IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jcmkts/v62y2024i5p1278-1295.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The EU's Autonomous Sanctions Against Russia in 2014 Versus 2022: How Does the Bureaucratic Politics Model Bring in the Institutional ‘Balance of Power’ Within the EU?

Author

Listed:
  • Ekin Sanus
  • Sinem Akgül‐Açıkmeşe
  • H. Emrah Karaoguz

Abstract

The European Union (EU) has been more incensed over Russian aggression towards Ukraine in 2022, when compared to Russia's invasion of Crimea in 2014. This article questions this shift by looking at the EU's sanctions towards Russia. It argues that the relative unwillingness of the European Commission, and accordingly the imbalance or lopsided distribution of power within and amongst the relevant EU institutions, was one of the factors internal to the EU that prevented an effective response in 2014. Although external and contextual factors have been crucial, the EU has adopted harsher sanctions against Russia since 2022 because the Commission is not unwilling to act as it was in 2014, and dissenting members have found it difficult to obstruct the process in the Council of the EU. This article also extends the analytical repertoire of the bureaucratic politics model by demonstrating that it retains explanatory power even when the traditional parameters remain constant over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Ekin Sanus & Sinem Akgül‐Açıkmeşe & H. Emrah Karaoguz, 2024. "The EU's Autonomous Sanctions Against Russia in 2014 Versus 2022: How Does the Bureaucratic Politics Model Bring in the Institutional ‘Balance of Power’ Within the EU?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(5), pages 1278-1295, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:62:y:2024:i:5:p:1278-1295
    DOI: 10.1111/jcms.13565
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.13565
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jcms.13565?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Walter Carlsnaes, 2004. "Where Is the Analysis of European Foreign Policy Going?," European Union Politics, , vol. 5(4), pages 495-508, December.
    2. Francesco Giumelli & Willem Geelhoed & Max de Vries & Aurora Molesini, 2022. "United in Diversity? A Study on the Implementation of Sanctions in the European Union," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 36-46.
    3. Junge, Dirk & König, Thomas & Luig, Bernd, 2015. "Legislative Gridlock and Bureaucratic Politics in the European Union," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 45(4), pages 777-797, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thomas König & Bernd Luig, 2017. "The impact of EU decision-making on national parties’ attitudes towards European integration," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(3), pages 362-381, September.
    2. Tanja A. Börzel, 2016. "From EU Governance of Crisis to Crisis of EU Governance: Regulatory Failure, Redistributive Conflict and Eurosceptic Publics," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54, pages 8-31, September.
    3. Amichai Magen, 2016. "Cracks in the Foundations: Understanding the Great Rule of Law Debate in the EU," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(5), pages 1050-1061, September.
    4. Steffen Hurka & Maximilian Haag, 2020. "Policy complexity and legislative duration in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(1), pages 87-108, March.
    5. Jørgen Bølstad & James P. Cross, 2016. "Not all Treaties are Created Equal: The Effects of Treaty Changes on Legislative Efficiency in the EU," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 793-808, July.
    6. Steffen Hurka & Yves Steinebach, 2021. "Legal Instrument Choice in the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 278-296, March.
    7. Jens Blom-Hansen, 2019. "Studying power and influence in the European Union: Exploiting the complexity of post-Lisbon legislation with EUR-Lex," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(4), pages 692-706, December.
    8. Serra Boranbay-Akan & Thomas König & Moritz Osnabrügge, 2017. "The imperfect agenda-setter: Why do legislative proposals fail in the EU decision-making process?," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 168-187, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jcmkts:v:62:y:2024:i:5:p:1278-1295. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-9886 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.