Who makes European trade policy?

Florian Lütticken:
Die europäische Handelspolitik in GATT/WTO. Nationale Außenpolitiken und ihr Einfluss auf die Handelspolitik der Europäischen Kommission am Beispiel der Verhandlungen zur Uruguay-Runde [European trade policy in GATT/WTO. National foreign policies and their impact on the European Commission in the case of the Uruguay Round trade talks].
Nomos-Verlag, Baden-Baden 2006, 214 p., €29.00, ISBN 978-3-8329-1905-4

How does the European Union (EU) define its common trade policy? What role do the EU member states play? Are some more influential than others? How do they assert that influence? And what do they want to achieve? Florian Lütticken discusses these fascinating questions which matter so much for the global economy and development.

Lütticken starts by questioning the extent to which three theories of international relations help to understand trade policy. Intergovernmentalism explains decisions in the EU by assessing the interests and the diplomacy of its member states, whereas rational-choice theory highlights the relevance of EU bodies and procedures. The third approach is the one of social identity, developed at the University of Trier.

It examines how collective identities and interests are shaped in discourse. This theory is only rarely used to analyse trade matters, though doing so is quite fruitful and exciting.

In the empirical chapters, which make up the major sections of the book, Lütticken compares the trade policies of Germany, France and Spain, providing many facts and occasional insights. This is particularly so in the case of Franco-German relations. According to Lütticken, member governments are crucial for making European trade policy, but they do not only take into account economic interests. For instance, Germany had foreign-policy rather than economic motives for supporting the French stance on agriculture in the Uruguay Round, which was concluded in 1994.

However, one would have liked the author to come up with even more interesting insights. After all, the cover claims that he has first hand experience of EU and WTO policy making, thanks to his work for German industry associations and the European Commission. Indeed, the blurb promises a dissection of “decision-making processes between the Council and the Commission, as well as opinion-forming in the individual governments”.

That claim is wildly exaggerated. The reader will look in vain for any analysis of political economy or critical discourse. Nor are the issues of political opposition and demands for more equitable global policy-making tackled. Very little is said about lobbies, be it at national or EU levels.

Moreover, Lütticken hardly deals with the so-called 133 Committee, which coordinates trade policy between the EU Commission and the Council of Ministers. It is true that it is very difficult to get access to this Committee’s records – even for scholars or members of parliament. The author cannot be held responsible for such problems. But not mentioning them at all severely limits the worth of his research. Sadly, this shortcoming is yet another symptom of the scandalous lack of transparency in this important field of policy-making.

Peter Fuchs