The creation of the European Union arguably ranks among the most extraordinary achievements in modern world politics. Observers disagree, however, about the reasons why European governments have chosen to co- ordinate core economic policies and surrender sovereign perogatives. This text analyzes the history of the region's movement toward economic and political union. Do these unifying steps demonstrate the pre-eminence of national security concerns, the power of federalist ideals, the skill of political entrepreneurs like Jean Monnet and Jacques Delors, or the triumph of technocratic planning? Moravcsik rejects such views. Economic interdependence has been, he maintains, the primary force compelling these democracies to move in this surprising direction. Politicians rationally pursued national economic advantage through the exploitation of asymmetrical interdependence and the manipulation of institutional commitments.

Why do some countries have 'Culture Wars' over morality issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage while other countries hardly experience any conflict? This book argues that morality issues only generate major conflicts in political systems with a significant conflict between religious and secular parties.

This book analyses the impact of socio-structural variables, such as social class, religion, urban/rural residence, age and gender, on influencing an individual’s voting preferences. There have been major changes in recent decades both to social structure and how social structure determines people’s voting behaviour. There has also been a shift in value orientations, for example from religious to secular values and from more authoritarian to libertarian values. The author addresses the questions: How do social structure and value orientations influence party choice in advanced industrial democracies?; To what extent is the impact of social structure on party choice transmitted via value orientations?; To what extent is the impact of value orientations on party choice causal effects when controlled for the prior structural variables? The book will be of use to advanced students and scholars in the fields of comparative politics, electoral politics and political sociology.

This book provides the first comprehensive discussion of conflicts between legal bases in EU law. It fills an important gap in the existing literature on the choice of legal basis in EU law by analysing the structure of legal bases and the resulting legal basis litigation in the European Union, thus identifying areas of conflict produced by overlapping competences, divergent inter-institutional interests, and inconsistencies in the courts’ judgements. While certain cases have been discussed extensively in academic literature (e.g. Tobacco Advertising, ECOWAS), there has been little analysis of the general underlying criteria and principles governing the choice of legal basis on the part of European institutions. Such an analysis has, however, become necessary in order to better understand and possibly predict judicial outcomes, and to identify flaws in the current legislative framework.

With a Foreword by the President of the European Parliament, Antonio Tajani. This book sheds light on the political dynamics within the EU member states and contributes to the discussions about Europe. Authors from all member states as well as Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey assess how their country could get more involved in the European debate, taking the reader on a journey through various political landscapes and different views. The chapters cover issues ranging from a perceived lack of ambition at the periphery to a careful balancing act between diverse standpoints at the geographical centre. Yet, discussions share common features such as the anxiety regarding national sovereignty, the migration and border discourse, security concerns as well as the obvious need to regain trust and create policies that work. The book contributes vigorously to the debate about Europe in all capitals and every corner of the continent, because this is where its future will be decided.

This book, based on recently declassified documents in Britain and the USA, is the first detailed account of Britain's East of Suez decision, which was taken by the Harold Wilson Government in 1967-68. Contrary to received opinion, the author argues that the decision was not taken hastily as a result of the November 1967 devaluation. Nor is there any hard evidence to support the notion that there existed a 'Pound-Defence' deal with the USA. Despite Washington's pressure to maintain Britain's East of Suez role, the decision was taken by the Labour Government on the basis of a long-term effort to re-examine Britain's world role since 1959, and it marked the end of an era for postwar Britain.