ST-202, general information Course code: ST-202 Course name: The European Union - Institutions and Politics Date: 11.05.2017 Duration: 09.00-14.00 Resources allowed: The use of bilingual dictionaries is allowed. Notes: This CLOSED-BOOK EXAM consists of three parts: I. 10 multiple choice questions (10% of final grade) II. 4 short and focused questions (40% of final grade) III. 1 essay (50% of final grade) Please read the instructions carefully! ALL answers should be given in English, with the only exception of the essay question (part III), which may be answered in Norwegian. Good luck! ------------------ The professors sometimes ask for exam answers to be used for teaching purposes, but in order for this to take place, the university needs your consent. Do you grant the University of Agder permision such permission? Select one alternative Yes No Besvart. 1 ST-202, II. Short question/short answer Answer briefly, but in full sentences FOUR of the following five questions! 1) How important was the Marshall Plan to the post-war recovery of Europe? 2) How far can we still think of the EU as an international organization, and how far has it developed the features of a state? 3) Why was the Maastricht Treaty more controversial than the Single European Act, and why was it so central to the backlash against integration? 4) What are the costs and benefits of differentiated integration? 5) How do realism and idealism compare when it comes to explaining the global role of the EU? Fill in your answer here 1/6
Fill in your answer here 2) The EU can be considered as an international organization because it has some of the characteristics typical of an IO: member states join the Union volountarly, they cooperate on issues of common interest and the EU can usually do only what member states allow it to do. Anyway, it also has supranational characters and it can not only be seen as a simple IO, as its goals, powers and global influence are much bigger. In some ways, the EU is more similar to a state. Indeed, it has some of the key qualities of a state, such as a defined territory and a clear and structured sovreignty; anyway, it does not completely respect the two other conditions to be a state: independence (the EU depends on its member states) and legitimacy (the EU is often criticized for its lack of legitimacy and democratic deficit). 3) The Maastricht Treaty was more controversial than the precedent treaties because of its political character. While the Single European Act was simply an economic agreement, with the goal to complete the Single Market, Maastricht changed the way to see the EU, with the changing name from "Community" to "Union" and giving more political power to its institutions, in particular to the European Parliament. The line between national and supranational powers became blurred and scepticism in public and political opinion started. 4) Differentiated integration is the process by which member states can decide to join or not specific treaties and agreeements, or can decide to join them with different speed or different conditions. Clear examples are the euro zone and Schengen, in which some of the states decided not to take part. The main benefit of differentiated integration is the possibility for states to integrate in different levels, according to their interests, willings and capacities. Those wishing to proceed more rapidly on cooperation within a particular policy area can do it and those not ready or not interested in it can decide not to join. This can facilitate the integration as it allows more states to be part of the Union and gives them more independence and choices. On the other hand, differentiated integration can also have negative consequences on integration, as it creates internal divisions and differences over critical issues for integration, such as the Monetary Union and free movement of people. 5) Realism and idealism are two oppostite theories of International Relations. According to realism, we live in an anarchic global world where there is no higher authority over the state and states act only following their self-interests. The only way states can relate to each other is through conflicts or alliances and long term cooperations are not positevely seen. Idealism highlights instead the importance of ideas on relationships between states and idealists think that states can come together on issues of common interests, and maintain peace through these cooperations. Besvart. 2 ST 202, I. Multiple choice PLEASE NOTE: Only ONE alternative is correct. 1. When was the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (Treaty of Rome) signed? 25 March 1948 25 March 1954 25 March 1957 25 March 1960 2. Who were the original parties signing the Treaty of Rome? 2/6
Belgium, France, Italy, Luxemburg, the Netherlands, West Germany Belgium, France, Italy, Portugal, Spain, West Germany Belgium, France, Italy, Luxemburg, the United Kingdom, West Germany Belgium, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxemburg, the United Kingdom 3. What is the name of an EU law that is general, directly applicable and binding? Regulation Decision Directive Recommendation 4. Which theoretical approach has introduced the concept of spill-over? Liberal Intergovernmentalism Neo-functionalism Governance Social constructivism 5. Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) is the voting system of The European Court of Justice The European Parliament The European Council The Council of the EU 6. Which article from which treaty allows a European Union member state to withdraw from the Union? Article 10 of the Maastricht Treaty Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty Article 8 of the Treaty of Rome Article 27.3 of the Lisbon Treaty 7. Who is the current president of the European Commission? 3/6
J.M. Baosso M. Schulz D. Tusk J.-C- Juncker 8. Which of these is NOT a power of the European Commission? Developing and making proposals for new EU laws and policies Overseeing the implementation of laws and policies in member states Passing the EU budget Representing the EU in international trade negotiations 9. How is enhanced cooperation best understood? It describes the efforts made by the EU states to collectively improve the quality of their policy cooperation States wishing to proceed more rapidly on cooperation within a particular policy area may do so within the EU legal framework without treaty changes The idea that quality is better than quantity in the field of regional integration The idea that elites could pursue their own plans for integration in the face of widespread lack of public interest 10. Which of the following was NOT a key goal of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)? : To ensure reasonable prices for consumers To stabilize markets To increase agricultural activity To reduce state management of agriculture Delvis riktig. 8 av 10 poeng. 3 ST 202, III. Essay question Answer in full sentences ONE of the following three essay questions. 1) Could the refugee crisis break up the European Union? Discuss. 2) According to Zimmermann and Dür (2016) there exists a fierce debate among European legal scholars on whether the European Court of Justice (ECJ) engages in wilful judicial activism and thereby violates the prerogatives of elected representatives. In your opinion, is the ECJ too powerful? Why? 3) Is there a democratic deficit inside the European Union? If so, how does the EU cope with it if at all? Discuss. 4/6
Fill in your answer here 1) COULD THE REFUGEE CRISIS BREAK UP THE EUROPEAN UNION? In the last few years, in particular since 2015, a terrible refugee crisis has affected Western countries. Europe is particularly concerned, more than the US, due to the geographical proximity with the Middle East, from where most of the migrants come today, and the African continent. Millions and millions of refugees come every year on the mediterrean costs, often of Italy or Greece, escaping from misery and war, in search for better leaving conditions and peace. Even though it is certain that a humanitarian aid is necessary, rescuing them from the sea, giving them medical and psychological assistance as well as giving them the possibility to leave in decent conditions in our countries, the situation is very complex and the public and political opinion on welcoming the migrants or not (and in which way) is very controversial and divided. The question that animates the debate is whether or not the European Union will survive the new crisis it is facing. There is a large risk that the refugee crisis will break up the EU and all the conditions are already present. First of all, Europe lacks a strong and united central government. Its institutions are very well organized and have both supranational and intergovernmental powers, but internal divisions and a national power rivendication is still strong. Quite ironically, the same people who criticize the Union for its excessive supranational power and that try to weak it, are the same that criticize it for not taking a strong position and decisions over the migrants crisis. If we really want an efficient response we probably need a stronger central government capable of speaking with one voice and taking fast and efficient decisions. Compared to the United States, for instance, the central power is much less strong and Europe is less used to have a mass immigration than the US, where waves of migration has always been the norm. Moreover, some states have already reacted by suspending Schengen without the official approval of the Union and this is the prove that EU lacks a strong power over its member states. Another main problem which creates divisions is the spread of xenophobia and racism, which have always been part of the process of immigration, but which nowadays are much more dangerous as they are alimented by the threat of terrorism and radical islamism. Xenophobia is often connected with the success of populist extreme right (and sometimes extreme left) parties, which most of the time are not only against immigration and globalization but of course against the European Union. Recent examples are the big score that the extreme right Front National reached in France (even though it failed the second turn elections) and the disaster of Brexit created by the anti-europe UKIP. Britain has always been an awkward partner and has always had doubts about integration, but one of the reasons why the United Kingdom decided to exit was to have more independence over the immigration policy. In a period of international tensions and consequent huge migrations to Europe, it is maybe easier for non-first-arrival states to be outside a Union that tries to force them to the cooperation with other states more in trouble than them. If other states will follow the example of Britain, this will probably means the end of the European Union as we know it today. There are also some possibilities for the EU to survive, but there is no doubt that cooperation of all the member states is fondamental and the process will be hard. The EU has already faced several crisis; when the most critical one, the euro crisis, emerged several experts announced the end of the EU, but this never happened and it managed instead to solve it even though the costs were high and the efforts consistent. If it follows the same dynamics, the Union will probably pass over this crisis as well and it will maybe come out even stronger. Indeed, if all the member states act together as a strong united power, they will come to find common solutions and integration will be even more successful than today. Moreover, the migrants can also solve some of the european problems such as the demografic deficit and can create more workforce with a consequent benefit for the economy and the society. An interesting idea was proposed by the Dutch government: the idea of a mini-schengen, a smaller area of free trade and free movement of people but more integrated, for all those countries willing to welcome refugees and act together to face the crisis. This could maybe be a way to solve the problem: it will become a kind of differentiated integration where more prepared countries can make the first steps and in the future new countries can join whenever and if they feel ready. It can however also create even more divisions between states, dividing their interests and creating feelings of exclusion between those not integrated in the agreement. Anyway, even in the case where the European Union would collapse, the "invisible hand of integration" will probably leave its traces and political, economic and social ties between european countries will survive. Whatever the future of the EU will be, there is no doubt that today member states have to collaborate and act together, not only for the survival of the Union but also for the survival and the welfare of the single states. To conclude, if the EU does not want to break up it has to take strong measures as a whole and powerful entity, maybe by sthrenghtening the institutions and working as a supranational force in the interests of all member states. Some of the solutions could be an equal distribution of migrants among states, economic aids to poorer countries, collaboration between states, assuring open borders, avoiding discrimination and promoting integration of migrants. This last point is very important since extremism and terrorism are often alimented by feelings of discrimation, and increased extremism sthrengthen prejudices and xenophobia, creating a vicious circle extremely dangerous for the international security. 5/6
Besvart. 6/6