Ulusal Çıkarların Avrupa Komisyonu Karar Alma Sürecine Sızması: Komisyonun Kabine Sistemine Rol Teorik bir Yaklaşım

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 18 Sayı: 1, 229 - 257, 02.08.2019

Yonca Özer , Gülşah Tuza

https://doi.org/10.32450/aacd.601935

Cited By: 1

Öz

Avrupa Komisyonu’nun Birliğin ortak çıkarları adına çalışabilmesi için ulusal çıkarlara karşı bağışık olması gerekir. Buna rağmen tarihsel olarak Komisyon içindeki kabineler, üye devletlerin kendi ulusal çıkarlarını Komisyon kararlarına sızdırabildiği ve üye devletler tarafından kuşatılmış ‘mini-Konsey’ler’ olarak tanımlanır. Her ne kadar Kinnock reformları kabinelerin ulusalsızlaşmasını sağlamış olsa da, bu ulusalsızlaşmanın kabinelerin ulusal çıkarlar için bir erişim noktası olması üzerindeki etkisinin henüz araştırılması gerekir. Bu makale Avrupa Komisyonu kabinelerinin ulusalsızlaştırılmasının gerçekten ulusal çıkarların Komisyon kararlarında temsil edilmesinin engelleyip engellemediğini araştırabilmek için rol teorik bir yaklaşımın uygulanması gerektiğini iddia ediyor.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Avrupa Komisyonu Kabineleri, Ulusalsızlaştırma, Hükümetlerarası, Uluslarüstü, Rol Teorisi

HOW EU MEMBER STATE INTERESTS PERMEATE INTO EUROPEAN COMMISSION DECISION-MAKING: A ROLE THEORETICAL APPROACH TO THE COMMISSION’S CABINET SYSTEM

Öz

Although the European Commission has to be immune to member state influences in order to act on behalf of the whole Union, historically its cabinets have been portrayed as national enclaves and even ‘mini-Councils’, constituting a venue for national interests to penetrate in European Commission decision-making. Despite the Kinnock reforms which led to the denationalisation of cabinets, empirical evidence whether denationalisation has an effect on the cabinets’ role as access points for national interests still needs to be discovered. This article claims that in order to test whether the denationalisation of European Commission’s cabinets has indeed prevented national interests to be represented in European Commission decision-making, the focus should be on agency rather than structure. Role theory has to contribute significantly in this regard.

Anahtar Kelimeler

European Commission’s Cabinets, Denationalisation, Intergovernmentalism, Supranationalism, Role Theory

Kaynakça

• Aggestam, Lisbeth. “Role Identity and the Europeanisation of Foreign Policy: A Political-Cultural Approach”. In Rethinking European Union Foreign Policy, Ben Tonra and Thomas Christiansen (eds.), 81-98. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004.
• Aspinwall, Mark D. and Schneider, Gerald. “Same Menu, Separate Tables: The Institutionalist Turn in Political Science and the Study of European Integration”. European Journal of Political Research 38, no 1 (2000): 1-36.
• Awesti, Anil. “The European Union, New Institutionalism and Types of Multi-Level Governance”. Political Perspectives 2, no 8 (2007): 1-23.
• Bengtsson, Rikard and Ole Elgström. “Conflicting Role Conceptions? The European Union in Global Politics”, Foreign Policy Analysis 8, no 1 (2012): 93-108.
• Beyers, Jan. “Multiple Embeddedness and Socialization in Europe: The Case of Council Officials”. In International Institutions and Socialization in Europe, Jeffrey T. Checkel (ed), 99-135. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
• Bitsch, Marie-Therese. “The College of Commissioners: A New Type of Public Authority”. In The European Commission 1958-72. History and Memories of an Institution, Michel Dumoulin (ed), 181-204. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2014. Accessed: December 17, 2018. http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/the-european-commission-1958-72-pbKA7606187/.
• Breuning, Marijke. “Role Theory Research in IR. State of the Art and Blind Spots”. In Role Theory in International Relations: Approaches and Analyses, Sebastian Harnisch, Cornelia Frank and Hanns Maull (eds), 16-35. Abingdon: Routledge, 2011.
• Carbone, Maurizio. The European Union and International Development: The Politics of Foreign Aid. London: Routledge, 2007.
• Cini, Michelle. The European Commission: Leadership, Organisation and Culture in the EU Administration. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1996.
• Commission of the European Communities. “Commission Decision of November 2005 amending its Rules of Procedure”. Official Journal (2005/960/EC, Euratom): 83-90. Accessed: December 17, 2018. https://eur-lex. europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32005D0960&from=EN.
• Deckarm, Renke. “The countries they know best: how national principals influence European commissioners and their cabinets”. Journal of European Public Policy 24, no 3 (2017): 447-466.
• “Dutch Get Second Representative in European Commission Cabinet”. Dutch News, September 16, 2014. Accessed: December 17, 2018. http://www.dutchnews.nl/ news/archives/2014/09/dutch_get_second_representativ/.
• Egeberg, Morten. “Executive Politics as Usual: Role Behaviour and Conflict Dimensions in the College of European Commissioners”. Journal of European Public Policy 13, no 1 (2006): 1-15.
• Egeberg, Morten and Andreas Heskestad. “The Denationalization of Cabinets in the European Commission”. Journal of Common Market Studies 48, no 4 (2010): 775-786. Eppink, Derk Jan. Life of a European Mandarin. Inside the Commission. 3rd edition. Tielt: Lannoo Publishers, 2007.
• European Commission. “Communication from the President to the Commission: The Working Methods of the European Commission 2014-2019”. Accessed: December 17, 2018. http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/3/2014/EN/3-2014-9004-EN-F1-1.Pdf.
• Goldman, Ralph M. The Future Catches Up: Educational and Instructional Experimentation. Vol. IV. Lincoln: Writers Club Press, 2002.
• Gouglas, Athanassios, Marleen Brans and Panagiotis M. Chaslaridis. “European Commission Cabinet Advisers and Policy Making”. Paper submitted for the NOPSA Conference, Workshop 23, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2014.
• Gouglas, Athanassios, Marleen Brans and Sylke Jaspers. “European Commissioner cabinet advisers: Policy managers, bodyguards, stakeholder mobilizers”. Public Administration 95, no 2 (2017): 359-377.
• Harnisch, Sebastian, Cornelia Frank and Hanns W. Maull. “Introduction”. In Role Theory in International Relations: Approaches and Analyses, Sebastian Harnisch, Cornelia Frank and Hanns W. Maull (eds.), 1-4. Abingdon: Routledge, 2011.
• Hartlapp, Miriam, Julia Metz and Christian Rauh. “The Agenda Set by the EU Commission: The Result of Balanced or Biased Aggregation of Positions?”. LEQS Paper 21 (2010), Accessed: 17.12.2018. http://www.lse.ac.uk/ europeanInstitute/LEQS%20Discussion%20Paper%20Series/LEQSPaper21.pdf.
• Hartlapp, Miriam, Julia Metz and Christian Rauch. “Linking Agenda Setting to Coordination Structures: Bureaucratic Politics Inside the European Commission”. Journal of European Integration 35, no 4(2013): 425-441.
• Hay, Colin, Michael Lister and David Marsh. The State: Theories and Issues. London: Red Globe Press, 2006.
• Headey, Bruce. British Cabinet Ministers: The Roles of Politicians in Executive Office. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1974.
• Hillery, Sharon. M. “Factors Associated with Professional Role Socialization of Nurses”, Retrospective Theses and Dissertations, paper 9531 (1991). Accessed: December 17, 2018. http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi? article= 10530&context=rtd.
• Holsti, Kal J. “National Role Conceptions in the Study of Foreign Policy”. International Studies Quarterly 14, no 3 (1970): 233-309.
• Hooghe, Liesbet. “Several Roads Lead to International Norms, but Few Via International Socialization: A Case Study of the European Commission”. International Organization 59, no 4 (Autumn 2005): 861-898.
• Kassim, Hussein. “’Mission Impossible‘, But Mission Accomplished: the Kinnock Reforms and the European Commission“. Journal of European Public Policy 15, no 5 (2008): 648-668.
• Kassim, Hussein. “Perspectives on the European Commission”. In Efficient and Democratic Governance in the European Union, Beate Kohler-Koch and Fabrice Larant (eds.), 63-72. Mannheim: University of Mannheim, 2008.
• Kassim, Hussein and Anand Menon. “European Integration since the 1990’s: Member States and the European Commission”. Paper presented at the ARENA Seminar, University of Oslo, February 11, 2004.
• Kassim, Hussein and Anand Menon. “Bringing the Member States Back In: The Supranational Orthodoxy, Member State Resurgence and the Decline of the European Commission since the 1990s”. Paper prepared for the CONFERENCE OF EUROPEANISTS OF THE COUNCIL FOR EUROPEAN STUDIES, Montreal, Canada, April 15-17, 2010.
• Kassim, Hussein, John Peterson, Michael W. Bauer, Sara Connolly, Renaud Dehousse, Liesbet Hooghe and Andrew Thompson. The European Commission of the Twenty-First Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
• Kleine, Mareike. “Trading Control: National Chiefdoms within International Organizations”. LEQS Paper 59 (March 2013), Accessed: December 20, 2018. file:///C:/Users/gulsah/Downloads/SSRN-id2235543.pdf.
• Kleine, Mareike. Informal Governance in the European Union: How Governments Make International Organizations Work. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press 2013.
• Mangenot, Michel. “The Cabinets”. In The European Commission 1973-86. History and Memories of an Institution, Eric Bussière, Vincent Dujardin, Michel Dumoulin, Piers Ludlow, Jan Willem Brouwer and Pierre Tilly (eds), 86-94. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2014. Accessed: December 20, 2018. http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/the-european-commission-1973-86-hardcover-edition--pbKA3013347/.
• March, James G. and Johan P. Olsen. “The New Institutionalism: Organizational Factors in Political Life”. The American Science Review 78, no 3 (1984): 734-749.
• Moravcsik, Andrew. “Preferences and Power in the European Community: A Liberal Intergovernmentalist Approach”. Journal of Common Market Studies 31, no 4 (1993): 473-524.
• Peters, B. Guy. “Institutional Theory: Problems and Prospects”. Reihe Politikwissenschaft/Political Science Series 69. Wien: Institut für Höhere Studien, July 2000. Accessed: May 14, 2019. https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/ bitstream/handle/document/24657/ssoar-2000-peters-institutional_theory.pdf? sequence=1
• Peterson, John. “The College of Commissioners”. In The Institutions of the European Union, John Peterson and Michael Shackleton (eds), 81-103. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2nd edition, 2006.
• Peterson, John. “Mission? Gestion? Cabinets and the Barroso Commission”. Paper Prepared for the European Union Studies Association Conference, Los Angeles, April 23-25 2009. Accessed: December 20, 2018. http://aei.pitt.edu/33119/1/peterson._john.pdf.
• Pieters, Janene. “NL Could Get Role in New EU Cabinet”. NL Times, September 16, 2014. Accessed: December 18, 2018. http://www.nltimes.nl/2014/09/16/nl-get-role-new-eu-cabinet/.
• Pollack, Mark A. “Delegation, Agency, and Agenda Setting in the European Community”. International Organization 51, no 1 (1997): 99-134.
• Pollack, Mark A. The Engines of European Integration: Delegation, Agency and Agenda-Setting in the EU. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.
• Ross, George. “Policy Development and the Cabinet System in the Delors’ Commissions”. Unpublished (1993). Accessed: December 20, 2018. http://aei.pitt.edu/7234/1/002484_1.pdf.
• Ross, George. Jacques Delors and European Integration. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1995.
• Searing, Donald D. “Roles, Rules, and Rationality in the New Institutionalism”. The American Political Science Review 85, no 4 (1991): 1239-1260.
• Seidel, Katja. The Process of Politics in Europe: The Rise of European Elites and Supranational Institutions. London: Tauris Academic Studies, 2010.
• Spence, David. “The President, the College and the Cabinets”. In The European Commission, David Spence and Geoffrey Edwards (eds.), 25-74. London: John Harper, 3rd edition, 2006.
• Spierenburg Report. “Proposals for Reform of the Commission of the European Communities and its Services”. European Commission (1979). Accessed: November 28, 2018. http://aei.pitt.edu/993/1/Spirenberg_report.pdf.
• Wehner, Leslie E. and Cameron G. Thies. “Role Theory, Narratives, and Interpretation: The Domestic Contestation of Roles”. International Studies Review 16, no 3 (2014): 411-436.
• Wille, Anchrit. The Normalization of the European Commission: Politics and Bureaucracy in the EU Executive. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
• Wonka, Arndt. “Technocratic and Independent? The Appointment of European Commissioners and its Policy Implications”. Journal of European Public Policy 14, no 2 (March 2007): 169-189.
• Zürn, Michael and Jeffrey T. Checkel. “Getting Socialized to Built Bridges”. In International Institutions and Socialization in Europe, Jeffrey T. Checkel (ed), 241-274. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.