Article 21 [The Principles and Objectives of the Union’s External Action]

  • Hermann-Josef Blanke
  • Stelio Mangiameli
Chapter

Abstract

External action of the EU (and the European Community) has traditionally been afflicted by a strong fragmentation of competences and organisational structures.

Keywords

Foreign Policy External Action European Council Humanitarian Assistance External Policy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Alston, P. (Ed.). (1999). The EU and human rights. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  2. von Bogdandy, A., & Bast, J. (Eds.). (2009). Principles of European constitutional law. Oxford: Hart Publishing & C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  3. Bosse-Platière, I. (2009). L’article 3 du Traité UE: recherche sur une exigence de cohérence de l’action extérieure de l’union européenne. Brussels: Bruylant.Google Scholar
  4. Bruha, T., & Rau, M. (2006). Verfassungsrechtliche Dimensionen europäischer Aussenpolitik. In T. Bruha & C. Nowak (Eds.), Die Europäische Union: Innere Verfasstheit und globale Handlungsfähigkeit (pp. 165–182). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  5. Bungenberg, M. (2009). Außenbeziehungen und Außenhandelspolitik. EuR – Beiheft, 44(1), 195–215.Google Scholar
  6. Calliess, C., & Ruffert, M. (Eds.). (2011). EUV/AEUV-Kommentar (4th ed.). Munich: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  7. Cannizzaro, E. (Ed.). (2002). The European Union as an actor in international relations. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  8. Cardwell, P. J. (2011). Mapping out democracy promotion in the EU’s external relations. European Foreign Affairs Review, 16(1), 21–40.Google Scholar
  9. Cordonier Segger, M.-C., & Khalfan, A. (2004). Sustainable development law: Principles, practices and prospects. Oxford: OUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Craig, P., & de Burca, G. (2008). EU law: Text, cases, and materials (4th ed.). Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  11. Cremer, H.-J. (2009). Die gemeinsame Außen-, Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik im Spannungsfeld zwischen Souveränität der Mitgliedstaaten und Supranationalität der EU. In U. Fastenrath & C. Nowak (Eds.), Der Lissabonner Reformvertrag. Änderungsimpulse in einzelnen Rechts- und Politikbereichen (pp. 275–298). Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  12. Cremona, M. (2008a). Coherence through law. Hamburg Review of Social Sciences, 3(1), 11–36.Google Scholar
  13. Cremona, M. (2008b). Developments in EU external relations law. Oxford: OUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cremona, M., & de Witte, B. (Eds.). (2008). EU foreign relations law: Constitutional fundamentals. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  15. Dashwood, A., & Maresceau, M. (Eds.). (2008). Law and practice of EU external relations: Salient features of a changing landscape. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. De Baere, G. (2008). Constitutional principles of EU external relations. Oxford: OUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. De Witte, B. (2003). The constitutional law of external relations. In I. Pernice & M. Poiares Maduro (Eds.), A constitution for the European Union: First comments on the 2003-draft of the European convention. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  18. Dimopoulos, A. (2010). The effects of the Lisbon treaty on the principles and objectives of the common commercial policy. European Foreign Affairs Review, 15(2), 153–170.Google Scholar
  19. Donnelly, J. (1989). Universal Human Rights in theory and practice. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Economides, S., & Ker-Lindsay, J. (2010). Forging EU Foreign Policy Unity from diversity: The ‘Unique Case’ of the Kosovo status talks. European Foreign Affairs Review, 15(4), 495–510.Google Scholar
  21. Eeckhout, P. (2005). External relations of the European Union: Legal and constitutional foundations. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  22. van Elsuwege, P. (2010). EU external action after the collapse of the pillar structure: In search of a new balance between delimitation and consistency. Common Market Law Review, 47(4), 987–1019.Google Scholar
  23. Fink-Hooijer, F. (1994). The Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union. European Journal of International Law, 5(1), 173–198.Google Scholar
  24. Fischer-Lescano, A., & Teubner, G. (2006). Regime-Kollisionen. Zur Fragmentierung des globalen Rechts. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  25. Foqué, R. (1998). Global governance and the rule of law: Human rights and general principles of good global governance. In K. Wellens (Ed.), International law: Theory and practice. Essays in honour of Eric Suy (pp. 25–44). The Hague: Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  26. French, D. (2005). International law and policy of sustainable development. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Frenz, W. (2010). Die neue GASP. Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht, 70(3), 487–521.Google Scholar
  28. Gauttier, P. (2004). Horizontal coherence and the external competences of the European Union. European Law Journal, 10(1), 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gehring, M., & Cordonier Segger, M.-C. (Eds.). (2005). Sustainable development in World Trade Law. The Hague: Kluwer Law.Google Scholar
  30. González Alonso, L. N. (2009). Desarrollo y seguridad en la jurisprudencia del TJCE: los limites al discurso de la coherencia en la acción exterior de la Union Europea. Revista de derecho comunitario europeo, 13(34), 867–894.Google Scholar
  31. Grabitz, E., & Hilf, M. (Eds.). (2004). EUV – EGV. Kommentar. Loose Leaf. München: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  32. Grabitz, E., Hilf, M., & Nettesheim, M. (2010). Das Recht der Europäischen Union. Kommentar zum Vertrag von Lissabon. Loose leaf. München: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  33. Hamonic, A. (2008). Cohérence et action extérieure de l’Union européenne. Revue du marché commun et de l’Union européenne, 523, 675–679.Google Scholar
  34. Herrmann, C., Krenzler, H. G., & Streinz, R. (Eds.). (2006). Die Außenwirtschaftspolitik der Europäischen Union nach dem Verfassungsvertrag. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  35. Hilf, M., & Oeter, S. (Eds.). (2010). WTO-Recht. Rechtsordnung des Welthandels (2nd ed.). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  36. Jones, K. (2010). The Doha Blues. Institutional crisis and reform in the WTO. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  37. Khaliq, U. (2008). Ethical dimensions of the Foreign Policy of the European Union: A legal appraisal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kingsbury, B. (1998). Confronting difference: The puzzling durability of Gentili’s combination of pragmatic pluralism and normative judgment. American Journal of International Law, 92(4), 713–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Koskenniemi, M. (2006). Fragmentation of international law: Difficulties arising from the diversification and expansion of international law. Report of the Study Group of the International Law Commission, UN-Doc. A/CN.4/L.682 of 13 April 2006. Available under http://www.helsinki.fi/oik/globalgovernance/Mallisivusto/tutkimus/L_682_E%5B1%5D.pdf.
  40. Koutrakos, P. (2001). Trade, foreign policy and defence in EU constitutional law. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  41. Koutrakos, P. (2006). EU international relations law. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  42. Koutrakos, P. (Ed.). (2011). European Foreign Policy: Legal and political perspectives. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  43. Krajewski, M. (2005). External trade law and the constitution treaty: Towards a federal and more democratic commercial policy? Common Market Law Review, 42(1), 91–127.Google Scholar
  44. Laatikainen, K. V. (2010). Multilateral leadership at the UN after the Lisbon treaty. European Foreign Affairs Review, 15(4), 475–493.Google Scholar
  45. Leino, P. (2005). European universalism? The EU and human rights conditionality. Yearbook of European Law, 24, 329–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Marchesi, D. (2010). The EU Common Foreign and Security Policy in the UN Security Council: Between representation and coordination. European Foreign Affairs Review, 15(2), 97–114.Google Scholar
  47. Missiroli, A. (2010). The new EU ‘Foreign Policy’ system after Lisbon: A work in progress. European Foreign Affairs Review, 15(4), 427–452.Google Scholar
  48. Oppermann, T., Classen, C. D., & Nettesheim, M. (2009). Europarecht (4th ed.). Munich: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  49. Pace, M. (2010). Interogating the European Union’s democracy promotion agenda: Discursive configurations of ‘Democracy’ from the Middle East. European Foreign Affairs Review, 15(5), 611–628.Google Scholar
  50. Pechstein, M. (2010). Die Intergouvernementalität der GASP nach Lissabon. Juristen Zeitung, 65(9), 425–432.Google Scholar
  51. Perry, A., & Hatchard, J. (Eds.). (2003). Contemplating complexity, law and development in the 21st century. London: Cavendish Publishing.Google Scholar
  52. Petrovsky, V. (1998). Good global governance and the UN. In Boutros Boutros-Ghali amicorum discipulorumque liber (vol. 2, pp. 1265–1277). Brussels: Bruylant.Google Scholar
  53. Rose, R. (2008). Evaluating democratic governance: A bottom-up approach to European Union enlargement. Democratization, 15(2), 251–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Schimmelfennig, F., & Scholtz, H. (2008). EU democracy promotion in the European Neighborhood. European Union Politics, 9(2), 187–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Schrijver, N. (2008). The evolution of sustainable development in international law: Inception, meaning and status. Leiden: Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Schwarze, J. (Ed.). (2009). EU-Kommentar (2nd ed.). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  57. Seppänen, S. (2005). Possibilities and challenges of the human rights-based approach to development. Helsinki: The Erik Castrén Institute Research Reports 17/2005.Google Scholar
  58. Stern, N. (2006). Review on the economics of climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Streinz, R., Ohler, C., & Herrmann, C. (2005). Die neue Verfassung für Europa. Munich: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  60. Streinz, R., Ohler, C., & Herrmann, C. (2008). Der Vertrag von Lissabon zur Reform der EU: Einführung mit Synopse (2nd ed.). Munich: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
  61. Tietje, C. (1997). The concept of coherence in the TEU and the CSFP. European Foreign Affairs Review, 2(2), 211–233.Google Scholar
  62. Tomuschat, C. (1996). Das Endziel der europäischen Integration – Maastricht ad infinitum? Deutsches Verwaltungsblatt, 111(19), 1073–1082.Google Scholar
  63. Tridimas, T. (2006). The general principles of EU law (2nd ed.). Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  64. Vedder, C., & Heintschel von Heinegg, W. (Eds.). (2007). Europäischer Verfassungsvertrag. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  65. Wessel, R. A. (1999). The European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy: A legal institutional perspective. The Hague: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  66. Wessel, R. A. (2000). The inside looking out: Consistency and delimitation in EU external relations. Common Market Law Review, 37(5), 1135–1171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Williams, A. (2004). EU human rights policies: A study in Irony. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  68. Wouters, J., Hoffmeister, F., & Ruys, T. (Eds.). (2006). The United Nations and the European Union: An ever stronger partnership. The Hague: Asser Press.Google Scholar
  69. Zangl, B., & Zürn, M. (Eds.). (2004). Verrechtlichung – Baustein für Global Governance? Bonn: J.H.W. Dietz.Google Scholar
  70. Zimmermann, A. (2006). Aktuelle Herausforderungen der Entwicklungspolitik der EU. In S. Kadelbach (Ed.), Die Außenbeziehungen der EU (pp. 109–124). Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hermann-Josef Blanke
    • 1
  • Stelio Mangiameli
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty for Economics, Law and Social ScienceUniversity of ErfurtErfurtGermany
  2. 2.National Research Council Institute for Regionalism, Federalism and Self-GovernmentRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations