Abstract
This article offers the central argument that universalisms – defined as narratives of identity and role-playing in International Relations (IR) – depict different roles and identities for the United States and the European Union (EU). On the one hand, America's universalism depicts the democratic city upon a hill that leads in the world by example and with power, hard and soft. On the other, Europe's universalism is a utopia (an ideal plan) and a fragile balance between supranationalism and intergovernmentalism, putting forward consensual but ambiguous notions of ‘civilian’ and ‘normative’ power. Despite ample evidence of its international primacy and potential, the EU insists on keeping a low profile in IR. As a result of these trends, the rhetoric of the West and common values on the basis of transatlantic relations are clearly undermined.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
This article explores the EU post-Cold War narrative more specifically, but it acknowledges the long history and broader context (beyond institutions) of European universalism.
These universalisms can be understood in the light of long history, including the (European) origins of Western philosophy, US independence and constitutional path, early twentieth century pan-Europeanism, and European integration through the second half of the century. The universalisms, and the rivalry, were less visible in the context of the Cold War, but even then different approaches existed: the Helsinki Conference and the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, later OSCE, offer interesting examples. This article focuses on the post-Cold War period to document the new terms on the side of the EU.
EU websites and documents have offered ample evidence of this conceptualization, and the academic debate on ‘civilian power’ is lively (Orbie, 2006).
The argument of EU exclusivity in this ‘normative power’ has been refuted by analysis showing that other international actors have as much (if not more) power to shape norms. Most of the themes that supposedly gave ground to the EU as normative power are complex and cannot be traced back as inherently European or non-American, including the abolition of the death penalty (Moravcsik, 2005).
This argument is based on fieldwork conducted in Brussels, Paris, Barcelona, and London between 2006 and 2009, including 11 interviews with EU officials and members of academia and think tanks.
As with the EU, both the US institutional discourse and many academic analyses have historically contributed to substantiate this narrative.
Bobbio contends that the idea of Europe is ‘a bit less irrational than a myth, a bit less defined than a theory, a bit less pretentious than an ideal’. Possibly, the comparison with the US (myth, theory, pretentious ideal) underlies his definition.
Only 16 countries (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, and Spain) made a declaration on the symbols of the EU and did mention it.
References
Baldwin, D.A. (2002) ‘Power and International Relations’, in W. Carlsnaes, T. Risse and B.A. Simmons (eds.) Handbook of International Relations, London: SAGE, pp. 177–191.
Berenskoetter, F. and Williams, M.J. (eds.) (2007) Power in World Politics, New York: Routledge.
Bobbio, N. (2003) Teoria general de la politica, Madrid: Trotta.
Brands, H.W. (1998) What America Owes the World: The Struggle for the Soul of Foreign Policy, Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, C. (1997) ‘Universal human rights: A critique’, International Journal of Human Rights 1 (2): 41–65.
Cox, M. (2005) ‘Beyond the west: Terrors in transatlantia’, European Journal of International Relations 11 (2): 203–233.
Deudney, D. (2008) Keynote address, London: BISA US foreign policy working group annual conference, 18 September.
Diez, T. (2005) ‘Constructing the self and changing others: Reconsidering “normative power Europe”’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies 33 (3): 615–636.
Duchene, F. (1973) ‘The European Community and the Uncertainties’, in M. Kolistamm and W. Hager (eds.) A Nation Writ Large: Foreign Policy Problems Before the European Communities, London: Macmillan, pp. 1–21.
European Commission. (2009) ‘EU fills new top jobs’ in EU explained, 11 November.
Hassner, P. and Vaisse, J. (2003) Washington et le monde -dilemmes d’une superpuissance, Paris: Autrement.
Hersant, Y. and Durant-Bogaert, F. (2000) Europes -de l’antiquite au XXe siecle, Paris: Robert Laffont.
Ikenberry, G.J. (2006) Liberal Order and Imperial Ambition: Essays on American Power and World Politics, Cambridge: Polity.
Jorgensen, K.E. (1998) ‘The European Union's Performance in World Politics: How Should We Measure Success?’, in J. Zielonka (ed.) Paradoxes of European Foreign Policy, The Hague: Kluwer Law International, pp. 87–101.
Kagan, R. (2002) ‘Power and weakness’, Policy Review 113: 3–28.
Laidi, Z. (2005) La norme sans la force -l’enigme de la puissance europeenne, Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.
Lipset, S.M. (1996) American Exceptionalism – A Double-edged Sword, New York, London: Norton.
Lockhart, C. (2003) The Roots of American Exceptionalism: History, Institutions and Culture, 1st edn, New York; Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mandelbaum, M. (2002) The Ideas that Conquered the World: Peace, Democracy and Free Markets in the Twenty-first Century, New York: Public Affairs.
Manners, I. (2002) ‘Normative power Europe: A contradiction in terms?’ Journal of Common Market Studies 40 (2): 235–258.
Moravcsik, A. (2005) ‘The Paradox of US Human Rights Policy’, in M. Ignatieff (ed.) American Exceptionalism and Human Rights, Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, pp. 147–197.
Nicolaidis, K. (2006) ‘The clash of universalisms – Or why Europe needs a post-colonial ethos’, Paper presented at Sciences-Po conference: Are European preferences shared by others? Paris.
Nye, J. (1990) Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power, New York: Basic Books.
Obama, B.H. (2009) ‘Speech in Cairo: A new beginning’, http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/NewBeginning/, accessed 10 December 2009, Cairo, 4 June.
Orbie, J. (2006) ‘Civilian power Europe – Review of the original and current debates’, Cooperation and Conflict 41 (1): 123–128.
Patten, C. (2008) Lecture: Is There a European Union Foreign Policy? London: London School of Economics, 22 May.
Peterson, J. and Pollack, M. (eds.) (2003) Europe, America, Bush: Transatlantic Relations in the Twenty-first Century, London: Routledge.
Slaughter, A.-M. (2007) The Idea That Is America – Keeping Faith with Our Values in a Dangerous World, New York: Perseus Books.
Smith, M. (2004) ‘Between two worlds? The European Union, the United States, and world order’, International Politics 41 (1): 95–117.
Telò, M. (2006) Europe, a Civilian Power? European Union, Global Governance, World Order, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Barrios, C. Rival Universalisms in Transatlantic Relations: Obama's Exceptionalism Meets Europe's Low Profile. Eur Polit Sci 10, 11–19 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2010.69
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2010.69