The Southern African Development Community (SADC), formerly known as the Southern African Development Coordination Conference (SADCC), is an organization of Southern African states initially formed to reduce economic dependence on South Africa (then an Apartheid state) and to harmonize and coordinate development in the region The vision and mission of SADC reach well beyond the harmonization of development within the region. It extends to fields that include political stability, peace building, the maintenance of security and justice as well as economic cooperation. The attainment of these goals requires well co-ordinated regional mechanisms; as such over the past decade member states have paid particular attention to the possibility of attaining these goals through regional integration. The transformation from SADCC to SADC indicated that the body would no longer be a loose association (conference) of states but rather a regional body that would have a legally binding effect on its member states. The question is, when the member states assembled in Windhoek, August 1992, did they create an institutional framework, and policies that would have enough legal force to ensure that the institutional agenda of integration is not defeated by member states? The argument of this dissertation is that the Treaty and the policies established afterwards contain principle imperfections that are self defeating for the pursuance of regional integration. The work will begin by discussing regional integration in general, highlighting the historical origins of SADC as well as the role of the African Union. The work will then discuss the dimensions and functioning of SADC, laying the foundation for a proper critique on how the institutional framework contains inherent weaknesses that eventually hinder the progression of SADC. The dissertation ultimately will discuss and benchmark the European Union against SADC, in an attempt to extract important lessons for the progression of SADC. / Thesis (LLM) North-West University, Mafikeng Campus, 2011

This thesis addresses the gap in the literature of the Gulf Cooperation Council and its distinct relations with the European Union by identifying the obstacles preventing the development of GCC–EU interregionalism, in two case studies: energy security and economic cooperation in the Mediterranean. By bringing an empirical application of interregionalism to the study of GCC–EU relations, the thesis draws an original comparison that is based on a Hettne and Söderbaum typology of regionness (2000) to determine the GCC’s and the EU’s types, levels of actorness and the subsequent type of interregionalism resulting from the interaction between their kinds. The theoretical construct of the thesis underlines interregionalism as a tool for consolidating the organisations’ identities and actorness and increasing their capacities at exerting influence within the changing dynamics in the regional and global theatres. In addition, this thesis sheds light on the obstacles that impede the development of interregional cooperation and the mechanism to overcome them. As such, the thesis considers the dynamics instigating the renewed interest in deepening GCC–EU interregional relations; outlines the tools available at the GCC and the EU, and highlights the implications of the Arab Spring and GCC–Asia ties on GCC–EU relations. By avoiding benchmarking the EU as a model, the thesis purports that cooperation in energy security is ongoing and is opening avenues for promising partnerships in renewables, energy sustainability and efficiency. On the other hand, the divergence in the organisations’ levels of actorness, economic strategies and the unwillingness to assess policies are major hindrances against a successful partnership in the Mediterranean. Asymmetries in actorness, bilateralism, the American influence and the growing GCC–Asia ties do impact the development of the relations; albeit, they do not impede the multilateral framework from producing unintended outcomes in other areas of the relations.

The post-Cold War era has seen a restructuring of the institutions of global governance and an intensification of international relations, to which one of the most important responses has been a reinvigoration of regionalism and regionalisation. The proliferation of regionalism has led to increased relations between regional groups in different world regions, and the EU has been central to the development of this new interregional phenomenon. This thesis sets out to test the theory of interregionalism by looking at how the EU has strategically pursued interregionalism, and at how this has subsequently worked in practice. To best achieve this objective the thesis develops a more sophisticated framework of analysis; complex interregionalism. This framework allows for a detailed investigation of how the EU has simultaneously engaged in bilateral and interregional relations in Latin America. The thesis explores the tensions between interregionalism as a strategy and interregionalism in action, principally by drawing lessons from the EU's relations with Latin America, and Mercosur in particular. The most general foundation for this analysis is the study of International Political Economy (IPE), particularly the extensive literature on regional integration and the emerging literature that deals specifically with interregionalism. The thesis starts by presenting a comprehensive framework for analysis of interregional relations using the theory of interregionalism. The theory of interregionalism, ascribes a series of motivations and impacts that interregionalism. should exhibit, all of which are replicated in EU complex interregional strategy. The EU is found to have a consistent and coherent complex interregional strategy that it employs across three world regions: Asia, Africa and Latin America. The EU, notably the Commission, is pursuing an ambitious complex interregional strategy in each region that encompasses different levels of relations with different actors, but a strategy that always centers on the pursuit of pure interregionalism. Whilst the thesis details the EU's pursuit of this consistent complex interregional strategy with all three of the aforementioned world regions, it is the presence of the Andean Community, Central American Common Market and Mercosur in Latin America that marks the region out for deeper analysis. Complex interregional strategy in Latin America is applied consistently to all three regional integration vehicles, confirming the EU desire to pursue pure interregionalism, most notably with Mercosur. Analysis of EU relations with Mercosur reveals a core tension between strategy and action, notably that Commission strategy is not translated into action, as witnessed by the change towards bilateral relations with Brazil in 2007. The thesis finds that more important than the EU inability to translate strategy into action, is its inability to foster regional integration in its partners and encourage more coherent counterparts for the future pursuit of pure interregionalism.

<p>Uppsatsen har till syfte att undersöka huruvida MERCOSUR är en aktör på den internationella arenan och om dess tilltagande utveckling kommer kunna bidra till ett ökat interregionalt samarbete. Uppsatsen ska uppnå syftet genom att svara på två frågeställningar: 1) Kan MERCOSUR definieras som en aktör på den internationella arenan? 2) Kan MERCOSUR ses som ett nytt regionalt block och därmed ingå i interregionala samarbeten?</p><p>Uppsatsen går igenom nya regionala blockens uppkomst och vad som skiljer dem åt från andra frihandels avtal. Uppsatsen är en komparativ analys som använder sig av två modeller för att svara på frågeställningarna. Den ena är Björn Hettnes dynamiska modell som beskriver en förändringsprocess. Den andra modellen består av fem kriterier, vilka definierats av Bretherton och Vogler och definierar ett aktörsbeteende. Denna typ av modell är, till skillnad från Hettnes, en statisk modell som används för att definiera grundläggande egenskaper. I samband med Bretherton och Voglers kriterier undersöks fundamentala begrepp, så som actorness och regioness, för att på underlätta analysen om huruvida MERCOSUR agerar som en aktör. För att kunna förstå uppkomsten och utvecklingen av regionala block undersöks hur EU skapades och uppkomsten av Europeiska värderingar samt en introduktion till regionala sammanslutningar i Latinamerika. EU är det äldsta regionala blocket vars gemensamma politik innefattar både ekonomiska och politiska mål. EU stödjer hela den regionala utvecklingen i Latin Amerika och dess interregionala politik bygger på dialog och samförstånd vilket gynnar sammanslutningarna i kontinenten. Speciellt har utvecklingen i MERCOSUR varit av intresse. MERCOSUR har blivit sedd som ett alternativ till det USA drivna projektet FTAA.</p>

Uppsatsen har till syfte att undersöka huruvida MERCOSUR är en aktör på den internationella arenan och om dess tilltagande utveckling kommer kunna bidra till ett ökat interregionalt samarbete. Uppsatsen ska uppnå syftet genom att svara på två frågeställningar: 1) Kan MERCOSUR definieras som en aktör på den internationella arenan? 2) Kan MERCOSUR ses som ett nytt regionalt block och därmed ingå i interregionala samarbeten? Uppsatsen går igenom nya regionala blockens uppkomst och vad som skiljer dem åt från andra frihandels avtal. Uppsatsen är en komparativ analys som använder sig av två modeller för att svara på frågeställningarna. Den ena är Björn Hettnes dynamiska modell som beskriver en förändringsprocess. Den andra modellen består av fem kriterier, vilka definierats av Bretherton och Vogler och definierar ett aktörsbeteende. Denna typ av modell är, till skillnad från Hettnes, en statisk modell som används för att definiera grundläggande egenskaper. I samband med Bretherton och Voglers kriterier undersöks fundamentala begrepp, så som actorness och regioness, för att på underlätta analysen om huruvida MERCOSUR agerar som en aktör. För att kunna förstå uppkomsten och utvecklingen av regionala block undersöks hur EU skapades och uppkomsten av Europeiska värderingar samt en introduktion till regionala sammanslutningar i Latinamerika. EU är det äldsta regionala blocket vars gemensamma politik innefattar både ekonomiska och politiska mål. EU stödjer hela den regionala utvecklingen i Latin Amerika och dess interregionala politik bygger på dialog och samförstånd vilket gynnar sammanslutningarna i kontinenten. Speciellt har utvecklingen i MERCOSUR varit av intresse. MERCOSUR har blivit sedd som ett alternativ till det USA drivna projektet FTAA.

The thesis "Role of the European Union in Latin America: a Change after the Rio Summit?" focuses on alternations of the position of the European Union (EU) in Latin America after the Rio Summit (1999) which was supposed to be a milestone in European-Latin-American relations. The main objective is to identify and explore the EU role and its trends which result not only from the economic links but also the actions of the EU institutions. Factors of unequal position of Latin America in mutual relations, as well as the impact of the interregional strategy of the EU are of special focus. The thesis is organized as follows. The chapter 1 lays conceptual and theoretical grounds and develops the methodology of "the Atlantic triangle" to frame the issue in interregional relations concepts. The chapter 2 analyses the EU and Latin America as subjects of interregional relations. As for the Latin-American region, its social-economic features, development strategy orientation and its impacts and subregional integration are examined. The EU region subchapter is focused on the interregional strategy, its design and development, as well as the multidimensional nature of the relations and its component dynamics (trade, political dialogue, development cooperation). The Chapter 3 identifies and explores external factors which influence the European-Latin-American ties. According to the triangle methodology, the inevitable influence of the United States (the Anglo-American region in the thesis concept) is studied separately from the global environment and other regions. The Chapter 4 quantifies the economic links of the Latin-American region. It examines the shares and trends in trade, investment, development cooperation transfers and migration. The Chapter 5 studies the institutionalised relations within the Atlantic triangle. It classifies the existing links of the Latin-American region (treaties, fora), assesses the role of interregional summits, compares the political approaches from the United States (US) and the EU in trade, development and security areas and studies in detail the EU impact on several aspects of Latin-American institutional configuration (e.g. regional integration). Among others, the most important conclusions drawn in the last chapter are the following: The unequal position of Latin America in relations with the EU can be attributed to its development characteristics as well as its fragmentation that has recently been progressing. It results in week coordination capability of Latin-American countries on the subregional level and absence of effective coordination on regional level. The interregional strategy of the EU aimed at building "Birregional Strategic Partnership" has not met Latin-American expectations. Although the situation in both regions and global environment has changed substantially from the strategy initiation, the strategy concept remains unaltered which is reflected the mutual relation stagnation. The EU strategy has not proved to be effective in fostering the EU role in Latin America. The free trade negotiation balance of the EU and the US is unfavorable to the EU which has not been able to conclude the association agreements (a basic tool to build the partnership) with its major Latin-American partners (MERCOSUR). The mid/long-term trends in the economic positions on the Latin-American markets have been also unfavorable to the EU in favor to the US and Asian partners. The ineffective strategy did not reverse nor stop such trends. However, the EU role is still not negligible in Latin-American aspirations to diversify its external links from the US influence. The relations with the EU display evident counter-balancing features. The EU also plays the role of "external federator" on subregional level but its influence is rather limited. The overall conclusion is that the Rio Summit did not start closer cooperation. The weakening economic relations are not supported by an effective interregional strategy from the EU. The role of the EU is therefore diminishing.

Climate change is currently one of the greatest challenges of our times. Due to the urgency of the issue, a cooperation on climate mitigation has been developing at different levels in order to reach reduction emission targets. In parallel, the European Union has developed interregional ties with other regions of the globe as a strategy to strengthen its power. More specifically, it has developed its relations with the region of Latin America and the Caribbean, in many fields including climate change mitigation. The interregional relationship between the European Union (EU) and Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) on climate mitigation is of interest because it concerns two crucial regions in the field of climate change: the European Union is one of the world’s largest leaders in the fight against climate change and Latin America is of the richest regions in terms of biodiversity as well as resources, yet one of the most endangered by climate change. The present thesis analyses EU-LAC interregional relations on climate mitigation. It takes a specific case study analysis of the EU-LAC EUROCLIMA programme, the largest programme for climate mitigation between the EU and LAC. The objective of the article is to investigate the extent towards which EUROCLIMA can be considered as a practical example of EU-LAC interregional cooperation on climate mitigation, from a constructivist approach. The study is based on a discourse analysis of public reports and interviews on EUROCLIMA. The results of the empirical analysis of EUROCLIMA demonstrate that the programme features the main attributes of successful EU-LAC cooperation on climate mitigation and of EU-LAC complex interregionalism. Hence, EUROCLIMA can be considered as a clear example of EU-LAC interregional cooperation on climate mitigation. The paper draws new conclusions and implications on the way to define EUROCLIMA and provides a new perspective for the scholarship on EU-LAC relations. EUROCLIMA can be specifically defined as an EU-LAC complex interregional cooperation.

Europoje prasidėję regioninės integracijos procesai palaipsniui apėmė daugelį pasaulio regionų. Sustiprėję savo viduje, pastarieji ėmė vis intensyviau sąveikauti tarpusavyje, tokiu būdu tarpregioninius santykius įtvirtindami kaip integralią užsienio politikos dalį. Išaugus Lotynų Amerikos politinei ir ekonominei reikšmei, ES suaktyvino savo vykdomą užsienio politiką šio regiono atžvilgiu. Tačiau išryškėję valstybių narių interesų skirtumai padidino atotrūkį tarp oficialios ES retorikos ir konkrečių praktinės politikos veiksmų. Toks Lotynų Amerikai teikiamo dėmesio netolygumas, paskatino kitus didžiuosius tarptautinės sistemos veikėjus iš naujo susidomėti šio regiono valstybėmis. / European regional integration processes have gradually covered most of the world regions. First of all, regions were strengthened internally and after that they began increasingly interact with each other, thus consolidating interregional relations as an integral part of their foreign policy. European Union decided to activate foreign policy actions in Latin America due to its growing economical and political significance. However, EU member’s different interests have increased the gap between the official statements of EU and concrete practical policies. Such inequality of attention to Latin America led other great players of the international system to renew their interest in the region.

The main objective of our doctoral thesis is to evaluate the role of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) and its political, economic and socio-cultural pillars as a political process in interregional (multilevel) governance in Eurasian relations. We have conducted a unique case study that is based on a holistic qualitative interpretation by means of a postpositivist perspective and discourse analysis. Given the transitional and multidimensional nature of interregionalism as a political process, we are applying the (neo)realist balancing with elements of (neo)liberal multilateralism and social constructivism as the basic theoretical approach. Based on this structure, we have come to the conclusion that (1) ASEM as an interregional policy framework is too flexible (in terms of its scope and agenda-setting) and too inclusive (in terms of its enlargement). (2) Given the inability of ASEM to actively respond to various challenges and to implement properly its policies through its currently available instruments, this Eurasian interregional process cannot be regarded as a fully-fledged contribution the global (multilevel) governance. (3) Therefore interregionalism as part of the ASEM process will not lead to a creation of an "Eurasian Century", despite the undeniable need to identify corresponding supranational political regimes that will efficiently promote a balance of power between Europe, Asia and America. (4) Interregionalism as a political approach cannot be demoted to a loose and informal interaction of nation states or regions only because the current challenges in international relations require an organized and results-oriented framework for cooperation. (5) Additionally, the existing bilateral relations between individual countries in Asia and Europe will continue to be the key and most efficient form of solving various issues and challenges between the states.

As transnational crime has no regard to borders, competent authorities need to overcome the barriers the barriers of national jurisdictions and cooperate together. The UN and regional organisations, including the EU and ASEAN, have required States to criminalise transnational crime, including terrorism, and to implement effective measures to prevent, investigate, detect, prosecute and punish these offences. They have also required States to cooperate; cooperation being one of the key measures to ensure the effectiveness of States’ action.The regional level is considered to be the most effective to harmonise legislation as well as to adopt and implement mechanisms of cooperation for security purposes. However, the nature and level of cooperation vary a lot depending on the regional framework considered. In the EU, this cooperation has been legally framed and institutionalised as well as associated with harmonisation of Member States’ legislation. By contrast, cooperation remains much more informal in ASEAN and is not associated with harmonization of legislation. Despite its low level of integration, ASEAN plays an increasing role in the region by leading efforts to create a regional legal architecture. ASEAN is the most successful regional grouping in the “developing world” and has a particular approach vis-à-vis terrorism. Both regions have therefore a legitimate ground and purpose in learning from each other (comparative regionalism) and in working together (interregionalism) in order to ensure – up to the capacities of each regions – the best response to terrorism.The differences between the two regions are due to various factors, among which the unalike degree of trust between their respective Member States and their capacity to cooperate. Despite its absence in the constitutional treaties, “mutual trust” is a concept constantly used in the AFSJ, especially when police and judicial cooperation is at stake. Whereas its precise status, nature and consequences is still debated, mutual trust seems to have reached an institutional level and to have been transformed into legal expectations in the EU. By contrast, although trust is repeated in ASEAN declarations and objectives, it is less visible in practice between ASEAN Member States. Mutual trust is a fundamental yardstick in developing cooperation mechanisms. The highest the confidence in each other’s systems is, the more efficient the cooperation. Mutual trust serves to build bridges between national jurisdictions. In the EU, such mutual trust is based on common values and norms and implies the development of common minimum standards in the field including human rights norms. It rests of course also on other factors such as mutual understanding of the threat and each other’s particular legislation.The compared regional analysis will highlight notable discrepancies in each region’s approach. The EU has gone through a tremendous institutional evolution by communitarising the AFSJ. The EU has adopted norms to facilitate cooperation based on common standards and mutual trust. With the numerous types of cooperation mechanisms, the EU adopted a two-fold objective, namely facilitating the cross-border cooperation and harmonising the HR standards. By contrast, ASEAN is still governed by the so-called ‘ASEAN Way’ based on consultation and consensus rather than on bargaining and give-and-take leading to deals enforceable in a court of law; on non-institutionalised processes; and on practice-based rules. These differences involve a clear lack of trust between Member States. This method is slowly and partially shifting towards a more institutional and rules-based approach. This comparative analysis will allow to conclude on the convergences and differences in the conditions and level of trust in each of the two regions in the field of terrorism and on their impact on the level of cooperation.Based on this comparison, interregional challenges and prospects will be focused on. The EU has adopted a comprehensive approach combining human rights and security measures. Preserving such a balance when interacting with external actors is a serious challenge, especially when States tend to privilege security measures. The EU must adapt its objectives, priorities and means to the particularities of ASEAN while respecting its own standards. In this regard, mutual trust is an important factor in developing interregional collaboration. Since 1972, the EU developed economic ties with different ASEAN Member States and with the ASEAN Secretariat itself. Both regions have increasingly engaged in an interregional dialogue on different issues of interest, including terrorism. Here again, the criteria/conditions and the level of mutual trust developed between the two regions will be examined. / Doctorat en Sciences juridiques / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished