ArticlePublisher preview available

Conflicts of sovereignty over EU trade policy: a new constitutional settlement?

June 2022
Comparative European Politics 20(2):1-22

DOI:10.1057/s41295-022-00272-x

Authors:

Amandine Crespy

Université Libre de Bruxelles

Julia Rone

University of Cambridge

This paper investigates whether the politicization of a new generation of trade agreements has led to the transformation of EU trade policy. It provides a qualitative study of multilevel contention based on sources from civil society and the parliamentary archives in Belgium, Germany, and the European Union concerning the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and three subsequent agreements concluded by the EU with Japan, Vietnam, and Singapore. We argue that, far beyond mere institutional disputes, the contention surrounding CETA has epitomized two conflicting visions of sovereignty: on the one hand, a vision where national executives qua states share sovereignty under the auspices of the European Commission, and on the other hand, a claim to reassert popular sovereignty (and the channelling thereof by parliaments) in a multilevel fashion. We demonstrate that the strengthening of the latter vision has been limited as the empowerment of parliaments was not sustained when civil society’s mobilization waned. The EU institutions have successfully curtailed the category of mixed agreements thus limiting the involvement of national and regional parliaments. CETA was a climax in the politicization of trade yet failed to bring about a new constitutional settlement that enhances the popular component of sovereignty in the EU.

A preview of this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.
Learn more

Preview content only

Content available from Comparative European Politics

This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.

Vol:.(1234567890)

Comparative European Politics (2022) 20:314–335

https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-022-00272-x

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Conﬂicts ofsovereignty overEU trade policy: anew

constitutional settlement?

AmandineCrespy1· JuliaRone2

Accepted: 18 January 2022 / Published online: 28 March 2022

Abstract

This paper investigates whether the politicization of a new generation of trade agree-

ments has led to the transformation of EU trade policy. It provides a qualitative study

of multilevel contention based on sources from civil society and the parliamentary

archives in Belgium, Germany, and the European Union concerning the EU-Can-

ada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and three subsequent

agreements concluded by the EU with Japan, Vietnam, and Singapore. We argue

that, far beyond mere institutional disputes, the contention surrounding CETA has

epitomized two conﬂicting visions of sovereignty: on the one hand, a vision where

national executives qua states share sovereignty under the auspices of the European

Commission, and on the other hand, a claim to reassert popular sovereignty (and

the channelling thereof by parliaments) in a multilevel fashion. We demonstrate that

the strengthening of the latter vision has been limited as the empowerment of par-

liaments was not sustained when civil society’s mobilization waned. The EU insti-

tutions have successfully curtailed the category of mixed agreements thus limiting

the involvement of national and regional parliaments. CETA was a climax in the

politicization of trade yet failed to bring about a new constitutional settlement that

enhances the popular component of sovereignty in the EU.

Keywords Sovereignty· Trade· CETA· Politicization· Parliament· People

Introduction

European trade was never uncontentious, and there were always dissenting voices

(della Porta 2007). To a large extent, EU trade policy is known as an area of

intense lobbying as decision makers seek to satisfy demands stemming from key

* Amandine Crespy

Amandine.Crespy@ulb.be

1 Cevipol andInstitut d’Etudes Européennes, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium

2 CRASSH, University ofCambridge, Cambridge, England

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Sovereignty in Political Discourses of the European Populist Radical Right: The Right of the People and the Right of the Peoples

Chapter

Full-text available

Jun 2023

Alexander Alekseev

The populist radical right (PRR) in the European Union so frequently evokes sovereignty as one of the indispensable rights of the people(s) that it becomes urgent to examine the relationship between the concept of sovereignty and the concept of rights in PRR political discourses. The chapter explores how in practice the PRR discursively instrumentalises references to rights to construct its vision(s) of sovereignty in the EU context(s). By applying instruments of critical discourse analysis to the electoral speeches of Marine Le Pen and Jarosław Kaczyński, the leaders of two very dissimilar EU PRR parties, the Rassemblement National and the Prawo i Sprawiedliwość, the chapter outlines concrete discursive strategies containing references to rights used by the PRR in the EU. The analysis shows that the PRR uses references to rights to advance exclusionary conceptions of popular (the right of the people) and national (the right of the peoples) sovereignty built upon the idea of a monocultural and ethnically homogenous majoritarian democracy, thus discursively challenging the foundational legitimacy of today’s European project as well as its current institutional configuration.

Paradiplomacy and the European Union’s trade treaty negotiations: the role of Wallonia and Brussels

Article

Full-text available

Mar 2023

Because of their integration in the elaboration of national positions in the European decision-making process, Belgian subnational entities have since the 1990s favoured collaborative paradiplomacy. This has been particularly the case for Wallonia and the Brussels Region since they have a stronger stake in keeping Belgium together. Cooperative paradiplomacy has therefore been their default option, only interrupted by the crisis over the signature of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) treaty, which was refused by these two regions. This article therefore analyses the dynamics of the conflict over the signature of the CETA treaty and the specific contribution of the two regions, Wallonia and Brussels.

Sovereignism and its Implication: The Differentiated Disintegration of the European Union

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2022

Right‐Wing Sovereignism in the European Union: Definition, Features and Implications

Article

Jun 2023

This article investigates how traditionally anti‐European Union (EU) right‐wing parties and leaders in four EU member states reinterpreted their relation with the EU in the post‐Brexit period (2016–2022). Either for the political opportunity structure's constraints or for the costs triggered by Brexit, right‐wing European nationalists had to redefine their role in remaining in the EU. We conceptualize as ‘sovereignism’ their attempt to endogenize nationalism in the EU. Relying on discourse analysis, this article shows that right‐wing sovereignism criticized the supranational character and the centralized policy system that developed within the EU. However, right‐wing sovereignism differed in the rationale of its criticism, based more on an economic discourse in Western Europe and more on a cultural discourse in Eastern Europe, as well as on the policies to repatriate. The sovereignist approach of nationalist right‐wing parties and leaders would lead to the nationally differentiated disintegration of the EU.

Sovereignty in Conflict: Political, Constitutional and Economic Dilemmas in the EU

Chapter

Jun 2023

This introductory chapter provides an overview of the book’s distinctive approach to conflicts of sovereignty in the European Union, and show how it was employed or challenged by the various contributors to the volume. Three types of sovereignty conflicts are distinguished: foundational, institutional, and territorial. Whereas the foundational principle of popular sovereignty has remained unchallenged, there has been a proliferation of institutional and territorial conflicts of sovereignty in the EU, driven by claims to popular sovereignty, but also to state sovereignty, parliamentary sovereignty and supranational sovereignty. Political parties across both Western and Eastern Europe have increasingly mobilized such sovereignty claims within inter-party competition to oppose the EU (as seen in the case of Brexit; radical right and radical left opposition to the EU in France; and Hungary and Poland’s confrontation with EU institutions on the rule of law), but also to demand constitutional changes such as regional independence (the case of Catalonia), parliamentary reforms (in Italy and Bulgaria) and more direct democratic mechanisms (in Germany).KeywordsSovereigntyEU integrationCrisis of representationHorizontal and vertical conflicts of sovereigntyEuropean sovereignty

Left-Wing Populism and Sovereignty: An Analysis of Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s Discourse (2011–2022)

Chapter

Jun 2023

Laura Chazel

Scholars have long mainly associated the concept of sovereignty with radical-right parties. However, the Great Recession (2007–2009) has created a breeding ground allowing the emergence/consolidation of populist movements in Europe among which left-wing parties and movements which have partly built their discourses and programs on the desire to recover a “stolen sovereignty”. Among these new political parties can be found Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s movement, La France insoumise, created in 2016. This chapter aims to examine Mélenchon’s sovereignist discourse. It is based on a lexicometric analysis and a qualitative discourse analysis of his discourse between 2011 and 2022. The general results show that, according to Mélenchon, the sovereignty of the people must be exercised directly (mechanism of direct democracy, social movements), indirectly (through the Parliament), and within the national framework. He argues that sovereignty is today attacked by both national and supranational entities (e.g. the establishment, the so-called Troika).KeywordsSovereigntyLeft-wing populismRadical leftNationalismFranceMélenchonPatriotismParliamentarismPopulismLa France insoumise

The Technocratic Populist Loop: Clashes Between Parliamentary and Popular Sovereignty in EU’s Eastern and Southern Periphery

Chapter

Full-text available

Jun 2023

This chapter starts from an apparent paradox. Key policy competences in economic governance have shifted to the supranational level within the European Union, since the Maastricht Treaty onwards. At the same time, calls and procedures for the national parliaments of member states to act up and provide scrutiny, accountability, and thus, legitimacy to EU policy-making have been on the rise. The surveillance role of the national parliaments, however, especially in the field of macro-economic policy, is rooted in an idealized vision of national parliaments. European integration has more often than not disempowered the parliaments of member states. Furthermore, we live in times of a profound crisis of party politics and a crisis of representation, with parliaments enjoying less and less trust from society. Both these developments trigger conflicts of sovereignty in national polities where different claims about where the final authority lies are clashing with each other. In the aftermath of the 2008 economic crisis, this has become particularly visible in Southern and Eastern Europe, where claims to popular sovereignty have strongly clashed with claims to parliamentary sovereignty. In the two paired comparisons analysed in this chapter—Greece and Slovenia, on one hand, Italy and Bulgaria, on the other—we interpret these sovereignty conflicts in a dialectic fashion: these conflicts are only caused by the weakening of parliaments, they also contribute to their further weakening, and therefore, further impeding their role of scrutiny in European multilevel governance. Against this background, a specific political praxis—identified as technopopulism—is gaining strength. Technopopulists, we find, invoke popular sovereignty to weaken parliaments and invoke parliamentary sovereignty to ignore the people. Ultimately, both popular and parliamentary sovereignty remain trapped in a technopopulist loop that not only reflects new conflicts of sovereignty but also exacerbates them, leading to a state of permanent crisis of democratic legitimacy.KeywordsConflicts of sovereigntyParliamentsParty politicsTechnopopulism

Chapter

Full-text available

Jun 2023

Marta Lorimer

Far right parties have been responsible for much of the politicisation of sovereignty at the European level. However, the far right's contestation of sovereignty presents a mixed picture of evolving positions and changing meanings associated with the term sovereignty. To study the dynamics of the far right's contestation of sovereignty, this chapter presents a diachronic analysis of how the French Rassemblement National defined sovereignty in party programmes produced between 1978 and 2019. It shows how internal party composition and knowledge of the EU, domestic political competition, and transnational factors pertaining to the evolution in the shape of the EU and the international political context, prompted the RN to redefine its approach to the relationship between sovereignty and the EU, and shift from supporting 'European autonomy' in the 1970s and early 1980s to opposing the EU on grounds of national and popular sovereignty from the end of the 1980s onwards.

‘A Sovereign Europe’? Strategic Use of Discourse at the Service of French Economic Interests in EU Politics (2017–2022)

Article

Feb 2023

Salih Isik Bora

The ‘practice turn’ in European Union (EU) studies has shown that everyday actions, notably discursive practices, are consequential for producing European integration. Yet, an important development has been overlooked by scholars: the emergence of a ‘European sovereignty’ discourse in EU politics. Since President Emmanuel Macron's Sorbonne speech in September 2017, the EU policy of the French government has been structured around the affirmed objective of building ‘European sovereignty’. It supposes that the EU should become more geopolitical and not shy away from defending its own interests in an increasingly disorderly and hostile world. This article enquires into the objectives that President Macron and the French government have sought to realise by introducing this discourse into EU politics. We argue that ‘European sovereignty’ is a discursive practice that instrumentalises security threats to the EU in order to legitimise France's economic policy objectives, most notably the reform of EU competition policy. Our findings derive not only from publicly available documents and speeches but also 72 semi‐directed interviews.

The shape of the cloud: Contesting date centre construction in North Holland

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2023
NEW MEDIA SOC

Julia Rone

The article analyses local contestation of data centres in the Dutch province of North Holland. I explore why and how local councillors and citizen groups mobilized against data centres and demanded democratization of decision-making processes about digital infrastructure. This analysis is used as a vantage point to problematize existing policy and academic narratives on digital sovereignty in Europe. I show, first, that most debates on digital sovereignty so far have overlooked the sub-national level, which is especially relevant for decision making on digital infrastructure. Second, I insist that what matters is not only where digital sovereignty lies, that is, who has the power to decide over digital infrastructural projects: for example, corporations, states, regions, or municipalities. What matters is also how power is exercised. Emphasizing the popular democratic dimension of sovereignty, I argue for a comprehensive democratization of digital sovereignty policies. Democratization in this context is conceived as a multimodal multi-level process, including parliaments, civil society and citizens at the national, regional and local levels alike. The shape of the cloud should be citizens' to decide.

10 From Nada to Namur: Sub-federal Parliaments’ Involvement in European Union Trade Politics, and the Case of Belgium

Chapter

Full-text available

Dec 2020

Participation of Civil Society in EU Trade Policy Making: How Inclusive is Inclusion?

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2021

In response to growing contestation and politicisation of trade policy, policy makers have aimed to enhance the ‘inclusiveness’ of trade policy through the institutionalisation of deliberative forums in which civil society organisations participate. However, it is not clear whether these processes actually enhance inclusiveness. This article adds to our understanding of this question by, first, developing an analytical framework (the ‘inclusiveness ladder’) and, second, applying it to the civil society mechanisms (CSMs) of European Union (EU) free trade agreements. The unique feature of CSMs is their focus on ensuring that the actual implementation of trade agreement does not run counter to sustainable development principles. Specifically, our empirical research involves a mixed methods analysis of primary and secondary sources and a survey of civil society participants. We find that CS is largely included at the level of logistics and partly at the level of information sharing, whereas monitoring capacities remain limited and impact on policy-making is quasi-absent. Moreover, results suggest differences between business participants, who seem largely satisfied with the lower steps on the ‘ladder’, and non-governmental actors who insist on policy impact. Finally, we outline avenues for further research and reflect on policy implications.

Contesting Austerity and Free Trade in the EU: Protest Diffusion in Complex Media and Political Arenas (Introduction)

Book

Full-text available

Dec 2020

Julia Rone

The book explores the diffusion of protest against austerity and free trade agreements in the wave of contention that shook the EU following the 2008 economic crisis. It discusses how protests against austerity and free trade agreements manifested a wider discontent with the constitutionalization of economic policy and the way economic decisions have been insulated from democratic debate. It also explores the differentiated politicization of these issues and the diffusion of protests across Western as well as Eastern Europe, which has often been neglected in studies of the post-crisis turmoil. Julia Rone emphasizes that far from being an automatic spontaneous process, protest diffusion is highly complex, and its success or failure can be impacted by the strategic agency and media practices of key political players involved such as bottom-up activists, as well as trade unions, political parties, NGOs, intellectuals, and mainstream media. This is an important resource for media and communications students and scholars with an interest in activism, political economy, social movement studies, and protest movements.

Mixed competences and ‘second generation’ trade agreements: a consideration of EU disintegration

Article

Full-text available

Aug 2020

Valerie J. D’Erman

This paper considers recent developments in EU trade policy in the context of the theoretical framework of ‘disintegration’. The events surrounding the conclusion of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with Canada, as well as the CJEU’s opinion on the EU-Singapore free trade agreement, underscore the limits to centralized decision-making in trade policy for newer ‘second generation’ trade agreements. The argument is that recent political developments with EU trade agreements have complicated the possibility for further exclusive competence at the supranational level, and in doing so have indirectly illustrated some potential limits to further economic integration. This examination is helpful when considering if (or to what degree) the logic of European integration has been weakened in the aftermath of various crises, and whether the federal structure of EU governance is able to accommodate changes in the allocation of competences in trade policy.

From Nada to Namur: National Parliaments’ Involvement in EU Trade Politics and the Case of Belgium

Chapter

Full-text available

Jan 2020

National Autonomy or Transnational Solidarity? Using Multiple Geographic Frames to Politicize EU Trade Policy

Article

Full-text available

Mar 2020

The article contributes to our understanding of how trade is politicized and how civil society activists manage the tensions between multiple collective action frames in a complex political context. When viewed alongside the Brexit referendum and Trump’s US Presidency, it is easy to see the 2013–2016 campaign against a European Union–US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership as a further example of an apparently growing populist ‘nationalism.’ Yet, in the European context—where campaigning was most visible—there was in fact extensive reliance on, and re-iteration of, a transnational ‘European’ frame, with antecedents in the 1999–2006 campaign against General Agreement on Trade in Services negotiations. As the article argues, transnational campaigning operates within a nexus of multiple, and sometimes conflicting, geographic frames. In both campaigns discussed here, activists typically engaged with the wider public via the national context and, sometimes, with allusions to ‘national autonomy.’ However, their activism was dependent upon a frame espousing ‘transnational solidarity.’ Developed over time, this structured their transnational relations with other groups and more full-time activists.

The Political Economy of Deep Integration

Article

Jan 2020

Framing TTIP in the European Public Spheres, Towards an Empowering Dissensus for EU Integration

Article

Jan 2021

Alvaro Oleart

‘This is a very well-crafted and thought-provoking book on the politicisation of EU issues within domestic politics and its role in the development of a European public sphere. An important takeaway is that EU should embrace public contestation as a means to foster the real engagement with its politics and policies.’ —Catherine de Vries, Bocconi University, Italy ‘This book is not only a rich study of the impact of civil society mobilisations on the debates about the TTIP in Europe, but also an important contribution to establish a much needed interdisciplinary dialogue between political theory, interest groups and mobilisation studies and political communication in European studies.’ —Luis Bouza García, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain ‘This book is a leap forward for the study of the European public sphere. Students will find it informative on the themes of EU democracy and public spheres, as well as on the TTIP debate in particular, while scholars will value its original findings, methods and theoretical contributions.’ —Louisa Parks, School of International Studies, University of Trento, Italy This book explores the debate and politicisation of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations in the Spanish, French and British public spheres. It addresses the questions of how and to what extent the national media discourses about TTIP were Europeanised, and how this type of Europeanisation contributes to the democratic legitimacy of the EU. The author argues that the politicisation of TTIP should be seen as a symptom of the ‘normal’ politics of a democratic polity, as it enlarges the political arena by embedding European issues into national political debates. Demands for ‘Another Europe is Possible’ empower rather than hinder the legitimacy of the EU. Alvaro Oleart is a researcher in EU studies at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands, and a scientific collaborator at the Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium.

The Political Economy of Deep Integration

Article

Dec 2020

Modern trade agreements no longer emphasize basic trade liberalization but instead focus on international policy coordination in a much broader sense. In this paper we introduce the emerging literature on the political economy of such deep integration agreements. We organize our discussion around three main points. First, the political conflict surrounding trade agreements is moving beyond the classic antagonism of exporter interests who gain from trade and import-competing interests who lose from trade. Second, there is a more intense popular backlash against deep integration agreements than there was against shallow integration agreements. And third, the welfare economics of trade agreements have become more complex, in the sense that the insight that "free trade is good" is no longer sufficient as a guide to evaluating the efficiency of international agreements.

Sovereignty Matters: The Mainstreaming of Populist Politics in the European Union

Chapter