Studies in EU External Relations is a peer-reviewed book series dedicated to the legal, political, trade and historical aspects of the EU's relations with non-member states or regions or other international organisations.
Focusing on the EU's position and role in the world, the series covers the Union’s bilateral as well as its multilateral relations with third countries. This coverage extends to institutional, legal and political issues on or affecting external relations, as well as to specific sectoral substantive topics, including migration, defence or trade matters for example. The series also includes monographs on the external dimension of substantive domestic EU policies (competition, environment, etc). In addition, the series welcomes studies on various facets of the EU enlargement phenomenon and the European Neighbourhood Policy.
Authors are cordially invited to submit proposals and/or full manuscripts to Marie Sheldon.
For further information on book proposals and manuscript submission, please see our Author Gateway.
Will the twenty-first century be the Asian century? Will the People’s Republic of China (PRC) overtake the United States as the leading global superpower? Will an institutionalised Third Bloc emerge in international relations and challenge the transatlantic alliance that has dominated world politics for such a long time? While opinions on the details differ strongly, there seems to be a certain consensus that the East Asian region, roughly defined as Northeast Asia (Greater China, the two Koreas, Japan and the Russian Far East) plus Southeast Asia (the ten members states of ASEAN), will be globally significant in the years to come and see its role growing. Such a role includes almost all fields such as economics, science and technology, migration, culture, and international relations. These issues are interrelated and often overlap.
This series, therefore, takes as its main focus the field of international relations post-WWII that pertain to the region and in particular the question of collective security and related issues, including options for institutionalised mechanisms of a joint regional security policy. The need for such a focus has become increasingly obvious: shifts in the global balance of power, as well as a multitude of conflicts in the region, some old and unresolved, some new and emerging, actual or potential, call for ongoing detailed appraisal and sustainable solutions.
The British parliamentary system is generally praised for its longevity and stability. However, the flaws of British democracy were highlighted following the referendum of June 2016. This withdrawal was not only an earthquake for the European project, it was also the source of unprecedented constitutional controversies in the UK itself. In particular, it raised a series of questions about the respective competences of national institutions and local institutions in the field of European affairs and, more broadly, in foreign affairs. Since the British Constitution is not a written one, the rules for the distribution of competences in these areas are essentially the result of practice.
The UK’s parliamentary regime, that was in the process of collapsing in September 2019 appears, against all odds, to have recovered following the early elections of 12 December 2019. The result of those elections has apparently provided a way out of the crisis, although it is unclear whether it will be temporary or not.
This article provides an analysis of public engagement as it is practised and conceptualised by the Welsh Parliament. It does so by applying an interpretive framework to elite interviews and parliamentary committee report forewords, in order to identify institutional narratives of public engagement. These narratives are identified and discussed at three different levels of decision-making (and in ascending levels of ‘abstraction’): practice, strategy, and concept. The chosen framework and methodology show the usefulness of narrative at a conceptual and analytical level. The conclusions drawn – regarding 1) the need for a shift from public-facing to public-engaging committee work, 2) a lack of clarity on desired outcomes, and 3) continued tensions around sources of evidence and knowledge – are relevant and applicable to parliaments across a range of contexts.
Expatriate citizens of countries under authoritarian rule have been increasingly engaging in protest against repression in their home countries. Whether such diaspora protests can boost social uprisings inside authoritarian countries, however, is yet to be analysed. I hypothesise that diaspora protests inspire protest against authoritarian rulers inside the home country by reducing political repression or providing the dissidents with a perception of political opportunity. To test this hypothesis, I use Iran as a case study of an authoritarian regime with a sizeable diaspora and notable protest surges in recent decades. Using daily protest data from 1996 to 2018, results show that protests against the Iranian regime by Iranian expatriates were followed by a significant increase in the chance of protest incidence inside Iran. This association is robust to a variety of modelling specifications and independent of the role of transnational organisational links between activists, which has been documented in the literature previously.