It is generally acknowledged that Europe will not be a superpower in the sense of a political-military ensemble on an equal footing with the United States or China. Europeans reject this possibility across the board. Moreover, even if they wanted to go that route, would it not expose them to reproducing on a European scale what they have struggled to combat amongst themselves: the idea of becoming a great power with all the attributes of force and supremacy that such a project implies?1


Monetary Policy Normative Power Military Power State Sovereignty Euro Zone 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 2.
    François Duchêne, “Europe’s Role in World Peace,” in R. Mayne (ed), Europe Tomorrow: Sixteen Europeans Look Ahead, London, Fontana, 1972; “The European Community and the Uncertainties of Interdependence,” in M. Kohnstamen and W. Hager, A Nation Writ Large? Foreign Policy Problems before the European Community, Basingstoke, Macmillan, 1973; John Galtung, The European Community. A Superpower in the Making, London, Allen & Unwin, 1973 and Andrew Shonfield, Europe: Journey to an Unknown Destination, London, Allen Lane, 1973.Google Scholar
  2. 5.
    Edwar Carr, The Twenty YearsCrisis, 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations, London, Macmillan, 1962.Google Scholar
  3. 6.
    Hedley Bull, “Civilian Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?”Journal of Common Market Studies 21 (2), 1982, pp. 149–164.Google Scholar
  4. 9.
    H. Maull, “Germany and Japan. The New Civilian Powers,” Foreign Affairs 69 (5), 1990, pp. 91–106.Google Scholar
  5. 10.
    K. Twichett (ed), Europe and the World: The External Relations of the Common Market, St. Martin’s Press, 1976.Google Scholar
  6. 11.
    Bull, “Civilian Power Europe,” p. 151 and Christopher Hill, “The Capability-Expectations Gap, or Conceptualizing Europe’s International Role,” Journal of Common Market Studies 31 (3), September 1993, p. 309.Google Scholar
  7. 12.
    Hill sees Europe as a regional peacemaker, mediator of conflicts, global actor, bridge between the rich and poor, and co-supervisor of the world economy.Google Scholar
  8. 16.
    Ian Manners, “Normative Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?” Journal of Common Market Studies 40 (2), 2002.Google Scholar
  9. 17.
    R. Rosencrance, “The European Union: A New Type of International Action,” in Jan Zielonka (ed), Paradoxes of European Foreign Policy, The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 1998, pp. 15–23.Google Scholar
  10. London, Routledge, 1997; J.H.H. Weiler, The Constitution of Europe, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1999; Brigid Laffan, “The European Union Polity: A Union of Regulative, Normative and Cognitive Pillars,” Journal of European Public Policy 8 (5), 2001, pp. 709–727.Google Scholar
  11. 23.
    Stefano Guzzini, Constructivism and the Role of Institutions in International Relations, Copenhagen, CPRI. Available at http://www.ciaonet.orgwps/gus06/.
  12. 24.
    Joseph Nye, “Neorealism and Neoliberalism,” World Politics 40 (2), 1988, p. 240.Google Scholar
  13. 26.
    Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics, Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley, 1979.Google Scholar
  14. 27.
    Martha Finnemore and Katheryn Sikkink, “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change,” International Organization 52 (4), Autumn 1998, p. 891.Google Scholar
  15. 28.
    Martha Finnemore, “Norms, Culture and World Politics: Insights from Sociology’s Institutionalism,” International Organization 325, 1996.Google Scholar
  16. 30.
    Robert Rosencrance, The Rise of the Trading State: Commerce and Conquest in the Modern World, New York, Basic Books, 1986.Google Scholar
  17. 33.
    Romano Prodi, “2000–2005: Shaping the New Europe,” speech before the European Parliament in Strasbourg, February 15, 2000.Google Scholar
  18. 36.
    Patrick Artus and Charles Wyplosz, La Banque Centrale Européenne, Paris, Conseil d’Analyse économique, La Documentation Française, 2002, 181 p.Google Scholar
  19. 37.
    Jean Pisani-Ferry and Elie Cohen, “Les paradoxes de l’Europe-puissance,” Esprit, August-September 2002.Google Scholar
  20. 42.
    Kalypso Nicolaïdis and Robert Howse, “This is my EUtopia…Narrative as Power,”Journal of Common Market Studies 40 (4), 2002, p. 771. Regarding the importance of the discourse on power in general, see Karoline Postel-Vinay, LOccident et sa bonne parole. Nos représentations du monde de l‘Europe coloniale à l‘Amérique hégémonique, Paris, Flammarion, 2005. There is nothing automatic, however, about this reality. In the case of GMOs, 22 states out of the Union’s 25 recently refused to lift the safeguard clauses against introducing GM rapeseed and corn, contrary to the EU Commission’s opinion recommending states to condemn recourse to safeguard clauses. Finding itself at odds not only with European member states but also with European public opinion on such a sensitive subject, the EU Commission is taking the risk of seeing its legitimacy weakened. Le Monde, June 26–27, 2005.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Zaki Laïdi 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zaki Laïdi

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations