The European Union and the Liberal International Order in the Age of ‘America First’: Attempted Hedging and the Willingness-Capacity Gap

IF 1.1 Q2 AREA STUDIES
Brice Didier
{"title":"The European Union and the Liberal International Order in the Age of ‘America First’: Attempted Hedging and the Willingness-Capacity Gap","authors":"Brice Didier","doi":"10.30950/JCER.V16I3.1097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"  \nThe crisis of the Liberal International Order (LIO) has resulted in, and been amplified by, the unilateral turn taken by the United States (US) under the Trump presidency. In this sense, ‘America First’ resulted in revisionism by the system leader vis-à-vis an order the US created and led for decades. This shift away from a historical US liberal hegemony has been even more consequential as it resulted in a leadership crisis and translated into episodes of rupture within the transatlantic community, which constitutes the backbone of the LIO. While the European Union (EU) initially positioned itself as a follower of the US, today it appears to oppose American ‘illiberalism’ through its rhetoric of ‘principled pragmatism’, expressed in an increasing number of issues. Building on the concept of leadership, this article analyses whether and to what extent the EU has the willingness to uphold LIO leadership and to what extent it is strategically equipped to do so. Following an analysis of the 2003 European Security Strategy and 2016 EU Global Strategy in order to comprehend better the EU’s relationship with the LIO and its willingness to lead, the article builds on two brief case studies: the America First trade policy and the Iran nuclear agreement. In turn, this facilitates examination of the EU’s capacity to lead and determination of the extent to which this leadership is accepted by other actors. The article argues that, while being limited by American preponderance over international issues, the EU is faced with a willingness-capacity gap but still attempts to uphold the LIO through pragmatic leadership by hedging.","PeriodicalId":44985,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary European Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contemporary European Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30950/JCER.V16I3.1097","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

  The crisis of the Liberal International Order (LIO) has resulted in, and been amplified by, the unilateral turn taken by the United States (US) under the Trump presidency. In this sense, ‘America First’ resulted in revisionism by the system leader vis-à-vis an order the US created and led for decades. This shift away from a historical US liberal hegemony has been even more consequential as it resulted in a leadership crisis and translated into episodes of rupture within the transatlantic community, which constitutes the backbone of the LIO. While the European Union (EU) initially positioned itself as a follower of the US, today it appears to oppose American ‘illiberalism’ through its rhetoric of ‘principled pragmatism’, expressed in an increasing number of issues. Building on the concept of leadership, this article analyses whether and to what extent the EU has the willingness to uphold LIO leadership and to what extent it is strategically equipped to do so. Following an analysis of the 2003 European Security Strategy and 2016 EU Global Strategy in order to comprehend better the EU’s relationship with the LIO and its willingness to lead, the article builds on two brief case studies: the America First trade policy and the Iran nuclear agreement. In turn, this facilitates examination of the EU’s capacity to lead and determination of the extent to which this leadership is accepted by other actors. The article argues that, while being limited by American preponderance over international issues, the EU is faced with a willingness-capacity gap but still attempts to uphold the LIO through pragmatic leadership by hedging.
“美国优先”时代的欧盟与自由国际秩序:对冲尝试与意愿能力差距
自由国际秩序(LIO)的危机导致了美国在特朗普总统任期内的单方面转变,并被其放大。从这个意义上说,“美国优先”导致了体系领导人对美国创建和领导了几十年的秩序的修正主义。这种从历史上的美国自由主义霸权的转变更为重要,因为它导致了领导层危机,并转化为跨大西洋社区内部的破裂事件,而跨大西洋社区是LIO的支柱。虽然欧盟最初将自己定位为美国的追随者,但如今,它似乎通过在越来越多的问题上表达的“原则实用主义”言论来反对美国的“非自由主义”。基于领导力的概念,本文分析了欧盟是否以及在多大程度上有意愿维护LIO的领导地位,以及在战略上有多大能力这样做。在分析了2003年《欧洲安全战略》和2016年《欧盟全球战略》之后,为了更好地理解欧盟与LIO的关系及其领导意愿,本文以两个简单的案例研究为基础:美国优先贸易政策和伊朗核协议。反过来,这有助于审查欧盟的领导能力,并确定这种领导在多大程度上被其他行为者接受。文章认为,尽管受到美国在国际问题上的优势的限制,欧盟面临着意愿和能力的差距,但仍试图通过对冲的务实领导来维护LIO。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
26 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信