Small states European union presidencies : the case of Ireland in 2004

Abstract

Ever since its foundation the European Union (EU) was always characterised by an inherent divide between small and large member states resulting in strong tensions between these two factions of states. With each enlargement round and successive wave of small member states joining the EU, large member states started experiencing the "Lilliput Syndrome". The size-factor of a state has been placed into discussion several times in EU politics and the 2003 Intergovernmental Convention on the Future of Europe was a case in point. In this Convention big states advocated the abolition of the Council Presidency and replacing the rotating system with a full-time figure-head managing the Office of the Presidency. The Council Presidency is very important for small states in the EU due to its principles of equality and reciprocity. Small states face structural disadvantages in the day to-day negotiations in the EU and must thus make use of counter-strategies to make-up for these disadvantages. In order to maximize their influence they may apply these strategies through a 'smart' state strategy. The role of the Council Presidency forms part of this 'smart' strategy. Hence small states may make use of this role to counteract for some of their structural constraints. Besides, the combination of formal and informal powers owned by this role provides the state in office the powers necessary for it to enhance its influence within the EU decision-making system. Through a case study of the 2004 Irish Presidency and a comparative analysis between the latter and the 2003 Italian Presidency, it will be shown how, a small state despite its size, can manage an effective Presidency and can use this role to make-up for its structural constraints.