‘It takes three to tango’: new inter-institutional dynamics in managing major crisis reform

ABSTRACT This paper provides an in-depth reconstruction of the (failed) reform of the EU’s Common European Asylum System. Even though this was essentially a legislative process, it was characterized by extensive European Council involvement. In fact, the European Council is commonly blamed for the lack of progress in EU reform. Divisions at the level of the Heads and an insistence on consensus made it impossible for the machine room to proceed with the dossier. We challenge this view, by looking at the interplay between the European Council, Council (of Ministers) and Commission. We argue that the effectiveness of European Council involvement crucially depends on the actions of these two institutions. Involvement of the Heads can propel, paralyze or derail EU decision-making, depending on when and how they are brought into play. The Council and Commission play a crucial role by anticipating, setting the scene for and providing the follow-up to European Council involvement.

[1]  S. Smeets,et al.  Intergovernmentalism and its implications – new institutional leadership in major EU reforms , 2020 .

[2]  Mark Gilbert Alarums and Excursions: Improvising Politics on the European Stage, by L.Van Middelaar, (Newcastle Upon Tyne: Agenda, 2019, ISBN 99781788211727); xviii+301pp., £25.00 hb. , 2019, JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies.

[3]  S. Smeets,et al.  When success is an orphan: informal institutional governance and the EU–Turkey deal , 2019, West European Politics.

[4]  Marco Scipioni Failing forward in EU migration policy? EU integration after the 2015 asylum and migration crisis , 2018 .

[5]  S. Smeets,et al.  The role of the EU institutions in establishing the banking union. Collaborative leadership in the EMU reform process , 2018 .

[6]  F. Schimmelfennig Liberal Intergovernmentalism and the Crises of the European Union , 2018, JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies.

[7]  S. Lavenex ‘Failing Forward’ Towards Which Europe? Organized Hypocrisy in the Common European Asylum System , 2018 .

[8]  Natascha Zaun States as Gatekeepers in EU Asylum Politics: Explaining the Non‐Adoption of a Refugee Quota System , 2018 .

[9]  S. Connolly,et al.  The Commission: boxed in and constrained, but still an engine of integration , 2016, Europe’s Union in Crisis.

[10]  J. Peterson Juncker's Political European Commission and an EU in Crisis , 2017 .

[11]  N. Nugent,et al.  Is the European Commission Really in Decline? , 2016 .

[12]  Tanja A. Börzel,et al.  From EU Governance of Crisis to Crisis of EU Governance: Regulatory Failure, Redistributive Conflict and Eurosceptic Publics , 2016 .

[13]  Sergio Fabbrini,et al.  Integration without supranationalisation: studying the lead roles of the European Council and the Council in post-Lisbon EU politics , 2016 .

[14]  Adina Maricuţ With and without supranationalisation: the post-Lisbon roles of the European Council and the Council in justice and home affairs governance , 2016 .

[15]  Edoardo Bressanelli,et al.  The Shadow of the European Council. Understanding Legislation on Economic Governance , 2016 .

[16]  E. Jones,et al.  Failing Forward? The Euro Crisis and the Incomplete Nature of European Integration , 2016 .

[17]  D. Hodson,et al.  The New Intergovernmentalism: European Integration in the Post‐Maastricht Era , 2015 .

[18]  Uwe Puetter The European Council and the Council: New intergovernmentalism and institutional change , 2014 .

[19]  P. Bocquillon,et al.  An elephant on the 13th floor of the Berlaymont? European Council and Commission relations in legislative agenda setting , 2014 .

[20]  J. Tallberg Bargaining Power in the European Council* , 2008 .

[21]  S. Bulmer The European Council and the Council of the European Union: Gatekeepers of a European Federal Order? , 1996 .

[22]  R. H . Lauwaars,et al.  The European Council , 1977, Common Market Law Review.

[23]  T. Jukes,et al.  Alarums and Excursions , 1970, Nature.