia as well as Azerbaijan and Armenia funded by theTacis programme. To this end, we were to answer the following questions: Can weidentify transfer of norms in the written bilateral agreements with these states, andare there any normative demands? Can we on the basis of our study answerwhether the EU holds a normative power to influence these countries to change, inaccordance with the normative theory? The agreements that we studied was thebilateral agreements that the EU signed with these States. In order to makeManners five norms (peace, freedom, democracy, rule of law and human rights),which he argues that EU is based on measurable; we used the Freedom Housefreedom index, and also by a historical study the development of the country. Theresults we found were the following; in all the studied bilateral agreements wefound clear - but to varying degrees - the transfer of norms. Although it differs indegree of regulatory requirements and also in the formulation of how the country iscommitted to abide by and comply with the normative requirements differaccording to the agreements, we can find the so-called "carrot and stickrelationship" that Manners believes that the EU use in the transfer of norms. Threeof the states that we investigated under the Freedom House freedom index did notdeveloped in a democratic way did, and the positive steps taken cannot be directlytraced back to the EU's efforts. It may also be due to other States or other forcesinfluence. We can’t, through our study confirm that Manners is right in these statesbut we can’t either rule out the possibility that the EU through the writtenagreements has changed the norms of the state in question, although progressseems to go very slowly. / Vi ämnade med denna uppsats undersöka hur den Europeiska Unionen arbetar för att överföranormer till stater man slutit avtal med och ger stöd till inom ramen för Barcelonaprocessenoch Tacis-programmet. Den teori som vi använde var Ian Manners teori om "EU som en uniknormativ makt". Syftet var att undersöka om EU - som Manner menar - har haft en normativmakt att påverka stater till normativ förändring. Vi använde ett kvalitativt angreppssätt medhjälp av en multipel fallstudie och kvalitativ text- och innehållsanalys. De stater som utgjordegrunden för vår studie var inom Barcelonaprocessen; Marocko och Tunisien samtAzerbajdzjan och Armenien inom Tacis-programmet. Följande frågeställningar skullebesvaras; Kan vi se överföring av normer i de skrivna avtalen med dessa stater, ställs detnormativa krav på länderna? Kan vi utifrån vår undersökning ge svar på huruvida EU inneharen normativ makt att påverka dessa länder till förändring? De avtal som vi studerat var debilaterala avtal som EU tecknat med dessa stater mellan 1995 och 1996. För att göra Mannersfem normer, (fred, frihet, demokrati, rättsstat och mänskliga rättigheter) som han menar attEU grundar sig på, mätbara, så använde vi å ena sidan Freedom House frihetsindex, menockså en historisk studie av landets utveckling. De resultat vi kom fram till var att vi i alla destuderade bilaterala avtalen fann tydliga - men i varierande grad - överföringar av normer frånEU till länderna. Vi kan i avtalen se att man ställer krav på att länderna ska utvecklasdemokratiskt och verka för mänskliga rättigheter, fred och rättssamhället. Vi kan även finnaspår av det s.k. "piska och morot förhållande" som Manners menar att EU använder sig av irelationen med andra stater.Tunisien, Armenien och Azerbajdzjan har enligt Freedom House frihetsindex inte utvecklasmot en demokratisk riktning till 2006. I Marocko fann vi att en viss positiv förändring skett ienlighet med EU:s normer och att vi även kan se en marginell utveckling mot demokratiskaprinciper. Resultatet visar även att vi inte kan härleda de få positiva steg som tagits, till EU:sBarcelonaprocess och Tacis-program. Den positiva utveckling vi kan se kan också bero på attandra aktörer eller krafter haft påverkan på landet i fråga. Det vi kan säga är att EU inomramen för Barcelonaprocessen och Tacis-programmet är benägna att verka normativt mot defyra staterna, då de ställer krav på normativ förändring genom de undersökta avtalen. Vad vidäremot inte kunnat bekräfta genom vår studie, är att EU - i enlighet med Manners normativateori - verkligen kunnat förändra normer i de stater vi studerat.

The European Union together with other international organizations have a significant role in creating world order, promoting international cooperation, and strengthening international security. For this reason, the EU has been interested in finding a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict which is one of the EU's top foreign policy issues. EU's failure to implement a two- state solution for Israel-Palestine puts the EU in a challenging position and questions its role as an international peacemaker. The starting point of the research problem is covered by the following question: How can the EU's failure to implement a two-state solution for the Israel-Palestine conflict be explained by realism and liberalism? The research problem is studied with the help of realism and liberalism, which are central schools in the political discipline; international relations. The chosen method for this research is a qualitative case study. The results shows that partly internal gaps within the EU, the US role in the conflict, monopolies of violence, disagreements among the Palestinian movements and the absence of binding international law are behind the EU's failure to implement a two-state solution. Despite this, the EU maintains stability in the region by being the main donor to the Palestinians and Israel's primary trading partners.