january/june 2011 international role of the european union

JANUARY/JUNE 2011

International Role of theEuropean Union in the

Western Balkans?Measuring Consistency

and Coherence of ValueExpression in the EU's

External RelationsDamir Kapidiic*

Original scientific paperUDC 327(061.1 EU:497-15)Received in December 2010

The aim of this paper is to examine the international role of the European Union in regardto the Western Balkans based on constructivist ground and drawing on an analysis of

discursive practices. Focusing on questions of consistency and coherence in role conceptby analyzing expressions of values and norms in foreign policy documents, conclusionsare drawn regarding the EU's international role towards the region. The EU's foreign

policy is found to be very consistent throughout the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty.Nevertheless, it is clearly lacking cross-institutional coherence. The emphasis on rational

objectives over normative issues further undermines the Union's impact to inducedomestically driven reforms.

Key words: European Union, role conception, consistency, values, Qualitative Content Analysis

1. Introduction est amendment to the founding documents of theUnion, is seen as an important step towards furtherstrengthening of the EU's international role. Theimportance given to principles and values in defin-ing the Union's foreign policy is evident through-out Title V of the Lisbon Treaty: General Provi-sions on the Union's External Action and SpecificProvisions on the Common Foreign and SecurityPolicy. Values, norms and principles are said toguide, motivate, and regulate EU's international

The European Union has long been seeking todefine its role in the world, and especially towardits close neighborhood. Creating a stronger anddistinct international profile has been a major issuein all recent reforms. The Treaty of Lisbon, the lat-

* Damir Kapidzic, Doctoral candidate and Assistant Lecturerand Researcher at the Faculty of Political Sciences of theUniversity of Sarajevo

5

6 CROATIAN iNTERNATIONAL RELATIONS REVIEW

actions and those of the member states. The fol-lowing Article (Treaty of Lisbon, 2007, Treaty onthe EU, Title V, Chapter 1,Article 21) underscoresthis:

"The Union's action on the internationalscene shall be guided by the principles whichhave inspired its own creation, development andenlargement, and which it seeks to advance inthe wider world: democracy, the rule of law, theuniversality and indivisibility of human rightsand fundamental freedoms, respect for humandignity, the principles of equality and solidarity,and respect for the principles of the United Na-tions Charter and international law."

In continuation, safeguarding and promotingEU values, fundamental interests, security, inde-pendence, and integrity are cited as aims that de-fine the Union's external actions. Consistency andcoherence also feature prominently in EU docu-ments as an important policy goal:

"the Union shall ensure consistency betweenthe different areas of its external action and be-tween these and its other policies. The Counciland the Commission, assisted by the High Rep-resentative of the Union for Foreign Affairs andSecurity Policy, shall ensure that consistencyand shall cooperate to that effect" (Treaty of Lis-bon, 2007, Treaty on the EU, Title V, Chapter 1,Article 21).

An inconsistent an incoherent European Unionis likely to be perceived as a cacophony of differ-ent institutional and national interests, be it Coun-cil, Parliament, French, German, Greek or other,where the loudest and most potent voice wins theday. This would severely undermine the conceptof the EU as a vital international actor. The Unionthus has a particular interest in profiling itself in-ternationally in a consistent and coherent mannerthrough a recognizable European internationalrole or foreign policy identity. The Western Bal-kans presents itself as an ideal case for assessingthe Union's foreign policy. The European Union isvery active in all countries throughout the region,and is a major international player that could as-sert considerable domestic influence. All WesternBalkan countries are also thoroughly integrated invarious EU programs receiving large amounts offunding through pre-accession instruments. Mostimportant, all the countries have a clear European

perspective, meaning that they are invited (and en-couraged) to eventually become members of theEU, even though they are at different stages on theroad to accession. All this lets us conclude that theUnion has a particular interest in profiling itselftowards the region in a consistent and coherentmanner through a distinct international role of theEuropean Union.

This paper shall adopt an ontologically con-structivist approach, emphasizing the importanceof role in international relations, as well as nor-mative principles and values that guide foreignpolicy. Role or actorness is not viewed as a funda-mental quality of an international entity, one thatis pre-determined by material factors and capa-bilities, but one that is constructed through action,discourse and communication. Elgstrorn men-tioned that the field of research on morality, normsand foreign policy is "currently receiving quite alot of scholarly attention," in particular "the rolethat normative ideas may have for foreign policybehavior" (2007, p. 467). I intend to continue inline with this academic trend and look at Euro-pean foreign policy as a "cognitive regime [... ] anapproach in which the interests, values, ideas andbeliefs of actors are themselves the central ana-lytical focus" (Tonra 2003, p. 738). Constructingentities actorness and illustrating identity impliessome sort of expression of attributes and this hap-pens foremost through language. In a world wheremeanings are produced and reproduced frequently,language has a central role in conveying thoughtand social meaning. Therefore, this paper shallapply a discursive analytical approach, focusingon language and discursive practices. Sedelmeier(2003, p. 15) highlights the centrality of the EUcommunicative processes and the importance of"actual policy practice, including discursive prac-tices, such as European Council declarations orCommission documents" arguing that they iden-tify and exemplify important aspects of the EU'sinternational role by "giving norm-based justifi-cations for common actions." Wrever states thatan "overall foreign policy line has to be able toarticulate the state's 'vision of itself"', officialtexts used for analysis cannot be dismissed as be-ing 'purely rhetoric' (1998, p. 107). For this rea-son, it is necessary not to dismiss words, languageand communicative action as unimportant or ofsecondary value; we need to take them seriously(Risse 2004).

JANUARY/JUNE 2011 7

The additional value of this paper is in ana-lyzing the "relatively stable collection of commu-nicative practices and rules defining appropriatebehavior" (Risse 2002, p. 604) that define inter-national institutions. It is interesting to see howstable communicative processes of the EU to-wards the Western Balkans are, particularly roleconception through norms and values. Contestingvalues and norms are always present in EU poli-cies, thus it is important to stress those that showup over and over again, eventually being endorsedthrough legal and political practices and becom-ing part of the EU international role (Lucarelli2006). Through asserting consistency (stabilitywithin a short timeframe) and coherence (stabil-ity throughout EU-institutions) of the EU's valueexpression in foreign policy, it is possible to drawconclusions on its position towards the region itultimately seeks to integrate. The research ques-tion guiding this paper is whether the EuropeanUnion expresses a consistent and coherent foreignpolicy identity towards the Western Balkan states.The focus shall thereby rest on language as a pri-mary form of expressing social meaning and anypre-linguistic or 'hidden' meanings shall be dis-regarded (Larsen 2002). Official articulation shallserve as the sole source of analysis, where non-formal, off-the-record and personal exchanges arenot taken into account. This will help to draw at-tention to the self-depiction the EU wants to putforward and omit unclear and subjective views,personal opinions, and attitudes. Cases shall beofficial EU documents as put forward by the threemajor decision-making institutions of the Union:the Council of the European Union, the EuropeanCommission, and the European Parliament. Thepaper rests on some basic ontological assump-tions. First, the European Union is viewed as a sin-gle-unit of analysis and its constitutive elements(nation-states, advocacy groups, bureaucracy ... )are sidelined. The interests of all constitutive el-ements are seen to be represented in statementsmade by the three main governing institutionalbodies ofthe Union, the Council, Commission andParliament. This way the EU is unified vertically,although retaining its horizontal (institutional) dif-ferences. The second assumption is that the Euro-pean Union matters in the world and especially inthe Western Balkans, thereby occupying a certainposition in international relations and rejectingrealist (non- )interpretations of the ED. And thethird is in line with constructivist reasoning, thatforeign policy is decisively influenced by values,

norms, and principles. The questions of consistentand coherent value expression will be empiricallytested by applying the method of qualitative con-tent analysis to EU foreign political documentsconcerning the Western Balkan states. A set ofprominently featured European values includedin the Union's founding documents, and identifiedin academic literature will be analyzed in a largenumber of official documents from the EU's threekey institutions (Council, Commission, and Par-liament), covering a time period before and afterthe entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. Thesewill be used as a framework for the analysis. Theyinclude the main value of peace, and core valuesof human rights, liberty and freedom, democracy,the rule of law, equality, and solidarity. Other newand complex values such as sustainable develop-ment, good governance, liberal market economy,and comprehensive security are also included. Anobvious inconsistency and incoherence of val-ues expressed through documents would point toproblems in constructing the EU as a legitimateunitary actor and could undermine efforts to takeon a more decisive international role. Inconsisten-cy and incoherence could also point to a shift inpower balance between the institutions followingthe entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty.

To summarize, this paper aims to examine theinternational role the European Union attributes toitself within the Western Balkans. Based on con-structivist ground, and drawing on a qualitativecontent analysis of discursive practices, questionsof consistency and coherence in role conceptionare examined through value expressions, normsand principles in foreign policy documents.

2. Role conception, consistency and coherence

The EU's goal to define and secure itself a place inthe world ultimately entails constructing a Euro-pean Union's international role as a recognizablesystem of collective worldviews, norms and objec-tives to function as orientation for self-referenceand action. The issues this paper addresses belongto a broader debate on the role' of the EuropeanUnion as an actor in international relations. Effortsto define the European Union as an internationalactor have been present for almost four decadeswith academic debates being closely intertwinedwith institutional changes of the EU. Starting fromFrancois Duchene's 1973 concept of the Europe-

8 CROATIAN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS REVIEW

an Communities being a civilian force aimed atspreading civilian and democratic standards inter-nationally (in Orbie 2006), to Sjestedt's conceptof ,actomess' and Allen and Smith's 'presence' (inGinsberg 1999), early approaches seek to under-stand if the EU can be conceptualized as an inter-national actor. With the Union gaining ever morerelevance in the international arena and affirmingits presence, the debate that followed addressedthe question what kind of actor the EU is. Accord-ing to Lucarelli (2007, pp. 252-253) three mainareas of this debate can be identified. First the"honestly rather sterile debate on the differencesbetween 'civilian', 'normative', 'structural', 'gen-tle', etc., power", second the possibility of sucha civilian or normative power to possess militarycapacity, and third the debate related to the ideaof 'EU distinctiveness' in international relations.To analyze the distinctiveness argument Lucarelli(2007, p. 257) suggests utilizing the concept ofrole, defining it as "patterns of expected or ap-propriate behavior and are determined by both anactor's own conceptions about appropriate behav-ior and by the expectations of other actors." Re-ferring to Holsti (1970, p. 240), one can add roleperformance, encompassing concrete actions anddecisions governments take, as a third factor, not-ing that all three are intertwined and situated in aconstant feedback-loop. Acting on role-concepts,actors introduce intrinsic norms and values to theirforeign policy statements, thus further strengthen-ing the normative structure of their internationalrole.

This paper shall focus on the subjective di-mension of the EU's international role and on thenotion of role as normative self-expectation. Itwill further apply this self-conception to the re-cent EU foreign policy actions towards the West-ern Balkans. The analysis is essentially an assess-ment of the EU's capacity to put forward a uni-fied (and yes, distinct) image towards the worldin order to make its foreign policy more present.It is possible to find reference to desired roles un-derpinned by normative values in numerous ma-jor EU documents and treaties. For instance theLaeken Declaration on the Future of the EuropeanUnion calls for Europe to playa leading and stabi-lizing role worldwide building on humane values,liberty, solidarity and above all diversity as wellas solidarity and sustainable development (LaekenDeclaration 2001). Aggestam defines (self-) con-ception of the role as "normative expectations of a

certain kind of foreign policy behavior expressedby the role-beholders themselves" where "actorsplay a crucial part in defining their own roles"(2004, pp. 88-89). 'Normative expectations' cre-ate a certain 'image' of appropriate objectives,interests, and functions in the international arena,this 'image' being the actors own role-conception.This does not render the analysis of EU foreignpolicy discourse a theoretical exercise, for, asLarsen points out, "at the very least, the dominantEU discourse can be seen as an expression of thelevel of common language between EU actors'discourses, which is of interest when analyzingthe scope for joint action within the EU" (2002,p. 288). "The crucial point therefore is that thereis a dominant EU discourse which articulates theEU as an international actor" (Larsen 2004, p. 69).Focusing on role concept we are able to operation-alize self-conception as it implies how normativequalities are transformed into verbal statements oninternational behavior and orientation and expect-ed foreign policy action (Aggestam 1999, 2004).Analyzing verbal statements by investigating thenormative foundations of the EU's role concep-tion, it is possible to draw conclusions to the in-ternational image the Union seeks to establish inofficial communication. Aggestam points out thatthe role is "conceived of in terms of a character-istic behavioral repertoire" capturing elements ofcontinuity in foreign policy (2004, p. 88).

It is exactly such elements of continuity thatthis paper seeks to find out, thus evaluating theconsistency and coherence of the EU's norma-tive self-conception. Even documents referringto different policy areas should display certainamount of consistency and coherence in norma-tive expressions, since a stable normative founda-tion should have impact throughout the Union'sforeign policy. As only relatively stable and con-tinuous communicative practices define appropri-ate behavior and thus the role, the consistency andcoherence of the EU's foreign policy discourse iscrucial. Consistency and/or coherence have beentouched upon by many authors as representing achallenge to formulating Europe's internationalrole (Allen and Smith 2007, Diez 2005, Sedel-meier 2003, Biscop 2004, Nuttall 2005, Wagnerand Hellmann 2001, Barbe and Herranz 2005,Johansson-Nogues 2007, amongst others) but sofar have not been analyzed concerning the EU'srole conception. Allen and Smith recall a criti-cal paradox that, although pursuing a very active

JANUARY/JUNE 2011 9

foreign policy in 2006, the EU's activity "did notalways add up to the development of consistentor coherent strategies" (2007, p. 163). Sedelmeier(2003) cautions of repeated inconsistencies in for-eign policy undermining achievements reachedon EU international identity with regard to humanrights conditionality policy. Wagner and Hellmann(2001) warn that institutional overlapping of for-eign policy competences creates contest amongEU-institutions leading to visible incoherencyand undermining the Union's perception in theworld. Diez (2005, p. 614) has similar concernswhen asking if the European Commission, Parlia-ment, and Council pursue different norms and in-terests. Nuttall finally argues that "consistency inEU foreign-policy making is desirable, if not forits own sake, then for the credibility of the Unionas a foreign-policy actor and thus its capability ofdefending its interests and values on the interna-tional stage" (2005, p. 94). Consistency and co-herence in foreign policy are, by all means, cru-cial and the quest for achieving them has also beenvery present in official European Union discourse.The Luxembourg Report of October 1970 statesthat " ...Europe must prepare itself to exercise theresponsibilities which to assume in the world, [...this] is both its duty and a necessity on accountof its greater cohesion and its increasingly impor-tant role." In the Communique of the Paris Sum-mit in December 1974 "the Heads of Govemrnentconsider it essential to ensure progress and over-all consistency in the activities of the Communi-ties and in the work of political co-operation ..."The Single European Act of 1987 provided that"the external policies of the European Commu-nity and the policies agreed in European PoliticalCo-operation must be consistent. The Presidencyand the Commission, each within its own sphereof competence, shall have special responsibilityfor ensuring that such consistency is sought andmaintained." This was amplified, and slightly al-tered, in the Maastricht Treaty "The Union shallin particular ensure the consistency of its externalactivities as a whole in the context of its exter-nal relations, security, economic and developmentpolicies" (from Nuttall 2005, pp. 94-96). Morerecently, the (unsuccessful) Constitution for Eu-rope and the Lisbon Treaty adapted almost identi-cal formulations while referring to consistency atotal of 36 times, for example: "The Union shallensure consistency between the different areas ofits external action and between these and its otherpolicies. The Council and the Commission, as-

sisted by the High Representative of the Union forForeign Affairs and Security Policy, shall ensurethat consistency and shall cooperate to that effect"(Treaty of Lisbon, 2007, Treaty on the EU, TitleV, Chapter 1, Article 21). The goal of realizing aconsistent foreign policy has been requested inEU documents throughout the past 40 years andthe analysis on whether it has been reached and towhat degree is far overdue.

So how do we operationalize consistency andcoherence in regard to our research question? IsEurope's self-defined role in the Western Balkansan ad hoc affair, or does it follow a distinct pat-tern? Consistency, characterized as stability innorm expression within a given timeframe, pro-vides us with an indication of the degree of po-litical commitment to certain foreign policy goalsand the persistence of intrinsic values influenc-ing such commitment. Coherence, described asstable norm expression across EU-institutions,gives us insight into the (non- )fragmentation ofexternal policy discourse within the Union, inter-institutional dialogue, and the underlying norma-tive influences affecting separate decision-makingbodies of the EU. An ideally consistent and coher-ent foreign policy discourse and role conceptionwould thus show minimal change in expressingobjectives, interests and values over a relative pe-riod, and a unanimous degree of expression alonginstitutional lines. For the EU to possess a credibleinternational role, both consistency and coherencehave to be achieved.

3. Values in the ED foreign policy

A distinct set of common values is presented asbeing at the core of European foreign policy-mak-ing and identity construction. These common val-ues, interconnected and mutually reinforcing, cre-ate an "EU discourse on joint values, and not juston decision-making procedures" (Larsen 2004, p.73). Many authors have touched upon the subjectand attempted to identify the normative structureunderlying European policy. Risse (2004, p. 170)describes the European institutions as trying toconstruct a post-national identity emphasizingdemocracy, human rights, market economy, wel-fare state, and cultural diversity as constitutivevalues. Harnisch and Maull (2001, p. 4), focusingon civilian powers, mention six intertwined ob-jectives: multilateralism, rule of law, democracy,


peace, social justice, and interdependence; whileMerlingen, Mudde and Sedelmeier (2001, p. 63)emphasize the Union's firmly established role inthe protection of fundamental rights. Mannersand Whitman (2003, p. 398) argue the EU's in-ternational identity to be constructed around spe-cific interpretation of principles including peace,liberty, democracy, rule of law and human rightsas well as social solidarity, anti-discrimination,sustainable development and good governance.Citrin and Sides (2004, p. 183) consider Europe's'civic religion' as encompassing a "demonstratedcommitment to democracy, a tolerance for mi-norities, and a spirit of transnational cooperation"along with support for a welfare state and exten-sive social justice, and a commitment to multilat-eralism. Referring to European strategic culture,Kagan (2004, p. 55) recalls negotiation, diploma-cy, education, commercial ties, international law,and multilateralism as the qualities it is constitutedof. According to Biscop (2004, p. 5) a character-istic of the EU is a broad, comprehensive notionof security based on interdependence of political,socio-economic, ecologic, cultural and militarysecurity. Relating to the root causes of conflict,these are defined as lack of "sustainable economicdevelopment, democracy and respect for humanrights, viable political structures, and healthy en-vironmental and social conditions, with the capac-ity to manage change." Finally Aggestam and Hill(2008, p. 99) point to the inherently multiculturalidea of 'unity in diversity' inherent to the EU, aswell as ideals of democracy, tolerance and respectfor human rights. It is hard not to notice that quitea few values and normative implications keep re-appearing throughout works of several authorshinting to some degree of salience in the EU'snormative role expression.

In order to analyze consistency and coherencein the European Union's expression of norma-tive principles, we have to agree on a set of val-ues considered prominent to the EU. Drawing onconstitutive documents of the EU itself (foremostLisbon Treaty) and academic literature (Manners2002, pp. 242-243; Manners 2006, pp. 32-38; Lu-carelli and Manners 2006, pp. 203-205), as wellas an initial analysis of 15 randomly selected EUforeign policy documents'; I identify eleven fun-damental values of the EU. These include the cen-tral value of peace, basic values of human rights,liberty and freedom, democracy, and the rule oflaw, as well as equality, solidarity and more recent

and complex values, i.e. sustainable development,good governance, liberal market economy, andcomprehensive security. Along this set of elevenvalues I shall analyze the discursive internationalrole conception of the European Union. Furtherelaboration and interpretation of the values intoforeign policy principles, objectives, and ulti-mately normative expressions will be spelled outin the Codebook to be used for analysis. Activelypromoting and defending of such values throughpolicy practice (also discursively) in a consistentand coherent manner will clearly define Europe'sinternational role (Tonra 2003, Sedelmeier 2003).

4. The EU foreign policy in the WesternBalkans

The Western Balkans (WB) is a high priority issuefor EU foreign policy. First of all the region issurrounded by EU states and designates an 'emptyarea' unregulated by common laws close to the verycenter of the ED. Related to this, and of greatersignificance, the region is viewed as unstable and apotential threat to security in Europe. The wars andupheavals of the 1990's have devastated most WBcountries. Institutional and material infrastructureis in dire need of being strengthened and societaltrust needs to be rebuilt. The region provides afertile breeding ground for corruption, smugglingand organized crime. Ifleft to its own, the countriescould grow isolated and pose even more significantrisks to the EU and individual member states.The EU, guided by its founding principles, assertits commitment to promote and advance peace,freedom, democracy and rule of law through itsforeign policy, and the most obvious beneficiarieswould be the states in the immediate neighborhood,including the Western Balkans. 3 The primary vehiclefor such involvement is the ongoing enlargementprocess, with the overarching EU membershipperspective for all Western Balkan countries that isbeing continuously repeated in official statements.In effect the Union is attempting to replicate thefirst 'eastern-enlargement' process in regard toSouth-East Europe founded on conditionality,compliance and reward as well as norm-export.This policy is albeit met with limited success.Noutcheva (2009) argues that non-compliance inthe case of Western Balkan countries cannot beexplained by the rational conditionality model andby domestic adoption costs of democratizationto incumbent political leaders, as was the case in

JANUARY/JUNE 2011 11

Central-Eastern Europe. Instead, she points tothe recent EU enlargement policy lacking strongnormative foundations as a source of legitimacy.The external legitimization for required reformsis build on efficiency arguments around which itis difficult to rally local political support. Instead,local leaders then tend to revert to domestic sourcesof legitimacy, no matter whether these are based onrationality or identity, sometimes in resistance toexternal views on statehood conditions. Noutchevaargues that the EU policy towards the WesternBalkans, based on rational motives instead of values,has not produced the necessary domestic consensusof compliance to conditionality requirements. "Theoutcome has been less voluntary compliance andmore imposed compliance with implications forthe EU's international identity" (Noutcheva 2009,p. 1081).

It is compelling to examine if the EU foreignpolicy towards the Western Balkans is indeedlacking normative legitimacy. Do normative val-ues give way to efficiency arguments in foreignpolicy documents? Another question asks whetherinstitutional changes introduced with the Lisbonhave had effect on value expression in EU foreignpolicy documents.

5. Case selection and codebook

I shall focus on discursive practices in theEU's external relations, i.e. look at and analyzeforeign policy documents of the EU. Thus a caseis an official, publically available EU policy docu-ment -- defined in broadest terms -- that is direct-ed towards and concerns countries of the WesternBalkans. The document selection was made ac-cording to four criteria: 1) European institutionand document type, 2) policy area in concern, 3)timeframe, and 4) country/regional focus. Docu-ments of the three most prominent and influentialEuropean institutions are selected: the Council ofthe European Union, the European Commission,and the European Parliament. All three institu-tions are involved in preparing and adopting theEU legislature. By focusing on them, on what theyrepresent and to whom they respond, it is possibleto cover a broad spectrum of interests and pref-erences in EU policy-making. Barbe and Herranz(2005) describe the European Parliament, apartfrom being the only directly elected EU institu-tion, as always considering its duty to be closelylinked to defending European values and topics

of public interest. The Commission is often de-picted using the words of Catherine Day" as being"the only body paid to think European" and actsaccordingly initiating most EU regulations andworking with the intention of strengthening theUnion. The Council is seen as an extension of themember states' national politics into the Europeanarena and it acts in an intergovernmental, multi-lateral fashion. The following types of documentswill be selected for the mentioned institutions:

- For the Commission: Commission decisions,Commission regulations, Commission noticesand communications, proposals for a Councildecision and for a Council regulation, press re-leases, speeches of Commissioners, and otherrelevant documents;

- For the Council: Council regulations, decisions,joint actions and conclusions as well as draftversions of these documents, working docu-ments, position papers, implementation reports,action plans, press releases, and other relevantdocuments;

- For the Parliament: Parliament resolutions andmotions for resolutions, Parliament regulations(joint adoption with Council), draft reports, rec-ommendations, and opinions, press releases,and other relevant documents.

The case selection shall include all foreignpolicy actions of the EU: economic, political,security, and judicial cooperation, with a slightemphasis on international political relations (pre-Lisbon CFSP). In order to obtain relevant resultsin regard to consistency, an equal timeframe wasselected for pre-Lisbon and post-Lisbon cases'.Two periods of ten months each were identified aspre-Lisbon (01.02.2009-30.11.2009) and post-Lisbon (01.12.2009-30.09.2010) and shall servefor comparison. Finally, cases should have specificfocus on the Western Balkan region and countries.In this regard documents containing keywordsCroatia/n, Bosnia/n, Serbia/n and Balkanls havebeen selected.

A random selection of documents wascompiled for the analysis from the official web-sites of the EU and the individual Europeaninstitutions". The documents take into accountequal distribution along institutional and temporalcriteria, as these are crucial for assessingconsistency and coherence, while simultaneouslyencompassing a multitude of policy areas. A total


of 49 cases (documents) are selected for analysis. Itis important to note that more than enough Councildocuments fulfilling our criteria were available,but the Commission and Parliament documentswere not. It was therefore necessary to include allavailable documents from the Parliament (14) andthe Commission (15). The final results take thisdisproportion into account, as well as the pre/postLisbon disproportion (26/23), and weigh resultsaccordingly resulting in comparative percentagevalues.

The analysis shall be conducted with directreference to a Codebook. The Codebook is alist of normative and norm-related expressionsor indicators sorted along the set of eleven coreEU values? The Codebook was compiled fromdefinitions, synonyms and antonyms of core values,and completed by analyzing the first random batchof fifteen EU documents and adding the normativeexpressions found therein into the Codebook. Themajority of normative expressions of importancefor the EU should show up in this list and theircategorization is what makes up this analysis. It isimportant to note that positive as well as negativeexpressions are assigned to the same core value (forexample both conflict and mediation are assigned tothe value ofpeace) and are included in the list. This isbecause in terms of the EU foreign policy discoursethe 'other' is of great importance. A European roleconception does not only build on declared values,but also on reference to 'anti-values' and principlesdescribing what 'Europe' is not about. It is importantto note that positive values have to be affirmed whilenegative values have to be condemned in policydiscourse in order to be relevant.

Method of qualitative content analysis tothe case selection was applied for the studyusing the Codebook as reference to categorizenormative expressions as emphasizing one ofthe eleven core EU values. Qualitative contentanalysis interprets the content of a text througha systematic classification process of codingand identifying core consistencies and meanings(Zhang and Wildemut 2009). The analysis of theEU foreign policy discourse was conducted in twoparts. Applying qualitative content analysis, thefirst batch of fifteen documents was analyzed withthe purpose of completing the Codebook. Uponthe Codebook's completion, that batch was thenre-analyzed, along with the remaining documents.Normative expressions were counted and classified

according to core EU values. This process wasrepeated for all 49 documents, grouping themaccording to institution and date.

6. Results and findings

The results are presented in the two followingtables thus making it possible to draw conclusionsfrom the data." The first table is set along temporallines and focuses on consistency. Here the resultsfrom all institutions were combined and showedexpressions for the set of EU values according tothe pre- and post- Lisbon period of our timeframe.The second table is compiled along institutionallines where the temporal dimension is omitted.These results for the single institutions allow us tocompare coherence. The two tables give differentviews, temporal or institutional, of the sameprimary data.

An initial finding is related to the median num-ber of value expressions per document. Althoughthe overall number is relatively stable", the valuesfluctuate significantly with regard to the EuropeanCommission and the European Parliament, whilethey remain consistent for the Council of the EU.In the pre-Lisbon period the Commission had onaverage 79.9 normative expressions per document,while the Parliament had 39.5. After the entry intoforce of the Lisbon Treaty, the Commission had onlyon average 14 normative expressions per documentas the Parliament had 96. These changes could beattributed to the institutional restructuring follow-ing the Lisbon Treaty, especially the broadening ofcompetences for the Parliament. Some norms arementioned more than others which may help an-swer the questions raised by Noutcheva. The values'rule of law' and 'liberal market economy' featuremost prominently receiving significantly more at-tention than other normative expressions (23.86and 26.35 respectively). Both can be linked to ra-tional requirements such as legislative frameworksand fiscal policies. The values 'equality' and 'soli-darity' both featuring strong normative componentsreceived the least attention (1.39 and 2.6 respec-tively). Values of 'human rights' and 'liberty andfreedom' did not come up often either, and the coreEuropean value of peace is also underrepresented.In this regard, we can confirm Noutcheva's the-sis that rational motives prevail in the EU foreignpolicy towards the Western Balkans, underminingnormative legitimacy arguments.

JANUARY/JUNE 2011

TABLE 1: Results of qualitative content analysis: pre/post Lisbon'"C >-rjr ::c: 0 ~

t:r1 r/J Or/J aa t:r1r r/J(J~ '"1-. ~ ~ .g 0 ~~ 00 (") _ . ~oI:» ~cr"S S (i" - < '" <0 ocr" (")S

(") ~~ s: ~S- t:l~0..;:+ I:» ~o.. §.'O~ I:» 0 0 - I:» -_. a 0'"10,-< t:l o >-+, ~. '"1 Ot:l Se:. ~@SI:» '"1 -. '01:» §~ I:» r ~ as!: '-<S;:: ::Tt:l dQ. o I:» o ~0.. '-< ~ ~~ I:» t:l

::T t:l ~ '"1'"- - :;>;" :;.

'"~- ~

Pre-Lisbon 11.23% 2.32% 2.44% 5.83% 25.03% 1.39% 1.94% 10.04% 6.54% 26.49% 6.75%(2009)

Post-Lisbon 11.27% 2.28% 3.67% 4.73% 22.69% 1.38% 3.26% 9.17% 7.83% 26.21% 7.51%(2009-2010)

Values weighed and in percent

TABLE 2: Results of qualitative content analysis: EU institutions

'"C >-rjr ::c: 0 ~t:r1 r/J Or/J aa t:r1r r/J(J~ '"1_. ~ ~ .n 0 ~~ 00 (") _. ~oI:» ~cr"

S a - ~ - <'" <0 ocr" 2ao ~~ ~ -. t:l~§-q e:. 0.. ~S- ~o..~ I:» 0 0 e; --. a 0'"1 ::l.'Ot:l (") >-+, ~. Ot:l Se:. ~@SI:» '"1 ~. '01:» I:»~ I:» r SS!: ::s '-<S;:: ::T

t:l dQ. (")

~(") ~0.. '< ~~ I:» t:l

::T t:l ~ ~ '"- - :;.'"

~- ~

COM 11.53% 1.45% 1.06% 4.15% 11.28% b,16% 2.39% 12.77% 5.13% 46.87% 3.21%

CEU 6.63% 2.46% 2.55% 2.62% 35.20% b.76% 1.87% 5.85% 10.01% 18.80% 13.24%

EUP 15.60% 2.99% 5.56% 9.07% 25.10% 6.23% 3.54% 10.20% 6.41% 13.39% 4.93%

Values weighed and percentage

Specific results related to consistency (Table1) find normative expressions in the pre- and post-Lisbon timeframes incredibly consistent. Not a sin-gle value showed relevant fluctuations between thetwo timeframes. It is easy to conclude that in gener-al EU foreign policy towards the Western Balkansremains very consistent. This is true even in lightof institutional restructuring following the imple-mentation of the Lisbon Treaty and the mentionedinconsistencies within individual institutions.

Focusing on coherence (Table 2) we can ob-serve many discrepancies. The only two valuesexpressed coherently are not very prominent (lib-erty and freedom, and solidarity). All other valuesshow significant incoherence. Peace is stressed bythe Parliament, while the Council gives it muchless significance; human rights are also strongeremphasized by the Parliament, as is the case withdemocracy. It is interesting to note that the Coun-cil and Commission do not emphasize these twovalues stronger in relation to the Western Balkans.The value of equality is noteworthy since it is al-most not expressed at all, especially by the Com-

mission and the Council. With regard to the ruleof law, things look a bit different as it is one of themost prominent values, albeit a rational one. TheCouncil and the Parliament clearly favors it, whilethe Commission does not relate to it very often.Concerning liberal market economy, it is the oth-er way around with the Commission extensivelystressing this rational value. Further, sustainabledevelopment is something that the Council doesnot relate to, in contrast to good governance. Espe-cially comprehensive security is a prime concernfor the Council and its member states. Summingup the results it is not possible to identify any co-herence in the EU's international role conception.As individual institutions of the European Unionstress different values through their foreign policythe picture of one European role in world seemillusory.

7. Conclusion

Building on diverse theoretical ground, a relevantand interesting research framework is formulated,on the topic of international role of the ED. The

13


conception is analyzed in regard to consistencyand coherence of normative expressions in EU for-eign policy towards the Western Balkans. Therebythe European Union is presented as having an ex-plicit aim to ensure for itself a distinct and influ-ential place within its neighborhood. This aim isarticulated through various policy statements andpresents the driving force for our research. Adopt-ing a constructivist approach, along with core is-sues of mutual constitutiveness and importanceof values, I have focused on analyzing the EU'sforeign policy discourse. Using qualitative con-tent analysis and looking at value expression inlanguage it is thus possible to evaluate the Union'srole conception. The main issues of the analysisare consistency and coherence, defined as stabilityin normative expressions over time, or through-out institutions respectively. An underlying issueespecially relevant for Western Balkan countriesis the relation between rational and normative ex-pressions in EU policies.

The European foreign policy towards the re-gion was found to be very consistent with valuesbeing expressed in a constant manner. On thelevel of individual institutions major inconsisten-cies were observed and attributed to institutionalchanges introduced through the Lisbon Treaty.Due to the limited number of cases available nocorrelation between these two disproportionate

findings on consistency could be made. Coher-ence was a much bigger issue with different Euro-pean institutions emphasizing or demoting certainvalues to a noticeable extent. Overall EU foreignpolicy towards the Western Balkans was found tobe influenced by the individual institutions, not byoverarching common values. No cross-institution-al patterns of coherence were observed. The minorsignificance of common values was underscoredby the accentuation of rational objectives, suchas legislative and judicial reform or fiscal policy,over normative expressions related to peace, liber-ty, freedom and equality. This identifies the EU'sstance towards Western Balkan countries as driv-en by rational interests and efficiency goals ratherthan normative arguments.

Judging from our analysis a strong emphasison consistency and coherence as put forward inthe central EU documents and statements was notfound. The EU lacks the ability to promote Eu-ropean values coherently because it internally fo-cuses on and accentuates different aspirations. TheEuropean resolve to act more coherently shouldbe addressed with urgency, especially regardingcross-institutional communication, dialogue anddebate within the EU. This implies that a distinctand tangible international role of the EU has notbeen achieved, although the overall impression isnot the one of an impossible prospect.

JANUARY/JUNE 2011

TABLE 3: Complete results of qualitative content analysis

tJ(l)

8o()...•~()

'<

ooo0-

oo<(l)

8§()(l)

COMpre-Lisbon

43 12[6.7%] [1.9%]

7[1.1%]

27 105 2 11 98 33[4.2%] [16.4%] [0.3%] [1.7%] [15.3%] [5.2%]

286 15[44.8%] [2.3%]

COMpost-Lisbon

16 1[16.3%] [1.0%]

1[1.0%]

4 6 0 3 10 5[4.1%] [6.1%] [0.0%] [3.1%] [10.2%] [5.1%]

48 4[49.0%] [4.1%]

CEUpre-Lisbon

39 13[6.7%] [2.2%]

16[2.7%]

9 218 4 11[1.5%] [37.5%] [0.7%] [1.9%]

121 71[20.8%] [12.2%]

CEUpost-Lisbon

39 16[6.6%] [2.7%]

14[2.4%]

22 196 5 11[3.7%] [32.9%] [0.8%] [1.8%]

29 51[5.0%] [8.8%]

40 67 100 85[6.7%] [11.3%] [16.8%] [14.3%]

EUPpre-Lisbon

64 9[20.3%] [2.8%]

11 37 67 10 7[3.5%] [11.7%] [21.2%] [3.2%] [2.2%]

44 18[13.9%] [5.7%]

EUPpost-Lisbon

63 18[10.9%] [3.1%]

44[7.6%]

37 167 19 28[6.4%] [29.0%] [3.3%] [4.9%]

31 18[9.8%] [5.7%]

61 41[10.6%] [7.1%]

74 24[12.8%] [4.2%]

Complete results (weighed results in percentage)

Results from a total of 49 documents included. Document distribution asfollows: European Commission:pre-Lisbon: 8, post-Lisbon: 7; Council of the EU: pre-Lisbon: 10, post-Lisbon: 10; European Parliamentpre-Lisbon: 8, post-Lisbon: 8.Absolute number of normative expressions: peace=264; liberty and freedom =69; human rights =93,democracy=136; rule of law =759; equality=40; solidarity=71; sustainable development=269; goodgovernance=215; liberal market economy=673; comprehensive security=217.

1 The concepts of image or identity are also used, but I preferrole as image is too vague and identity foremost describesindividual identity (also see Lucarelli 2007)2 The same documents used for completing the Code book3 For an overview of previous and current EU engagement inthe Western Balkans see Bendiek (2007) ..4 At that time acting European Commission Secretary-General5 The Treaty of Lisbon (short for "Treaty of Lisbon amendingthe Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing theEuropean Community") became effective on December 1st

20096 Documents have been obtained from the following web-sites: <http://europa.eu/documentation/official-docs/index_

NOTESen.htm>, <http://eur-Iex.europa.eu, http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/registre. cfm?CL =en> , <http://www.consilium.europa.eu/showPage.aspx?id= 1279&lang=EN>,and <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegWeb/application/registre/guideAccessDoc.faces>. All documents accessed on05.10.2010 and 06.10.2010.7 These core values are: peace, human rights, liberty andfreedom, democracy, the rule of law, equality, solidarity,sustainable development, good governance, liberal marketeconomy, and comprehensive security.8 Complete results can be found annexed to this paper.9 Pre-Lisbon: 59.19, and post-lisbon: 56.50 average valueexpressions per document.

15


REFERENCES

Aggestam, Lisbeth (1999) "Role Conceptions and thePolitics of Identity in Foreign Policy", ARENA WorkingPapers 99/8 [viewed: 29.04.08], <http://www.arena.uio.no/publications/working-papers1999/papers/wp99_8.htrr».

Aggestam, Lisbeth (2004) "Role identity and the Eu-ropeanisation of foreign policy: a political-cultural ap-proach", in Tonra, Ben & Thomas Christiansen, eds.(2004), Rethinking European Union Foreign Policy,Manchester University Press, Manchester/New York:pp.81-98.

Aggestam, Lisbeth & Christopher Hill (2008) ''The chal-lenge of multiculturalism in European foreign policy",International Affairs, 84(1): pp. 97-114.

Allen, David & Michael Smith (2007) "Relations withthe Rest of the World", Journal of Common MarketStudies, 45 (Annual Review): pp. 163-181.Barbe, Esther & Anna Herranz (2005) "Introduction", inBarbe, Esther & Anna Herranz, eds. (2005), The Roleof Parliaments in European Foreign Policy, Univer-sity Institute of European Studies Barcelona, [viewed:07.05.08], <http://www.iuee.eu/pdf-publicacio/20/clzt-Gd4XbHlvlfPJdtkd.PDF>.

Bendiek, Annegret (2007) "GASP und SOdosteuropa-politik der Europaischen Union", in Ehrhart, Jaberg,Rinke & Waldmann, eds. (2007), Die EuropeischeUnion im 21. Jahrhundert, VS Verlag, Wiesbaden: pp.162-173.

Biscop, Sven (2004) ''The European Security Strategy.Implementing a Distinctive Approach to Security" Se-curtte & Strategie, 82, [viewed: 12.03.07], <http://www.irri-kiib.be/papers/Artikel.ESS.pdf>.

Citrin, Jack & John Sides (2004) "More than Nationals:How Identity Choice Matters in the New Europe", inHerrmann, Richard K., Thomas Risse & Marilynn B.Brewer, eds. (2004), Transnational Identities. Becom-ing European in the EU, Rowman & Littlefield, Oxford:pp.161-185.

Diez, Thomas (2005) "Constructing the Self andChanging Others: Reconsidering 'Normative PowerEurope"', Millennium: Journal of International Studies,33(3): pp. 613-636.

Elgstr6m, Ole (2007) "Book Review Essay. EuropeanUnion Foreign Policy: Norms, Values and Responsibil-ities", Cooperation and Conflict: Journal of the NordicInternational Studies Association, 42(4): pp. 467-471.

European Council (2001) Laeken Declaration onthe Future of the European Union, 15 Decem-ber 2001, [viewed: 07.10.07], <http://www.ena.lu?lang=2&doc=17540>.

European Union (2007) Treaty of Lisbon, Official Jour-nal of the European Union C115, Vo1.51.

Ginsberg, Roy H. (1999) "Conceptualizing the EU asan International Actor: Narrowing the Theoretical Ca-pability-Expectations Gap", Journal of Common Mar-ket Studies, 37(3): pp. 429-54.

Harnisch, Sebastian & Hanns W. Maull, eds. (2001)Germany as a Civilian Power, Manchester UniversityPress, Manchester/New York.

Holsti, K. J. (1970) "National Role Conceptions in theStudy of Foreign Policy", International Studies Quar-terly, 14(3): pp. 233-309.

Johansson-Noques, Elisabeth (2007) "The (Non-)Nor-mative Power EU and the European NeighbourhoodPolicy: An Exceptional Policy for an Exceptional Ac-tor?", European Political Economy Review, 7: pp. 181-194.

Kagan, Robert (2004) Of Paradise and Power: Ameri-ca and Europe in the New World Order, Vintage BooksUSA [reprint]

Larsen, Henrik (2002) ''The EU: A Global Military Ac-tor?", Cooperation and Conflict: Journal of the NordicInternational Studies Association, 37(3): pp. 283-302.

Larsen, Henrik (2004) "Discourse Analysis in the Studyof European Foreign Policy", in Tonra, Ben & ThomasChristiansen, eds. (2004) Rethinking European UnionForeign Policy, Manchester University Press, Man-chester/New York: pp. 62-80.

Lucarelli, Sonia (2006) "Introduction. Values, prin-ciples, identity and European Union foreign policy",in Lucarelli, Sonia & Ian Manners, eds. (2006), Val-ues and Principles in European Union Foreign Policy,Routledge, London/New York: pp. 1-18.

Lucarelli, Sonia (2007) "The European Union in theEyes of the Others: Towards Filling a Gap in the Lit-erature", European Foreign Affairs Review, 12(3): pp.249-270.

Lucarelli, Sonia & Ian Manners (2006) "Conclusion.Valuing principles in European Union foreign policy",in Lucarelli, Sonia & Ian Manners, eds. (2006), Val-ues and Principles in European Union Foreign Policy,Routledge, London/New York: pp. 201-215.

Manners, Ian (2002) "Normative Power Europe: AContradiction in Terms?", Journal of Common MarketStudies, 40(2): pp. 235-58.

Manners, Ian (2006) ''The constitutive nature of values,images and principles in the European Union", in Lu-carelli, Sonia & Ian Manners, eds. (2006), Values and

JANUARY/JUNE 2011 17

Principles in European Union Foreign Policy, Rout-ledge, London/New York: pp. 19-41.

Manners, Ian & Richard Whitman (2003) "The 'Differ-ence Engine': constructing and representing the inter-national identity of the European Union", Journal ofEuropean Public Policy, 10(3): pp. 380-404.

Merlingen, Michael, Cas Mudde & Ulrich Sedelmei-er (2001) ''The Right and the Righteous? EuropeanNorms, Domestic Politics and the Sanctions againstAustria", Journal of Common Market Studies, 39(1):pp.59-77.

Noutcheva, Gergana (2009) "Fake, partial and im-posed compliance: the limits of the EU's normativepower in the Western Balkans", Journal of EuropeanPublic Policy, 16(7): pp. 1065-1084.

Nuttall, Simon (2005) "Coherence and Consistency"in Hill, Christopher & Michael Smith, eds. (2005), In-ternational Relations and the European Union, OxfordUniversity Press, Oxford: pp. 91-112.

Orbie, Jan (2006) "Civilian Power Europe: Review ofthe Original and Current Debates", Cooperation andConflict: Journal of the Nordic International Studies As-sociation, 41(1): pp. 123-128.

Risse, Thomas (2002) "Constructivism and Interna-tional Institutions: Towards Conversations AcrossParadigms", in Katznelson, Ira & Helen V. Miller, eds.(2002), Political Science. State of the Disciple, W. W.Norton & Company, New York: pp. 597-623.

Risse, Thomas (2004) "Social Constructivism and Eu-ropean Integration", in Wiener, Antje & Thomas Diez,eds. (2004), European Integration Theory, Oxford Uni-versity Press, Oxford: pp. 159-176.

Sedelmeier, Ulrich (2003) "EU Enlargement, Identityand the Analysis of European Foreign Policy: IdentityFormation Through Policy Practice", European Uni-versity Institute, Working Paper, RSC No. 2003/13[viewed: 16.09.10], <http://www.iue.itlRSCAS/WP-Texts/03_13.pdf>.

Tonra, Ben (2003) "Constructing the Common For-eign and Security Policy: The Utility of a Cognitive Ap-proach", Journal of Common Market Studies, 41 (4):pp.731-756.

Wrever, Ole (1998) "Explaining Europe by DecodingDiscourses", in Wivel, Anders, edt. (1998), ExplainingEuropean Integration, Copenhagen Political StudiesPress, Copenhagen: pp. 100-146.

Wagner, Wolfgang & Gunther Hellmann (2001) "Zi-vile Weltmacht? Die AuBen-, Sicherheits- und Vertei-digungspolitik der Europaischen Union", in Jachten-fuchs, Markus & Beate Kohler-Koch, eds. (2001), Eu-ropeische Integration, 2nd edition, Leske & Budrich,Opladen: pp. 569-596.

Zhang, Yan & Barbara M. Wildemuth (2009) "Quali-tative analysis of content", in Wildemuth, Barbara M.,edt. (2009), Applications of Social Research Methodsto Questions in Information and Library Science, West-port, CT: Libraries Unlimited: pp. 308-319 .