Global Integration II

1. Global Integration II May 7, 2013

2. Quiz Question 1: The European community had its origins in the attempt to coordinate policies with regard to what two items? Question 2: The participation of which two countries in the original European community was most important with regard to security and peace issue?

3. Quiz Question 3: What are transnational actors? Question 4: Identify one counterwave in which integration among nations has decreased

4. Treaty of Lisbon (2004) Provided additional constitutional structure to the EU in the face of the defeat of a proposed EU constitution by referenda in France and the Netherlands. Less expansive than the proposed constitution, but made important changes: Legally binding charger of human rights High Commissioner on Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Greater powers of member nations to veto new members Draft legislation from European Parliament made available to legislatures in member countries Mechanism for petitions from individuals

5. Structure of the European Union Because it was originally a technical organization focused on economic policy coordination (coal and steel), the EU has a strong tradition of technocratic dominance (technocrat = bureaucrat with technical rather than administrative expertise). Thus much of its staff look at problems as technical issues to be resolved (find the right technical solution) rather than as a political problem (involving the need to follow political procedures of gathering opinions, engaging in compromises, being accountable to ordinary citizens). Many ordinary citizens, therefore, find the EU to be too distant, too dismissive of their concerns, inflexible.

6. European Commission EU bureaucrats are organized under the European Commission, which consists of a single member from each EU nation (27). Each commissioner is proposed by his/her national government and serves a four year term. However, commissioners are not to represent their home government or home nation. Rather, they are to act in the interest of Europe as a whole. As such, they form a kind of cabinet government for the EU, with the president of the commission acting as a kind of prime minister. As a whole must be approved by European Parliament

7. Duties of EU Commission Act as day to day government of EU, individual members holding a portfolio of policy responsibilities Create agenda for the European Council by identifying problems and proposing solutions. Draft and propose legislation, represent EU in trade negotiations, draw up reguations Reports to and implements the policies of the Council of the European Union Before Treaty of Lisbon, only held these powers by delegation from the European Council; now do so directly as the result of EU treaties.

8. European Council Collective body of the leaders of the 27 member countries. Meet twice a year with president of the European commission and generally oversee the operation of the EU.

9. European Parliament 750 members directly elected by citizens within member countries Has parties, which cut across national lines Watchdog duties regarding Commission Approve Commission budget Some legislative powers Shares power with Council of European Union over migration, employment, health, consumer protection

10. European Court of Justice 27 judges (one from each state) appointed by member government but pledged to be neutral. Law experts rather than political figures. Has jurisdiction over disputes listed in the Treaty of Rome Can hear cases brought by governments or individuals Can overturn national laws by finding them in conflict with EU law

11. Council of European Union Changing body of ministers representing member governments of the EU who get together to approve EU policy in their realm of responsibility (energy ministers for energy policy; education ministers for education policy, etc.) Generally acts on the basis of consensus; more formally, major issues must be approved by 55% of the EU members representing 65% of EU citizens. Must have its actions approved by the European Council

12. Technology and Integration Modern technology has the capacity to spur internationalization in ways different than the type of integration exhibited by such organizations as the EU: Integration spurred by individual or small group action rather than states Connect people quickly across national lines Bypass or resist states Most important are radio, television, phones and the internet

13. Radio and Television Older technologies that have been forces of integration and of general political importance for more than 90 years. First had importance in integrating various parts of larger countries. Reproduce a single source of information in many locations Can reach remote areas and can be understood (if language is correct) by those with little formal education While radios least expensive, television particularly powerful because of its combination of pictures with speech.

14. Radio and Television • States attempt to regulate these media through: • Licensing and content control (censorship) • Regulation and allocation of frequencies • Also must cooperate internationally in regulation of frequencies • Satellites can be used to sidestep attempts at state control, though regulation of use of satellite dishes one way of state interfering. Al Jazeera an important source of news and information via satellite. • Older technologies also in use, in terms of the transportation of portable recorded messages (earlier, dvds, vcr and other tapes).

15. Internet Phones important for: Two-way communication New abilities to record sound and video Help make individuals international actors Cheap and widely available– 4 billion cell phone users in 2009 Available to poor and those not in power, difficult for states to regulate

16. Internet • Way of distributing information even more widely than through phones, and often used in conjunction with phones to: • Broadcast audio and video • Mobilize and organize people • Gather and store information • Quick textual messaging • Relatively private

17. States and New Technology • While new technologies tend to break down barriers among states and to give ordinary citizens important tools, states have always been quick to use it for their own purposes: • Gather and store information on citizens and opponents– dissidents, other countries. First satellites, now internet and other technologies • Use of shortwave, internet to broadcast information, news and public relations materials: Voice of America, BBC, Radio Moscow • Use state owned radio and television networks to sway popular opinion and mobilize citizens against opponents or to work on a state project.

18. Use Against States Technology allows ordinary citizens and others (NGOs, activists, liberation movements, terrorists) to work against states in various ways: Broadcast information states do not like (embarrassing to government, state secrets)– ways of holding government accountable Obtain information not available in states Broadcast criticisms of policies and officials Organize., connect and mobilize critics of states (meetings, demonstrations) Broadcast and popularize grievances and demands Appeal for help, sympathy, legal and military action across state lines Subvert state-supported culture by importing and broadcasting outside cultural materials (literature, music, movies, television and radio programs) Use as weapons– trigger bombs, hack computer systems and web sites Vietnam War, Iraq War, Philippines, Color Revolutions, Arab Spring, PRC, Occupy Movement, Al Qaeda

19. Countermeasures by States Channeling and filtering of internet (PRC, Iran) Regulation of internet sites (PRC, Iran) Monitoring of telephone and internet communications (most developed countries) Few or no internet connections (DPRK) Use of hackers and deployment of viruses and worms (PRC, Israel, Iran, US, GB, Russia)

20. Effects of technology on States In general, the argument is that the new technologies generally work against states when it comes to their attempts to protect their power and sovereignty. When states use those technologies, it is generally in reaction to their prior use by opponents and others doing things they do not like. States in that sense would be better off without the technologies, or at least with those technologies not in the hands of ordinary citizens. Better able to control information in general Able to control national identity Deny opponents use of ways of disseminating views, and connecting and organizing like-minded people.

21. Effects of Technology on States There are, however, larger benefits that states derive from these forms of technology: • Increases in economic productivity • Increased transparency • Threats more likely to be detected • Free riders and cheaters on agreements more easily detected. • Information in general tends to drive down transaction costs in both the economic and security realms, making cooperation easier and conflict more easily resolvable and less likely to end in conflict.

22. Effects of Technology on People While the argument is that technology, in promoting integration, tends to empower ordinary people and put states at a disadvantage (thus weakening states both internally and on the world stage), there are problems with these forms of communicative technology for ordinary people

23. Inequality While cell phone and internet technology is less expensive than older technology and getting less expensive, it still has a cost that is beyond the reach of many poorer people, in that their access to phones and the internet is sporadic. Technology disadvantages those who have less formal education or are unable to learn as quickly as others (such as the elderly)

24. Inequalities • Technology gives additional advantages to those with greater access and more capital. • The internet and satellite tv has allowed the advantages of the West in producing and distributing cultural materials to penetrate more global territory, to do so more thoroughly, and in doing so drive out and reduce support for indigenous cultural activities, norms and institutions. • Loss of indigenous languages to languages of dominant countries (US, Western Europe, China, Russia) • Greater risk of interference in internal politics and policymaking by those outside the country– other side of greater transparency and ability of citizens to force accountability by appealing to the outside.