The EU nowadays is a very powerful political actor and has a very big influence, not only in
Europe, but also in the rest of the world. Starting from a community for joint coal and steel
administration it developed further and further. Today there is a discussion among scholars about
the type of political actor the EU constitutes. Is it an international organization, a political system, a
supranational state or something completely new and incomparable. This paper wants to prove that
the European Union is not an international organization, despite having some of the appropriate
characteristics, but rather a political system. In order to achieve that it will try to define the terms
'political system' and 'international organization' and then evaluate if the characteristics of those
match with the European Union as a political actor.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Definition of International Organization
3. Definition of Political System
4. Conclusion and Evaluation
Objectives and Research Themes
The primary objective of this paper is to determine the nature of the European Union by examining whether it should be classified as an international organization or a political system. The research evaluates the EU against standard definitions to conclude that while it possesses traits of an international organization, its operational breadth and decision-making capacity are more characteristic of a political system, albeit one that stops short of being a fully sovereign state.
- Theoretical definitions of international organizations and political systems.
- Evaluation of the European Union as an international organization.
- Assessment of the European Union as a political system.
- Comparison of the EU with state-like sovereignty and legitimacy.
- Analysis of institutional power and decision-making processes.
Excerpt from the Book
Is the European Union a peculiar political system or a very developed political system?
The EU nowadays is a very powerful political actor and has a very big influence, not only in Europe, but also in the rest of the world. Starting from a community for joint coal and steel administration it developed further and further. Today there is a discussion among scholars about the type of political actor the EU constitutes. Is it an international organization, a political system, a supranational state or something completely new and incomparable. This paper wants to prove that the European Union is not an international organization, despite having some of the appropriate characteristics, but rather a political system. In order to achieve that it will try to define the terms 'political system' and 'international organization' and then evaluate if the characteristics of those match with the European Union as a political actor.
The first term this paper would like to analyse is the expression 'international organization'. Following Rittberger and Zangl (2006) there are several characteristics of such institutions. First of all it is often said that through these establishments states often try to achieve aims that are in the national interest but not necessarily beneficial for all states and decisions which are made “primarily reflect the interests of the most powerful member states” (Rittberger and Zangl, 2006:6) Moreover international organizations are defined as “permanent institutions of conference diplomacy in which states may exchange information, condemn or justify certain actions and coordinate their national political strategies.” (Rittberger and Zangl, 2006:6) Despite emphasizing the member states and their national interests in the first two characteristics, international organizations are also marked by pooled or delegated sovereignty coming from the member states so that these institutions become “corporate actors” (Rittberger and Zangl, 2006:6) themselves.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter introduces the research question regarding the classification of the European Union and outlines the intent to compare the EU against the definitions of international organizations and political systems.
2. Definition of International Organization: This chapter analyzes the characteristics of international organizations based on Rittberger and Zangl, specifically focusing on conference diplomacy, national interest pursuit, and pooled sovereignty.
3. Definition of Political System: This chapter discusses the defining aspects of a political system as conceptualized by Almond and Easton, including institutional decision-making, feedback loops, and resource distribution.
4. Conclusion and Evaluation: This chapter synthesizes the findings, arguing that the EU transcends the traditional definition of an international organization due to its extensive influence, yet remains distinct from a sovereign state due to the lack of a monopoly on legitimate violence.
Keywords
European Union, Political System, International Organization, Supranational, Sovereignty, Conference Diplomacy, Decision-making, Institutionalism, EU Law, Integration, Governance, Member States, Policy, Power Distribution, Legitimacy
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary subject of this paper?
The paper examines the nature of the European Union as a political entity, investigating whether it functions more like a traditional international organization or as a developed political system.
What are the core thematic areas discussed?
The core themes include the definition of international organizations, the functional characteristics of political systems, the role of institutional decision-making, and the limits of state-like sovereignty within the EU.
What is the central research question?
The central question is whether the European Union is merely a peculiar international organization or if it has evolved into a sophisticated political system that warrants a different classification.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The author utilizes a comparative analytical method, defining theoretical terms from established political science literature (Almond, Easton, Rittberger, Zangl) and evaluating the European Union's institutional behavior against these criteria.
What does the main body of the work cover?
The main body systematically contrasts the characteristics of international organizations—such as intergovernmental diplomacy—with the criteria of political systems, such as feedback mechanisms and the regulation of social and economic life.
Which keywords best describe this research?
Key concepts include the European Union, political systems, international organizations, supranational governance, and the distribution of power among member states.
How does the author distinguish between an 'international regime' and an 'international organization'?
The author notes that international regimes typically focus on one specific area of interest, such as health, whereas international organizations like the EU cover a broad, diverse range of policy topics.
Why does the author argue that the EU is not a 'state'?
The paper concludes that while the EU possesses many state-like features, it fails to meet Max Weber's definition of a modern state because it lacks the monopoly on legitimized violence, fiscal authority, and its own army or police force.
What is 'Kompetenz-Kompetenz' in the context of this paper?
It refers to the competence to define one's own competences, a power the author argues the European Union lacks compared to a fully sovereign nation-state.
- Quote paper
- Felix Wiebrecht (Author), 2013, Is the European Union a peculiar political system or a very developed international organization?, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/215582
