Seizing the moment: Regional opportunity structures and Wallonia’s temporary veto of the EU–Canada bilateral trade agreement

ABSTRACT Constitutionally, Belgium represents the most extreme case of regional entities wielding power over EU external trade policymaking. Formally, the Flemish, Walloon and Brussels regions can wield veto power over Belgian positions. Yet, only once has a Belgian region actually made use of this capacity, when Wallonia temporarily blocked the conclusion of the EU trade agreement with Canada in 2016 (CETA). We show that political actors – legislative and executive – could only activate this constitutional possibility in conjunction with other necessary conditions: a high degree of societal mobilization and, above all, inter-party competition across different levels of government. As the Walloon Parti Socialiste seized the moment, it reinforced the paradox of weakness and strengthened the EU’s trade bargaining power towards Canada. We finish by discussing the spill-over effects of the 2016 CETA episode into the shaping of future EU trade policies, as well as into future intra-Belgian EU policymaking.

[1]  Faisal Z. Ahmed.  Trade Policy in Multilevel Government: Organizing Openness. By Christian Freudlsperger. New York: Oxford University Press, 2020. 277p. $85.00 cloth. , 2021, Perspectives on Politics.

[2]  P. Conconi,et al.  EU Trade Agreements: To Mix or Not to Mix, That Is the Question , 2021, Journal of World Trade.

[3]  Jörg Broschek,et al.  8 Parallel Pathways? The Emergence of Multilevel Trade Politics in Austria and Germany , 2020, The Multilevel Politics of Trade.

[4]  F. D. Ville,et al.  10 From Nada to Namur: Sub-federal Parliaments’ Involvement in European Union Trade Politics, and the Case of Belgium , 2020, The Multilevel Politics of Trade.

[5]  Michael Hahn.  EU Trade and Investment Policy since the Treaty of Lisbon - Achievements and future priorities , 2020 .

[6]  Patricia M. Goff.  The Multilevel Politics of Trade , 2020 .

[7]  C. Freudlsperger.  Trade Policy in Multilevel Government , 2020 .

[8]  Niels Gheyle.  Huddle Up! Exploring Domestic Coalition Formation Dynamics in the Differentiated Politicization of TTIP , 2020 .

[9]  A. Poletti,et al.  Towards Explaining Varying Degrees of Politicization of EU Trade Agreement Negotiations , 2020 .

[10]  Oriol Costa,et al.  Editorial: Politicization of EU Trade Policy Across Time and Space , 2020 .

[11]  Sophie Meunier,et al.  Missing in Action? France and the Politicization of Trade and Investment Agreements , 2020 .

[12]  Bart. Kerremans,et al.  Principals and transceivers: regional authorities in EU trade negotiations , 2020 .

[13]  F. D. Ville,et al.  Outside Lobbying and the Politicization of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership , 2018, Lobbying in the European Union.

[14]  C. Freudlsperger.  More voice, less exit: sub-federal resistance to international procurement liberalization in the European Union, the United States and Canada , 2018 .

[15]  Dirk De Bièvre.  The Paradox of Weakness in European Trade Policy: Contestation and Resilience in CETA and TTIP Negotiations , 2018, The International Spectator.

[16]  Markus Gehring.  Subnational Participation in International Trade Law: Options for the European Union , 2018 .

[17]  M. Tatham.  The Rise of Regional Influence in the EU – from Soft Policy Lobbying to Hard Vetoing , 2018 .

[18]  Sieglinde Gstöhl,et al.  The Trade Policy of the European Union , 2017 .

[19]  Alasdair R. Young.  The New Politics of Trade , 2017 .

[20]  M. Kallestrup,et al.  National parliaments and the new contentiousness of trade , 2017, The EU and the New Trade Bilateralism.

[21]  Gabriel Siles‐Brügge,et al.  Why TTIP is a game-changer and its critics have a point , 2017 .

[22]  A. Poletti,et al.  Why the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership is not (so) new, and why it is also not (so) bad , 2017 .

[23]  Gabriel Siles‐Brügge.  Transatlantic investor protection as a threat to democracy: the potency and limits of an emotive frame* , 2017 .

[24]  R. Wessel,et al.  The non-ratification of mixed agreements: Legal consequences and solutions , 2017, Common Market Law Review.

[25]  G. Loo.  CETA’s signature: 38 statements, a joint interpretative instrument and an uncertain future. CEPS Commentary, 31 October 2016 , 2016 .

[26]  O. Rozenberg,et al.  The Palgrave handbook of national parliaments and the European Union , 2015 .

[27]  Simon Toubeau.  Multi-Level Party Politics in Western Europe , 2013 .

[28]  P. Bursens,et al.  How Europe Shapes the Nature of the Belgian Federation: Differentiated EU Impact Triggers Both Co-operation and Decentralization , 2013 .

[29]  M. Tatham.  Going Solo: Direct Regional Representation in the European Union , 2008 .

[30]  Joachim Blatter,et al.  In Search of Co‐variance, Causal Mechanisms or Congruence? Towards a Plural Understanding of Case Studies , 2008 .

[31]  P. Bursens,et al.  Europeanization of Subnational Polities: the Impact of Domestic Factors on Regional Adaptation to European Integration , 2008 .

[32]  P. Bursens,et al.  The European rescue of the federal state: How Europeanisation shapes the Belgian state , 2006 .

[33]  T. Schelling,et al.  The Strategy of Conflict. , 1961 .

[34]  P. Bursens,et al.  10 Belgium: The Democratic State of the Federation , 2021 .

[35]  Yelter Bollen.  The domestic politics of EU trade policy : the political-economy of CETA and anti-dumping in Belgium and the Netherlands , 2018 .

[36]  Matthias Bauer.  Manufacturing discontent: The rise to power of anti-TTIP groups , 2016 .

[37]  L. Winter,et al.  Kingdom of Belgium: Partitocracy, Corporatist Society, and Dissociative Federalism , 2015 .

[38]  Kris Deschouwer.  The politics of Belgium , 2012 .

[39]  Klaus Detterbeck.  Multi-Level Party Politics in Western Europe , 2012 .

[40]  Dave Sinardet.  Federal reform and party politics : the case of the fifth Belgian state reform , 2012 .

[41]  S. Paquin.  Federalism and Compliance with International Agreements: Belgium and Canada Compared , 2010 .

[42]  A. Alen.  Algemene beschouwingen bij de vijfde staatshervorming van 2001 , 2002 .

[43]  Pascal Delwit,et al.  La nouvelle réforme de l'État: processus, contenu, méthode , 2002 .