External drivers of EU differentiated cooperation: How change in the nuclear nonproliferation regime affects member states alignment

Reference list

• Alemán, E., Calvo, E., Jones, M. P., & Kaplan, N. (2009). Comparing cosponsorship and roll-call ideal points. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 34(1), 87–116. https://doi.org/10.3162/036298009787500358
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alter, K. J., & Meunier, S. (2009). The politics of international regime complexity. Perspectives on Politics, 7(1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592709090033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amadio Viceré, M. G., & Sus, M. (2023). Differentiated cooperation as the mode of governance in EU foreign policy: Emergence, modes and implications. Contemporary Security Policy, 44(1), 4–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2023.2168854
   Google Scholar
• Bailey, M. A., Strezhnev, A., & Voeten, E. (2017). Estimating dynamic state preferences from United Nations voting data. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 61(2), 430–456. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002715595700
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baldus, J., Müller, H., & Wunderlich, C. (2021). The global nuclear order and the crisis of the nuclear non-proliferation regime: Taking stock and moving forward. Zeitschrift für Friedens- und Konfliktforschung, 10(2), 195–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42597-021-00066-0
   Google Scholar
• Bátora, J., & Fossum, J. E. (2020). Introduction. In J. Bátora & J. E. Fossum (Eds.), Towards a segmented European political order: The European Union's post-crises conundrum (pp. 1–18). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Blavoukos, S., & Bourantonis, D. (2017). The EU in UN politics: Analytical and empirical challenges. In S. Blavoukos & D. Bourantonis (Eds.), The EU in UN politics: Actors, processes and performances (pp. 1–26). Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Brosig, M. (2017). Regime complexity and resource dependence theory in international peacekeeping. In J. A. Koops & R. Bierman (Eds.), Palgrave handbook of inter-organizational relations in world politics (pp. 447–470). Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Burmester, N., & Jankowski, M. (2018). One voice or different choice? Vote defection of European Union member states in the United Nations General Assembly. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 20(3), 652–673. https://doi.org/10.1177/136914811876818
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Council of the European Union. (2005). Council Common Position 2005/329/CFSP relating to the Review Conference on the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 2005. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri = CELEX%3A32005E0329&qid = 1647643335086.
   Google Scholar
• Council of the European Union. (2015). Council conclusions on the Ninth Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (8079/15). https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/24525/st08079-en15.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Council of the European Union. (2021). Council Conclusions on the 10th Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-13243-2021-INIT/en/pdf.
   Google Scholar
• da Conceição-Heldt, E., & Meunier, S. (2014). Speaking with a single voice: Internal cohesiveness and external effectiveness of the EU in global governance. Journal of European Public Policy, 21(7), 961–979. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2014.913219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dee, M. (2012). Standing together or doing the splits: Evaluating European union performance in the nuclear Non-proliferation treaty review negotiations. European Foreign Affairs Review, 17(2), 189–211. https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2012021
   Google Scholar
• Dee, M., & Smith, K. E. (2017). UK diplomacy at the UN after Brexit: Challenges and opportunities. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 19(3), 527–542. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117710208
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fabbrini, S. (2021). Differentiation or federalisation: Which democracy for the future of Europe? European Law Journal, advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12384
   Google Scholar
• Forster, A., & Wallace, W. (1996). Common foreign and security policy. In A. Forster & W. Wallace (Eds.), Policy-Making in the European Union (pp. 411–438). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Genschel, P., & Jachtenfuchs, M. (2014). Beyond the regulatory polity? The European integration of core state powers. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbons, R. D. (2018). The humanitarian turn in nuclear disarmament and the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. The Nonproliferation Review, 25(1–2), 11–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/10736700.2018.1486960
   Google Scholar
• Grand, C. (2000). The European Union and the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. European Union Institute for Security Studies. https://www.iss.europa.eu/sites/default/files/EUISSFiles/cp037e.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Hix, S., Noury, A. G., & Roland, G. (2005). Power to the parties: Cohesion and competition in the European Parliament, 1979–2001. British Journal of Political Science, 35(2), 209–234. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123405000128
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jonter, T., & Rosengren, E. (2014). From nuclear weapons acquisition to nuclear disarmament – the Swedish case. Medicine, Conflict and Survival, 30(sup1), s46–s63. https://doi.org/10.1080/13623699.2014.930241
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jørgensen, K. E. (2009). The European union in multilateral diplomacy. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 4(2), 189–209. https://doi.org/10.1163/187119109X440906
   Google Scholar
• Jupille, J., Mattli, W., & Snidal, D. (2013). Institutional choice and global commerce. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kielmansegg, S. G. v. (2017). The common foreign and security policy – A pool of flexibility models. In T. Giegerich, D. C. Schmitt, & S. Zeitzmann (Eds.), Flexibility in the EU and beyond: How much differentiation can European integration bear? (pp. 139–160). Nomos Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Kmentt, A. (2015). The development of the international initiative on the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons and its effect on the nuclear weapons debate. International Review of the Red Cross, 97(899), 681–709. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1816383116000059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurz, S. (2015). Joint Statement on the Humanitarian Consequences of Nuclear Weapons. http://www.un.org/en/conf/npt/2015/statements/pdf/humanitarian_en.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Leruth, B., Gänzle, S., & Trondal, J. (2019). Exploring differentiated disintegration in a post-Brexit European Union. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 57(5), 1013–1030.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Louwerse, T., & Otjes, S. (2015). The impact of parliamentary specialisation on cosponsorship. Journal of Legislative Studies, 21(4), 476–494.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luif, P. (2014). Der Konsens der Staaten der Europäischen Union in der Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik. In J. F. a W. Matyas (Eds.), Strategie und Sicherheit 2014 (pp. 289–303). Böhlau Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Michel, L., & Pesu, M. (2019). Strategic deterrence redux: Nuclear weapons and European security. FIIA Report no 60. Retrieved from https://www.fiia.fi/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/fiia_report60_strategic-deterrence-redux.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Sweden (2020) Ministerial meeting of the Stockholm Initiative for Nuclear Disarmament’, 27 February 2020, at https://www.swedenabroad.se/en/embassies/un-geneva/current/news/stockholm-initiative-for-nucleardisarmament
   Google Scholar
• Müller, H. (2020). The EU: RevCon Redeemer? Working paper prepared for the CNS Working Group on New Approaches to Disarmament, James Martin Centre for Non-Proliferation Studies, Monterrey, CA. https://nonproliferation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/EU-As-RevCon-Redeemer.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Müller, P., Pomorska, K., & Tonra, B. (2021). The domestic challenge to EU foreign policy-making: From europeanisation to de-Europeanisation? Journal of European Integration, 43(5), 519–534.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NATO. (2022). Finland and Sweden complete NATO accession talks. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_197737.htm#:~:text = Finland%20and%20Sweden%20completed%20accession,and%20commitments%20of%20NATO%20membership.
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen, J., & Hanson, M. (2014). The European Union and the Humanitarian Initiative in the 2015 Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Cycle. EU Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Consortium Non-proliferation Paper No. 41. https://www.sipri.org/publications/2014/eu-non-proliferation-papers/european-union-and-humanitarian-initiative-2015-nonproliferation-treaty-review-cycle.
   Google Scholar
• Nuti, L. (2021). NATO's Role in Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Arms Control: A (Critical) History. Instituto Affari Internazionali. Retrieved from https://www.iai.it/en/pubblicazioni/natos-role-nuclear-non-proliferation-and-arms-control-critical-history
   Google Scholar
• Oberthür, S. (2011). The European Union’s performance in the international climate change regime. Journal of European Integration, 33(6), 667–682. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2011.606690
   Google Scholar
• Onderco, M. (2021). Networked nonproliferation: Making the NPT permanent. Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Onderco, M., & Farrés Jiménez, A. (2021). A Comparison of National Reviews of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. EUNPDC Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Papers No.76. https://sipri.org/sites/default/files/2021-06/eunpdc_no_76.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Panke, D. (2014). The European Union in the United Nations: An effective external actor? Journal of European Public Policy, 21(7), 1050–1066. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2014.912149
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panke, D. (2017a). Regional actors in international security negotiations. European Journal for Security Research, 2(1), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41125-016-0010-4
   Google Scholar
• Panke, D. (2017b). Speaking with one voice: Easier said than done? The EU in the UNGA. In S. Blavoukos & D. Bourantonis (Eds.), The EU in UN politics: Actors, processes and performances (pp. 27–46). Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Panke, D., Lang, S., & Wiedemann, A. (2019). Regional organisations in the UNGA: Who is most active and why? Journal of International Relations and Development, 22(3), 744–785. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-017-0119-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Portela, C. (2004). The role of the EU in the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons: The way to Thessaloniki and beyond (PRIF Report Nr 65). Peace Research Institute Frankfurt.
   Google Scholar
• Portela, C. (2021). The EU’s arms control challenge: Bridging nuclear divides. EUISS.
   Google Scholar
• Portela, C., & Raube, K. (2012). The EU polity and foreign policy coherence. Journal of Contemporary European Research, 8(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v8i1.340
   Google Scholar
• Pouponneau, F., & Mérand, F. (2017). Diplomatic practices, domestic fields, and the international system: Explaining France’s shift on nuclear nonproliferation. International Studies Quarterly, 61(1), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqw046
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rieker, P. (2021). Differentiated integration and Europe’s global role: A conceptual framework. European Foreign Affairs Review, 26(Special Issue), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2021023
   Google Scholar
• Ritchie, N. (2019). A hegemonic nuclear order: Understanding the Ban Treaty and the power politics of nuclear weapons. Contemporary Security Policy, 40(4), 409–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2019.1571852
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schimmelfennig, F., Winzen, T., Lenz, T., Rocabert, J., Crasnic, L., Gherasimov, C., Lipps, J., & Mumford, D. (2021). The rise of international parliaments: Strategic legitimation in international organizations. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Siddi, M., Karjalainen, T., & Jokela, J. (2022). Differentiated cooperation in the EU’s foreign and security policy: Effectiveness, accountability, legitimacy. The International Spectator, 57(1), 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/03932729.2022.2026683
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smetana, M. (2016). Stuck on disarmament: The European Union and the 2015 NPT review conference. International Affairs, 92(1), 137–152. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12510
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, K. (2017). EU member states at the UN: A case of Europeanization arrested? Journal of Common Market Studies, 55(3), 628–644. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12504
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations. (2015). United Nations General Assembly Resolution 70/51 “Towards a nuclear-weapon-free world: accelerating the implementation of nuclear disarmament commitments”. https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/70/51.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations. (2016). United Nations General Assembly Resolution 71/54 “Towards a nuclear-weapon-free world: accelerating the implementation of nuclear disarmament commitments”. https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/71/54.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations. (2017). United Nations General Assembly Resolution 72/45 “Nuclear-weapon-free southern hemisphere and adjacent areas”. https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/72/45.
   Google Scholar
• Voeten, E. (2020). United-Nations-General-Assembly-Votes-and-Ideal-Points. GitHub. https://github.com/evoeten/United-Nations-General-Assembly-Votes-and-Ideal-Points/blob/master/Output/IdealpointestimatesNuclear_Apr2020.csv.
   Google Scholar
• Voeten, E., Strezhnev, A., & Bailey, M. (2018). United Nations General Assembly Voting Data (Version 18.0). Harvard Dataverse. http://hdl.handle.net/1902.1/12379.
   Google Scholar
• Voeten, E., Strezhnev, A., & Bailey, M. (2021). United Nations General Assembly Voting Data [Version 28] [roll-call data]. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/LEJUQZ.
   Google Scholar
• Webber, D. (2019). European disintegration? The politics of crisis in the European Union. Red Globe Press.
   Google Scholar