Does constructivist make a valuable contribution to the study of EU integration?

Introduction

European project remains a subject of close observation within international theories field. The decision made by major states in Europe to build all-encompassing project has been traditionally observed and, more importantly, interpreted through lenses of dominant theories of international relations. However, the time after the end of the Cold war, followed by the crash of the Soviet Union, brought up a new way of ideas. The thoughts of constructivist scholars posed an intellectual challenged to established theories of IR. The transformation which went across Europe and the European Union itself could not be supported with convincing explanations from rationalist theories or liberal institutionalists like it used to be. This paper aims to look at the key arguments raised by constructivist scholars against the transformational events within the Union. Looking at the formation of ‘common identity’ and its influence in dictating the decision-making processes during the integration process will be the key focus. Along with the impacts of shared identity on the integration process, this paper looks at the norms which are formulated and institutionalised among the member states. The norms as a consequence, also become a guiding tool throughout the integration process. By bringing to closer analysis key arguments of constructivist theory, this paper states that the theory is a significant contribution to the study of European integration. Although this paper focuses more on the key points raised by constructivist scholars about European integration, it is important to acknowledge the shortfalls of the constructivist theory to present a balanced overview.

Main body

European integration, an ambitious project, proposed after drastic events of the Second World War. Appalling conditions of state economies, ruins of the major cities of Europe and shortage of supplies along with ideas of neo-functionalism and liberal intergovernmentalism became a nourishing ground to the European integration. Till the 1990s the prevailing theories of European integration, such were neo-functionalism which stood for regional integration and possible “spillover” effects across other sectors or more contrasting theory of intergovernmentalism. In such case intergovernmentalism was advocating for more bargaining powers, drawing its key assumptions from a classical realist or neorealist theories of international relations. Looking at the international system as an anarchic environment where the self-interest of individual states prevails in any decision-making process, the project of European integration becomes no more than just a tool to secure interests. At the same time, neo-functionalism might not be so pessimistic to the outside realities, but more accurate at that time to explain integration across multiple sectors of governance. However, both of the more conventional IR theories do not cover all the gaps in explaining the process of European integration, especially after the break down of the Soviet Union and revival of the newly independent states in Eastern Europe. Whether focusing more on the state-centric focus of intergovernmental theories, or lack of explanation of political integration in Western Europe during the 1970s and 1980s (Cini and Borragan 2010, pp. 78–79) when the French boycott of European institutions contradicting with predictions of the neo-functionalism theories. Thus, the constructivist assumption and ideas about European integration have become valuable to contribute to the field of study.

Looking at the gaps left after conventional theories of international theories, the constructivist ideas entered the study of the EU integration field as a “spillover from the discipline of international relations” (T. Risse 2009, p. 1). Coming into the field during the 1990s when the European Union began its enlargement programme, increasing the number of member states by including former communist countries in Eastern Europe, the theory paying closer details to “ a social ontology which insists that human agents do not exist independently from their social environment and its collectively shared system of meanings” (T. Risse 2009, pp.4–5). Instead of looking at the surrounded world as a predetermined, the constructivist scholars like Alexander Wendt 1999 argue the interests of the states, the norms that guide the actors and everything that surrounds the players as socially constructed and can be changed. The economic preferences which are stressed by realist thinkers and bargaining supporters like Andrew Moravscik 1998 are what drives the states to base their decisions on, rather the looking at the interactions among the states throughout time. However, the in-between interactions among the states can take place on a global scale, but the product of such interactions differs. The European Union acts as a platform, an institutional platform, where the member states connect. In the situation, which is constructed by the member states themselves, the surrounding environment is constructed under their preferences and norms rather than accepted as pre-given. The self-constructed surrounding the norms become a collective tool. Norms that come out as a result of the interactions regulate the processes and allow the formation of identity, in this case, common European identity. The norms which are established among the member states as a result influence the decision making whether to accept new member to the union like it was with European opposition to Turkish accession to the European Union (E. S. Hurd 2006, p. 1). Following similar manner, designing of major European projects and entering regulatory instruments like the Copenhagen criteria are all written according to the norms established among the member states rather than based on individual interest of states. Therefore, the constructivist theory brings to the attention of important insight about the European integration process.

The interaction which takes place on the institutional platforms like the European Union itself along with norms which are used as an acting principal among the member states is valuable acknowledgement made by the constructivist theory. However, it is the identity which becomes a focal point for the constructivist scholars in analysing the European integration. As stated by Michelle Cini and Nieves Perez-Solorzano Borragan 2010, “constructivists endeavour to understand the constitution of interests and, therefore, identities” (p. 118). The identity which becomes shared among the member states becomes an adhesive substance. In turn, this unifying reason allows integration process which begins in one sector, for example, economic sphere, followed by more integration in other parts such as decision making like after signing of the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997. As constructivists would explain such developments concerning European integration, such changes are not about external threats that might cause closer cooperation. Rather, the established common identity allows defining what the union is and who states are in such union. The common identity which is established as a result of interactions and a desire for a more unified approach in the decision making enables to account for the shared interests (Risse 2009, p. 5). In turn, the common identity designed by the member states and for the member states enables to design collective understanding, uplifting some of the norms and prohibiting other. The identity which is to lesser or greater extend navigated by the norms within the union, dictates whether those states who see themselves as being more European-like can smoothly integrate into the union. Besides, such states apart from a perception of fitting into the European frame, as the constructivist suggest share common aspirations like liberal principals and democratic importance. This, in turn, influences how the member states perceive the action they make as well as the other. The commitment to shared aspirations which becomes part of common European identity changes the perception of the member states among themselves. As the theory shows, the EU members no longer look at themselves as being separate from the union. In turn, their behaviour becomes a subject of interpretation of the common ideas and “increasingly defined by their EU membership” (Reiss 2009, p. 6). The shared identity among the member states becomes a defining point in future decision making. Integration process ‘spillover’ not because of the individual interests of the sovereign states but because the established norms spread to other parts.

The decision-making process becomes a subject of shared norms and believes among the members of the European Union. The aspirations which are established can empower the member of the union as well as restrict the process of decision-making. The differences in norms and identity which contrast with the established within the European Union can be seen during the decision made during the opposition to Turkish accession to the Union. Having distinct cultural, religious and ideological obstacles for the country to enter the union. Looking at the decision made by major European states like France and Germany in opposing another state to enter the European circle, the constructivist theory gives a clear explanation. The strong opposition among the member states of the Union in granting the place for other states might not be explained concerning economic or strategic factors, rather having closer attention towards the norm difference. Therefore, the constructivist theory contributed to a better understanding of the European integration process focusing more than just economic or political feature, rather taking a closer look at the identities and constructed norms among them. Thus, as a result, guiding the decision making within the European Union. Looking closer to the phenomenon of identity formation, the constructivist ideas bring a valuable contribution to the study of the European integration process.

Another important contribution from the constructivist scholars to the study of European integration is the emphasis on communicative and discursive practices. The behaviour which is contracted among the member states of the European Union, it is important to observe the language used to speak about processes. The constructivist’s scholars state that ‘the speech acts can be institutionalised into norms which as result can change realities and provide meaning for action” (Chebakova 2008, p.7). This means that the type of words which are used to speak about the European integration process carries a specific meaning and attitude which navigates the member states throughout the decision-making process. By focusing on communication discourse within the European Union, the constructivist scholars focus on “arguing and reason-giving as an agency-centred mode of interaction” (Risse 2009, p. 149). In return, this enables to members to challenge the significance of the claims raised as a norm as well as to reach “communicative consensus about their understanding of a situation as well as justification for the principles and norms guiding their action, rather than acting purely based on strategic calculations” (Risse 2009, p. 149). As a result of closer attention to the language and communication specifics, the constructivist theory enables us to pay closer attention to the discourse process. This helps to get a better understanding of deliberate processes for the establishment of clear consensus among the member state to reach for the common goal rather than purely looking at the processes as bargaining.

Although the constructivist theory brings to the attention important insights that previously were not covered by conventional theories of international relations, the constructivist theory cannot on its own explain the whole process of European integration. The attention given by the constructivist scholars to the common identity does not bring to the attention the nation-state identity. The European Union is a collection of multiple states with unique identities would mean that the shared identity will always be closely tightened to the national unique features. People from France would not give up their identification features as in the same way the British people would not. This creates a challenge to the ideas posed by the constructivists about common identity. The national identity will have more powerful ties to the past, to the territorial specific and the linguistic specifics which cannot be fully blended within the “common European identity” and always comply with the shared norms. The national identity, thus, places challenge to the argument raised by the constructivist theory. Looking at the events which begun taking greater spin from 2014 after the referendum on the status of the United Kingdom concerning the European Union, some would argue that these events present a challenge to the process of European Integration. As the aftermath of the referendum demonstrates, the majority of the British population ruled in favour of leaving the European Union. This shows that common European identity which supposed to unite the member states for further integration cannot stand against the national identity of the states “because there is no European people, no common European history or common myths on which collective European identity could be built” (Kielmansegg 1996 and Grimm 1995 cited in Risse 2009, p. 151). Therefore, the constructivist approach does not cover all the gaps in the study of European integration.

Conclusion

The constructivist theory brings attention to important aspects of the European integration process. Contrasting with traditional theories of the integration process, such as neo-functionalism and intergovernmentalism, which tend to look from more state-centric and individual interest-based standpoints, the constructivism looks more closely at the processes. Acknowledging the importance of the interaction processes among the member states in the creation of the norms and establishing shared ideas, allows explaining the changes which occurred within the European Union and influenced the integration process after the fall of the Soviet Union. The norms and ideas which act as a guiding tool among the member state lead to the construction of the common European identity which as a result define the outlook to the strategic decisions among the member states. Whether paying closer attention to the communication features and discourse specifics, the constructivists look at the European integration from a different angle giving a better understanding of the process. Although the constructivist approach is challenged by the importance of the national identities and their impact on the integration process, it is clear that the theory makes a valuable contribution to the study of European integration.

Bibliography

Alexander Wendt (1999) Social Theory of International Politics, published by Cambridge University Press

Andrew Moravcsik (1998) The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht, published by Routledge

Andrew Moravcsik and Kalypson Nicolaidis (1999) Explaining the Treaty of Amsterdam: Interests, Influence, Institutions, published by Journal of Common Market Studies

Ben Rosamond (1999) Discourses of globalization and the social construction of European identities, published by Journal of European Public Policy

Christoph O. Meyer (2005) Convergence Towards a European Strategic Culture? A Constructivist Framework for Explaining Changing Norms, published by European Journal of International Relations

Frank Schimmelfennig and Ulrich Sedelmeier (2002) Theorizing EU enlargement: Research focus, hypotheses, and the state of research, published by Journal of European Public Policy

Felix Berenskoetter & Bastian Giegerich (2010) From NATO to ESDP: A Social

Constructivist Analysis of German Strategic Adjustment after the End of the Cold War, Security Studies, published by Taylor & Francis Group

Chebakova, A. (2008) Theorizing the EU as a Global Actor: a Constructivist Approach, The Maturing European Union — ECSA-Canada Biennial Conference Paper, pp.1–16

Jeffrey T. Checkel (2005) International Institutions and Socialization in Europe: Introduction and Framework, published by the IO Foundation

Jeffrey T. Checkel and Andrew Moravcsik (2001) A Constructivist Research Program in EU Studies?

Joseph Jupille, James A. Caporaso and Jeffreyt T. Checkel (2003) Integrating Institutions: Rationalism, Constructivism, and the Study of the European Union, published by COMPARATIVE POLITICAL STUDIES

Matthew Richmond (20140 What Light can Constructivism Shed on the EU?, accessed via https://www.e-ir.info/2014/01/17/what-light-can-constructivism-shed-on-the-eu/

Michelle Cinin and Nieves Perez-Solorzano Borragan (2009) European Union Politics, published by Oxford University press

Thomas Risse (2009) Social Constructivism and European Integration, published by Oxford University Press

Thomas Diez (1999) Speaking ‘Europe’: the politics of integration discourse, published by Journal of European Public Policy