Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conditions for socialization in international organizations: comparing committees of permanent representatives in the EU and NATO

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of International Relations and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cooperation in international organizations (IOs) is sustained by the socialization of state agents and their internalization of the organizations’ norms and identity. This article builds on a structured comparison of the scope conditions for socialization among permanent representatives in two organs of the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization—the Political and Security Committee (PSC) and the North Atlantic Council (NAC). In this study, we present some unexpected findings: First, the NAC is experiencing greater internalization (stronger socialization) than the PSC, normally held as a critical case of international socialization. Second, unambiguous norms favour socialization to a larger degree than ambiguous norms, refuting a widely held assumption about the pro-internalization effect of diffuse norms. Given that member states seem to grant their representatives larger “room for manoeuvre” when the norms of the IO have material stakes, the socialization effect of an IO’s norms is dependent on the perceived utility of the organization’s mission.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In the following analysis, we presume that there is organizational and functional likeness between the PSC and the NAC. Crucially, there is also likeness in the diplomatic practices at work in these committees (Pouliot 2011). Regarding the national representatives themselves (the respondents) they belong to the same category of senior officials who focus their careers on service in international/regional organizations. Although NAC ambassadors are of tradition considered as somewhat more senior than PSC ambassadors, there is little difference in the representatives’ prior experience. Incidentally, some of the respondents had experience from both committees and could subsequently compare the social environment and working practices in the two. The respondents were promised anonymity and therefore their nationality cannot be revealed. Those interviewed were all from European countries, big and small, old as well as new member states to the organizations. In total, 21 semi-structured interviews were conducted in the NAC and the PSC in the autumn of 2016.

  2. This is contrary to the prevailing scholarship in the field (albeit not all concur, see Trondal et al. 2010) which treats the EU as the critical case of international socialization presupposing stronger internalization among the national representatives in the PSC (see, for instance, Hooghe 2005; Lewis 2010; Cross 2010; Juncos and Pomorska 2011).

  3. We are aware that multiple causation, or equifinality—that is, a different set of independent variables leading to the same outcome—is a fundamental issue in comparative methods and likely to beset also this study (George and Bennett 2004). However, it is not our intention to solve this methodological issue in this article; nor do we contend that our results prove causal effects.

References

  • Barnett, Michael, and Martha Finnemore. 2004. Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bearce, David H., and Stacy Bondanella. 2007. Intergovernmental Organizations, Socialization, and Member-State Interest Convergence. International Organization 61 (4): 703–733.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyers, Jan. 2005. Multiple Embeddedness and Socialization in Europe: The Case of Council Officials. International Organization 59 (4): 899–936.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beyers, Jan, and Guido Dierickx. 1998. The Working Groups of the Council of the European Union: Supranational or Intergovernmental Negotiations? Journal of Common Market Studies 36 (3): 289–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chatzistavrou, Filippa. 2013. The Permanent Representatives to the EU: Going Native in the European Field? In The Field of Eurocracy, ed. D. Georgakakis and J. Rowell, 61–86. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkel, Jeffrey T. 1997. International Norms and Domestic Politics: Bridging the Rationalist-Constructivist Divide. European Journal of International Relations 3 (4): 473–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkel, Jeffrey T. 1998. The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory. World Politics 50 (1): 324–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkel, Jeffrey T. 2005. International Institutions and Socialization in Europe: Introduction and Framework. International Organization 59 (4): 801–826.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross, Mai’a K. Davis. 2010. Cooperation by Committee: The EU Military Committee and the Committee for Civilian Crisis Management. Occasional Paper No. 82, Paris: European Institute for Security Studies.

  • Epstein, Charlotte. 2010. Who Speaks? Discourse, the Subject and the Study of Identity in International Politics. European Journal of International Relations 17 (2): 327–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnemore, Martha. 1993. International Organizations as Teachers of Norms: The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization and Science Policy. International Organization 47 (4): 565–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnemore, Martha. 1996. National Interest in International Society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization 52 (3): 887–917.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flockhart, Trine. 2006. “Complex Socialization”: A Framework for the Study of State Socialism. European Journal of International Relations 12 (1): 89–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, Alexander L., and Andrew Bennett. 2004. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gheciu, Alexandra. 2005. Security Institutions as Agents of Socialization? NATO and the “New Europe”. International Organization 59 (4): 973–1012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenhill, Brian. 2010. The Company You Keep: International Socialization and the Diffusion of Human Rights Norms. International Studies Quarterly 54: 127–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas, Ernst. 1958. The Uniting of Europe. Political, Social and Economic Forces, 1950–1957. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas, Peter. 1992. Introduction. Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination. International Organization 46 (1): 1–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooghe, Liesbeth. 2005. Several Roads Lead to International Norms, but Few via International Socialization: A Case Study of the European Commission. International Organization 59 (4): 861–898.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ikenberry, John G., and Charles A. Kupchan. 1990. Socialization and Hegemonic Power. International Organization 44 (3): 283–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Organization. 2005. International Institutions and Socialization in Europe. Special Issue of International Organization 59 (4): 801–1079.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, Alastair I. 2001. Treating International Institutions as Social Environments. International Studies Quarterly 45 (4): 487–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, Alistair I. 2005. Conclusions and Extensions: Toward Mid-Range Theorizing and Beyond Europe. International Organization 59 (4): 1013–1044.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juncos, Ana E., and Karolina Pomorska. 2011. Invisible and Unaccountable? National Representatives and Council Officials in EU Foreign Policy. Journal of European Public Policy 18 (8): 1096–1114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, Jeffrey. 2005. The Janus Face of Brussels: Socialization and Everyday Decision-Making in the European Union. International Organization 59 (4): 937–971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, Jeffrey. 2010. How Institutional Environments Facilitate Cooperative Negotiation Styles in EU Decision-Making. Journal of European Public Policy 17 (5): 648–664.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucarelli, Sonia. 2006. Values, Identity and Ideational Shocks in the Transatlantic Rift. Journal of International Relations and Development 9: 304–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marciacq, Florent. 2015. Building European Security in the Western Balkans: The Diffusion of European Norms in the Context of Inter-organisational Interactions. Journal of International Relations and Development 18 (3): 337–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, James G., and Johan P. Olsen. 1998. The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Orders. International Organization 52 (4): 943–969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, Stuart Johan. 2010. A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive. New York: Harper & Brothers/Forgotten books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, Susan. 2005. Norm Diffusion within International Organizations: A Case Study of the World Bank. Journal of International Relations and Development 8 (2): 111–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pouliot, Vincent. 2011. Diplomats as Permanent Representatives. The Practical Logics of the Multilateral Pecking Order. International Journal 66 (3): 543–561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schimmelfennig, Frank. 2000. International Socialization in the New Europe: Rational Action, and the Eastern Enlargement of the European Union. European Journal of International Relations 6 (1): 109–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schimmelfennig, Frank, and Ulrich Seidelmeier (eds.). 2005. The Europeanization of Central and Eastern Europe. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trondal, Jarle, Martin Marcussen, Torbjörn Larsson, and Frode Veggeland. 2010. Unpacking International Organisations: The Dynamics of Compound Bureaucracies. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, Alexander. 1992. Anarchy is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics. International Organization 46 (2): 391–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, Alexander. 1994. Collective Identity Formation and the International State. American Political Science Review 88: 384–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, Alexander. 1995. Constructing International Politics. International Politics 20 (1): 71–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, Yi-chong, and Patrick Weller. 2015. Understanding the Governance of International Organizations. In The Politics of International Organizations: Views from Insiders, ed. P. Weller and Y. Xu, 2–17. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zürn, Michael, and Jeffrey T. Checkel. 2005. Getting Socialized to Build Bridges: Constructivism and Rationalism, Europe and the Nation-State. International Organization 59 (4): 1045–1079.

    Google Scholar 

List of interviews

  • Personal interview with a Deputy Permanent Representative to the PSC (PSC respondent 1), Brussels, 5 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Permanent Representative to the PSC (PSC respondent 2), Brussels, 4 October 2016.

  • Telephone interview with a Permanent Representative to the PSC (PSC respondent 3), 13 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Permanent Representative to the PSC (PSC respondent 4), Brussels, 3 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Deputy Permanent Representative to the PSC (PSC respondent 5), Brussels, 5 October 2016.

  • Telephone interview with a Deputy Permanent Representative to the PSC (PSC respondent 6), 21 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Permanent Representative to the PSC (PSC respondent 7), Brussels, 3 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Permanent Representative to the PSC (PSC respondent 8), Brussels, 7 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Permanent Representative to the PSC (PSC respondent 9), Brussels, 5 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Permanent Representative to the PSC (PSC respondent 10), Brussels, 5 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Deputy Permanent Representative to the PSC (PSC respondent 11), Brussels, 3 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Permanent Representative to NATO (NAC respondent 1), Brussels, 6 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Permanent Representative to NATO (NAC respondent 2), Brussels, 7 October 2016.

  • Telephone interview with a Deputy Permanent Representative to NATO (NAC respondent 3), 13 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Permanent Representative to NATO (NAC respondent 4), Brussels, 4 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Permanent Representative to NATO (NAC respondent 5), Brussels, 3 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Permanent Representative to NATO (NAC respondent 6), Brussels, 6 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Deputy Permanent Representative to NATO (NAC respondent 7), Brussels, 3 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Permanent Representative to NATO (NAC respondent 8), Brussels, 6 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Permanent Representative to NATO (NAC respondent 9), Brussels, 6 October 2016.

  • Personal interview with a Deputy Permanent Representative to NATO (NAC respondent 10), Brussels, 6 October 2016.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the participants in the workshop organized by the Swedish Network of European Studies in Political Science, Umeå University in March 2017. August Danielson would like to thank Michael Zürn for insightful comments on an earlier draft of the paper. Both authors would like to thank the three anonymous reviewers for their comments which greatly improved the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Government, Uppsala University, Box 514, 751 20, Uppsala, Sweden

    Anna Michalski

  2. Swedish Institute of International Affairs, Drottning Kristinas väg 37, 114 28, Stockholm, Sweden

    August Danielson

Authors
  1. Anna Michalski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. August Danielson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anna Michalski.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Michalski, A., Danielson, A. Conditions for socialization in international organizations: comparing committees of permanent representatives in the EU and NATO. J Int Relat Dev 23, 657–681 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-018-0156-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-018-0156-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation