But it would be wrong to equate in any deterministic fashion the end-result of the Barcelona Process with the formation of a regional regime per se. For these constructs are not regarded as ends themselves. Rather, as Krasner states, ‘[o]nce in place they do affect related behaviour and outcomes. They are not merely epiphenomena’ [85].From this angle, regimes impact on policy outcomes and related behaviour, thus transcending ‘structural orientations [that] conceptualise a world of rational self-seeking actors’ [86]. In short, regimes make a difference, in that they often transcend a state-centric realist perspective that primarily reflects calculations of self-interest. The relationship between patterned behaviour and convergent expectations is a key to our understanding of international regimes: those two aspects create an environment of ‘conditionalised behaviour’ that in turn ‘generates recognised norms’ that transcend national boundaries and nurture a broader social space [87]. Contrary to structural arguments made by realists, international regimes have an independent impact on behaviour and are a crucial part of patterned human interaction. The latter view is drawn from the Grotian tradition, where ‘regimes are a pervasive and significant phenomenon in the international system’ [88]. In the case of the EMP, it could be argued that regime-creation is directed at setting the limits of acceptable behaviour within a nascent and flexibly arranged structure of governance. Noteworthy in that respect is that the Partnership addressed the post-Cold War Mediterranean reality as an overlap of different regions bringing together different dimensions [89]. The flexibility of the EMP sets the limits of ‘consciousness-raising’ in issues of Euro-Mediterranean governance and the possibility of the regional formation to acquire operational capabilities. Its weak institutional structure makes it difficult for individual actors to transcend the pursuit of short-term interests. But regimes also deploy a system of interconnectedness among different arenas of collective action that helps explain the nature and complexity of interdependence among the actors involved who, in turn, are conscious of the need to achieve mutually rewarding outcomes. Yet, being a highly fragmented system of policy interactions, any future attempts to navigate the dynamics of the Euro-Mediterranean governance need to be differentiated according to the specific conditions of co-operation embedded within its structures. In particular, the EMP encompasses a multiplicity of norms of behaviour, which in the end determine the degree and intensity of actors’ involvement. Further, a partial conceptualisation of its component baskets as separate pillars is not particularly helpful when assessing its cross-sectional political properties - i.e., what defines it as a nascent regional system.
Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!