https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/52163 2026-05-06T11:58:10Z 2026-05-06T11:58:10Z Harwood, Mark Moncada, Stefano Pace, Roderick https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/52313 2022-05-31T08:34:31Z 2020-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: The future of the European Union : demisting the debate Authors: Harwood, Mark; Moncada, Stefano; Pace, Roderick Abstract: Does Europe have a collective future, or will the coming years be marked by increasingly incoherent developments within the heterogeneous EU? There is no denying that the second decade of this century has seen a strong mood shift away from the inter-dependence and concerted actions that guided Europe’s national governments since the end of World War II, and then since the fall of the Berlin Wall. What connections, if any, are there between the paroxysms of Brexit in the UK and the varying shades of populism in continental Europe? The common denominator may simply be the painful economic pressures resulting from waning global competitiveness. It is clear that the high ideals of the European project no longer exert the same political pull. The EU’s dreams of progressing almost seamlessly from a trading zone to a shared political economy are not being realised. Where are the convergence policies that would exert centripetal rather than centrifugal forces? Where is the appetite for reforms leading to political union, and whatever happened to the idea of Europeans speaking with one voice? If the EU continues along its present path, the verdict of history may well be that it achieved little more than the welter of regulations needed to ensure trade flows. In geopolitical terms, Europe as a major player on the world stage may have been an illusion largely created by aggregating national statistics.

2020-01-01T00:00:00Z Petroni, Nadia https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/52312 2022-05-31T08:34:40Z 2020-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: EU integration and policy (in)coherence towards irregular migration Authors: Petroni, Nadia Abstract: Irregular migration in the European Union (EU) dominates the current EU political agenda. It is also the top concern of European citizens, according to the latest Standard Eurobarometer (Spring 2019).38 EU member states, however, are not affected to the same degree, resulting in political friction with regard to how to deal with the challenges of this phenomenon. Furthermore, the EU’s failure to provide an adequate and unitary response to the unprecedented influx of irregular migrants in 2015 exposed the strength of state sovereignty within member states and led to divisions within the EU so far as to threaten the overall functioning of the Schengen Area. As a result, the EU approach to irregular migration shows clear signs of following an intergovernmental logic of cooperation, where the supranational institutions have a lesser role leaving member states in the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Council in the driving seat. Nonetheless, there is an apparent paradox: EU institutions and member states are more divided than ever over a common approach to irregular migration, yet at the same time they are increasingly converging towards more restrictive migration policies.

2020-01-01T00:00:00Z Matera, Amelia Martha https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/52311 2022-05-31T08:34:50Z 2020-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: The steps from Dublin III to Dublin IV Authors: Matera, Amelia Martha Abstract: In 1992, the EU established the Common European Asylum System, which is based on five central directives one of which is the Dublin regulation. The debate about a possible Dublin IV regulation started a long time ago, but the discrepancies among the member states’ interests are huge and it is hard to find a compromise. In fact, since the third and last update in 2013, there have not been any further changes. However, all parties agree that there is a need of reform and that the current system is unfair and inefficient. This paper wants to highlight future possible scenarios. The Commission presented a proposal in 2016 to reform the whole CEAS, which included a proposal for Dublin IV. The European Parliament had already adopted a position on the proposal of 2016, while the Council did not. The first part of the paper is dedicated to the current situation and to the reasons why the Regulation needs reform. The second section analyses the Proposal submitted by the Commission in 2016, and the related problems and reasons why this Proposal has not been agreed upon. Before reaching the conclusion, the third section explores possible alternatives of the Regulation’s future. It is difficult to say what will happen; theseare all hypothetical scenarios. However, it is fundamental to deeply analyse the suggestions proposed so far with regard to an eventual reform of the current regulation.

2020-01-01T00:00:00Z Kasper, Agnes Vernygora, Vlad Alex https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/52310 2022-05-31T08:34:59Z 2020-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: Towards a ‘Cyber Maastricht’ : two steps forward, one step back Authors: Kasper, Agnes; Vernygora, Vlad Alex Abstract: This chapter evaluates the EU’s cybersecurity policy from four perspectives – neofunctionalism, liberal intergovernmentalism, post-functionalism, and the imperial paradigm. A search for a theory-based framework is performed to ensure that the analysis in this chapter is completed within a set of boundaries, and does not stray into speculation about the EU’s prospective strategic steps. Using this contribution’s findings and elaborations, a proposal on the policy-associated model is made. Having observed the empirical data, while analytically reflecting on actuality, it can be argued that a ‘Cyber Maastricht’ is long overdue.

2020-01-01T00:00:00Z