The myth of German hegemony in the euro area revisited

References

• Anderson, Perry (2017). The H-Word. The Peripeteia of Hegemony. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Bagger, Thomas (2013). The ‘German Question’ and the Nature of Leadership in Europe. Washington, DC: Centre for European Policy Analysis (Central Europe Digest, 5 June 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Brunnermeier, Markus K., Harold James, and Jean-Pierre Landau (2016). The Euro and the Battle of Ideas. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bulmer, Simon J. (1997). ‘Shaping the Rules? The Constitutive Politics of the European Union and German Power’, in Peter J. Katzenstein (ed.), Tamed Power. Germany in Europe. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 49–79.
   Google Scholar
• Bulmer, Simon J., and William E. Paterson (2013). ‘Germany as the EU’s Reluctant Hegemon? Of Economic Strength and Political Constraints’, Journal of European Public Policy, 20:10, 1387–405.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulmer, Simon J. and William E. Paterson (2018). Germany and the European Union: Europe’s Reluctant Hegemon? London: Macmillan Education, Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, Ian (2011). Hegemony in International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Council (2016). Council Conclusions on a Roadmap to Complete the Banking Union. Brussels, June 17 (PR 353/16).
   Google Scholar
• Cox, Robert W. (1983). ‘Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations: An Essay in Method’, Millennium - Journal of International Studies, 12:2, 162–75.
   Google Scholar
• Degner, Hanno, and Dirk Leuffen (2019). ‘Franco-German Cooperation and the Rescuing of the Eurozone’, European Union Politics, 21:1, 89–108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Destradi, Sandra (2010). ‘Regional Powers and Their Strategies: Empire, Hegemony, and Leadership’, Review of International Studies, 36:4, 903–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donnelly, Shawn (2018). ‘Advocacy Coalitions and the Lack of Deposit Insurance in Banking Union’, Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 21:3, 210–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Court of Auditors (2016). Further Improvements Needed to Ensure Effective Implementation of the Excessive Deficit Procedure, Special Report No 10, Luxembourg.
   Google Scholar
• Finnish Ministry of Finance (2012). Joint Statement of the Minsters of Finance of Germany, the Netherlands and Finland. Press Release 175/2012.
   Google Scholar
• Gilpin, Robert (1981). War and Change in World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gilpin, Robert (1987). The Political Economy of International Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harnisch, Sebastian (2014). ‘Deutsche Führung in der internationalen Gesellschaft: Ein rollentheoretischer Ansatz’, in Sebastian Harnisch and Joachim Schild (eds.), Deutsche Außenpolitik und internationale Führung. Ressourcen, Praktiken und Politiken in einer veränderten Europäischen Union. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 17–55.
   Google Scholar
• Henning, C. Randall (2017). Tangled Governance: International Regime Complexity, the Troika, and the Euro Crisis. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Howarth, David, and Lucia Quaglia (2016). The Political Economy of European Banking Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hübner, Kurt (2012). ‘German Crisis Management and Leadership: From Ignorance to Procrastination to Action’, Asia Europe Journal, 9:2, 159–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, Erik (2010) ‘Merkel’s Folly’, Survival 52:3, 21–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaelberer, Matthias (1997). ‘Hegemony, Dominance or Leadership? Explaining Germany’s Role in European Monetary Cooperation’, European Journal of International Relations, 3:1, 35–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keohane, Robert O. (1980). ‘The Theory of Hegemonic Stability and Changes in International Economic Regimes, 1967-1977’, in Ole R. Holsti, Randolph M. Siverson, and Alexander L. George (eds.), Change in the International System. Boulder: Westview Press, 131–62.
   Google Scholar
• Keohane, Robert O. (1984). After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kindleberger, Charles P. (1973). The World in Depression 1929-1939. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kindleberger, Charles P. (1981). ‘Dominance and Leadership in the International Economy: Exploitation, Public Goods, and Free Rides’, International Studies Quarterly, 25:2, 242–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krasner, Stephen D. (1976). ‘State Power and the Structure of International Trade’, World Politics, 28:3, 317–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krotz, Ulrich, and Joachim Schild (2013). Shaping Europe: France, Germany, and Embedded Bilateralism from the Elysée Treaty to Twenty-First Century Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Krotz, Ulrich, and Richard Maher (2016). ‘Europe’s Crises and the EU’s “Big Three”’, West European Politics, 39:5, 1053–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kundnani, Hans (2012). ‘Was für ein Hegemon? Berlins Politik führt zu keinem deutschen, sondern einem chaotischen Europa’, Internationale Politik, 67:3, 21–5.
   Google Scholar
• Lake, David A. (1993). ‘Leadership, Hegemony, and the International Economy: Naked Emperor or Tattered Monarch with Potential?’, International Studies Quarterly, 37:4, 459–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Link, Werner (2012). ‘Integratives Gleichgewicht und gemeinsame Führung’, Merkur, 66:762, 1025–34.
   Google Scholar
• Link, Werner (2015). ‘Gemeinsame Führung und die Kultur der Zurückhaltung in der deutschen Außenpolitik’, Zeitschrift für Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik, 8:S1, 289–312.
   Google Scholar
• Magnette, Paul, and Kalypso Nicolaïdis (2005). ‘Coping with the Lilliput Syndrome: Large vs. Small Member States in the European Convention’, European Law Review, 11:1, 85–104.
   Google Scholar
• Matthijs, Matthias (2016). ‘The Failure of German Leadership’, in Hubert Zimmermann and Andreas Dür (eds.), Key Controversies in European Integration. London: Palgrave, 2nd ed., 236–42.
   Google Scholar
• Matthijs, Matthias, and Kathleen McNamara (2015). ‘The Euro Crisis’ Theory Effect: Northern Saints, Southern Sinners, and the Demise of the Eurobond’, Journal of European Integration, 37:2, 229–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matthijs, Matthias, and Mark Blyth (2011). ‘Why Only Germany Can Fix the Euro. Reading Kindleberger in Berlin’, Foreign Affairs, Snapshot, available at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/germany/2011-11-17/why-only-germany-can-fix-euro (accessed 25 March 2018).
   Google Scholar
• Matthijs, Matthias, and Mark Blyth (eds.) (2015). The Future of the Euro. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mazzucelli, Colette (1997). France and Germany at Maastricht: Politics and Negotiations to Create the European Union. New York: Garland.
   Google Scholar
• McNamara, Kathleen R. (1998). The Currency of Ideas: Monetary Politics in the European Union Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Meiers, Franz-Josef (2015). Germany’s Role in the Euro Crisis: Berlin’s Quest for a More Perfect Monetary Union. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Müller, Henriette and Femke van Esch (forthcoming a). ‘The Contested Nature of Political Leadership in the European Union: Conceptual and Methodological Cross-Fertilisation’, West European Politics.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller, Henriette, and Femke van Esch (forthcoming b). ‘What Makes Collaborative Leadership Successful? The Cognitive Dimension of European Integration’, West European Politics.
   Google Scholar
• Nye, Joseph S. (1990). ‘Soft Power’, Foreign Policy, 80:3, 153–71.
   Google Scholar
• Otero-Iglesias, Miguel (2017). ‘Still Waiting for Paris: Germany’s Reluctant Hegemony in Pursuing Political Union in the Euro Area’, Journal of European Integration, 39:3, 349–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paterson, William E. (2011). ‘The Reluctant Hegemon? Germany Moves Centre Stage in the European Union’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 49, 59–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pedersen, Thomas (2002). ‘Co-Operative Hegemony: Power, Ideas and Institutions in Regional Integration’, Review of International Studies, 28:4, 677–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, John (1995). ‘Decision-Making in the European Union: Towards a Framework for Analysis’, Journal of European Public Policy, 2:1, 69–93.
   Google Scholar
• Sachverständigenrat für die Beurteilung der gesamtwirtlichaftlichen Entwicklung (2012). Stabile Architektur für Europa – Handlungsbedarf im Inland. Jahresgutachten 2012/13, Wiesbaden.
   Google Scholar
• Schäfer, David (2013). ‘Der Fiskalvertrag–Ein Ausdruck deutscher Hegemonie in der Europäischen Union?’, Integration, 36:2, 107–23.
   Google Scholar
• Schieder, Siegfried (2014). ‘Führung und Solidarität in der deutschen Europapolitik’, in Sebastian Harnisch, and Joachim Schild (eds.), Deutsche Außenpolitik und internationale Führung. Ressourcen, Praktiken und Politiken in einer veränderten Europäischen Union. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 56–91.
   Google Scholar
• Schild, Joachim (2013). ‘Leadership in Hard Times: Germany, France, and the Management of the Eurozone Crisis’, German Politics & Society, 31:1, 24–47.
   Google Scholar
• Schild, Joachim (2018). ‘Germany and France at Cross Purposes: The Case of Banking Union’, Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 21:2, 102–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoeller, Magnus G. (2018). ‘The Rise and Fall of Merkozy: Franco-German Bilateralism as a Negotiation Strategy in Eurozone Crisis Management’, Journal of Common Market Studies, 56:5, 1019–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoeller, Magnus G. (2019). Leadership in the Eurozone: The Role of Germany and EU Institutions. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Schoeller, Magnus G. (forthcoming). ‘Tracing Leadership: The ECB’s “Whatever It Takes” and Germany in the Ukraine Crisis’, West European Politics.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schönberger, Christoph (2012). ‘Hegemon wider Willen. Zur Stellung Deutschlands in der Europäischen Union’, Merkur, 66:752, 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Schönberger, Christoph (2013). ‘Nochmals: Die deutsche Hegemonie’, Merkur, 67:764, 25–33.
   Google Scholar
• Snidal, Duncan (1985). ‘The Limits of Hegemonic Stability Theory’, International Organization, 39:4, 579–614.
   Google Scholar
• Spiegel Online (2012). ‘Merkel Vows “No Euro Bonds as Long as I Live”’, 27 June 2012, available at http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/chancellor-merkel-vows-no-euro-bonds-as-long-as-she-lives-a-841163.html (accessed 25 March 2018).
   Google Scholar
• Triepel, Heinrich (1961 [1938]). Die Hegemonie: Ein Buch von führenden Staaten (reprint). Aalen: Scientia Aalen.
   Google Scholar
• Underdal, Arild (1994). ‘Leadership Theory: Rediscovering the Art of Management’, in I. William Zartman (ed.), International Multilateral Negotiation. Approaches to the Management of Complexity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publ., 178–97.
   Google Scholar
• Van Esch, Femke A. W. J. (2017). ‘The Paradoxes of Legitimate EU Leadership: An Analysis of the Multi-Level Leadership of Angela Merkel and Alexis Tsipras During the Eurocrisis’, Journal of European Integration, 39:2, 223–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webber, Douglas (2019). European Disintegration? The Politics of Crisis in the European Union. London: Macmillan; Red Globe Press.
   Google Scholar
• Young, Oran R. (1991). ‘Political Leadership in Regime Formation: On the Development of Institutions in International Society’, International Organization, 45:3, 281–308.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar