Page 39 [39]
Integration and disintegration ] 37
Another theoretical framework for European integration is used
by constructivist scholars. Constructivists mostly believe that the social
environment in which European integration develops plays the most
important role in shaping states" cooperation. In their approach, everything
is constructed: the EU and other European organisations; their institutions;
the disputes, or the lack of disputes in these organisations; domestic social
and political culture, including national identity; party politics; and the states
foreign policies.
EU Member States bring to the negotiations the (political) culture of their
country, their domestic politics, which shape their preferences, and many
of their choices will be marked by the values they were trained to believe in.
As Jeffrey T. Checkel puts it, it is a mistake to reify EU "institutions, imbuing
them with fixed values and meaning, but not asking from where these came
or why certain ones are simply absent" (Checkel 2004, 145). So, the EU and
European cooperation are constructed and reconstructed on a permanent
basis, and are an unfinished and continuously changing project.
Finally, realists see Europe, the EU, and other European organisations as
tools to defend and pursue national interests. Iheir premises are based on the
conviction that states are the most relevant actors in international politics,
that states behaviour is determined or even dictated by their environment,
and that this environment is an inhospitable place (Kunz 2013, 5). Thus,
their thinking about European cooperation is based on creating a balance
against the backdrop of the position of Member States in power (especially,
big power) politics and also at the international level (Rynning 2005). As
the international system is anarchic, states want to cooperate to minimise
dangers and boost their potentials to fulfil their interests, ie. boost their power
and influence over others. As such, “EU member states have an incentive to
bundle their power resources in order to increase European influence in the
world” (Kunz 2013, 11).
On the other hand, realists are not completely unified in how they see the
states’ role in international cooperation: as is well known, there are different
schools in realism (classic realism will be slightly different from the different
types of structural realism, for example). Consequently, some realist scholars
would argue that states are more defensive and strive for security, while others
would follow offensive realism and claim that states tend to maximise power
for dominating and gaining incentives. This, then, also has an effect on how
they see European integration, and what elements (such as countering the
Soviet Union back in the early days of the EEC, or economic interests, or
more influence in world politics, or domestic stability) they put into the focus
of their attention and research.