Rauh, Ch is ian
A icle — Published Ve sion
In e na ional ecogni ion o Eu opean Union “ac o ness”:
Language-based e idence om Uni ed Na ions gene al
deba e speeches 1970–2020
In e na ional In e ac ions
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Rauh, Ch is ian (2025) : In e na ional ecogni ion o Eu opean Union “ac o ness”:
Language-based e idence om Uni ed Na ions gene al deba e speeches 1970–2020, In e na ional
In e ac ions, ISSN 1547-7444, Rou ledge, London, Vol. 51, Iss. 5, pp. 792-821,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/03050629.2025.2530513
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/321969.2
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
In e na Ional In e ac Ions
2025, Vol. 51, no. 5, 792–821
In e na ional ecogni ion o Eu opean Union
“ac o ness”: Language-based e idence om Uni ed
Na ions gene al deba e speeches 1970–2020
Ch is ian Rauha,b
aWZB Be lin social science cen e , Be lin, Ge many; bUni e si y o Po sdam, Po sdam, Ge many
ABSTRACT
The Eu opean Union is o en po ayed as a global ac o ha is
said o wield ‘economic’ o e en ‘no ma i e’ powe . Such pe -
spec i es p esume ha s a es in he in e na ional sys em ecog-
nize EU ‘ac o ness’ along he modes ly g owing o eign policy
capabili ies o he Union o e ime. Does his hold ue? In
which con ex s does his happen? And which hi d s a es ha e
an incen i e o do so? This a icle explo es he explici ecogni-
ion o EU ac o ness on he in e na ional s age by applying
no el na u al language p ocessing algo i hms o 8,481 speeches
in he Uni ed Na ions Gene al Deba e 1970–2020. Dependency
pa se s help o iden i y all sen ences in which he EU is p e-
sen ed o ac while wo d embedding models unco e in which
con ex s his akes place. Along hese measu es he ecogni ion
o in e na ional EU ac o ness has indeed inc eased o compa -
a i ely high le els o e ime. Bu his is p ima ily d i en by EU
membe s a es hemsel es and happens much mo e in eco-
nomic han in no ma i e con ex s. Non-EU s a es ecognize
ac o ness when hey a e geog aphically close o economically
dependen on he EU, while illibe al egimes and g ea powe s
sys ema ically a oid p esen ing he EU in i s capabili y o ac
on he in e na ional s age. The ecogni ion o EU ac o ness is
hus ha dly a global phenomenon and a he mi o s powe
and alue-based con lic s in he in e na ional sys em.
RÉSUMÉ
L’on déc i sou en l’Union eu opéenne comme un ac eu mon-
dial qui exe ce ai un pou oi « économique », oi e « no ma-
i ». De elles pe spec i es supposen que les É a s du sys ème
in e na ional econnaissen la quali é d’ac eu de l’UE a ec la
len e c oissance de ses capaci és en poli ique é angè e. Es -ce
ai ? Dans quels con ex es l’obse e- -on ? E quels É a s ie s
on des aisons de le ai e ? Ce a icle s’in é esse à la econ-
naissance explici e de la quali é d’ac eu de l’UE su la scène
in e na ionale en appliquan des algo i hmes de ai emen du
langage na u el inédi s à 8 481 discou s p ononcés lo s du
déba géné al des Na ions Unies en e 1970 e 2020. Des anal-
yseu s de dépendance nous pe me en d’iden i ie ou es les
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/03050629.2025.2530513
© 2025 he au ho (s). Published wi h license by aylo & F ancis G oup, llc
CONTACT ch is ian auh ch is ian. [email protected] WZB Be lin social science cen e , eichpie schu e 50,
D-10785, Be lin, Ge many.
supplemen al da a o his a icle can be accessed online a h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/03050629.2025.2530513.
his is an open access a icle dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he c ea i e commons a ibu ion license (h p://c ea i ecommons.
o g/licenses/by/4.0/), which pe mi s un es ic ed use, dis ibu ion, and ep oduc ion in any medium, p o ided he o iginal wo k
is p ope ly ci ed. he e ms on which his a icle has been published allow he pos ing o he accep ed Manusc ip in a
eposi o y by he au ho (s) o wi h hei consen .
KEYWORDS
Ac o ness; agency;
Eu opean Union; ex
analysis; Uni ed Na ions
Gene al Assembly
INTERNATIoNAL INTERACTIoNS 793
ph ases qui ep ésen en l’UE en ac ion andis que des modèles
de plongemen lexical dé oilen les con ex es dans lesquels
cela se p odui . D’ap ès ces mesu es, la econnaissance de la
quali é d’ac eu de l’UE à l’in e na ional s’es en e e acc ue au
il du emps pou a eind e un ni eau ela i emen éle é. o ,
ce e si ua ion s’explique p incipalemen pa les É a s memb es
de l’UE eux-mêmes e in e ien bien plus sou en dans des
con ex es économiques que no ma i s. Les É a s qui n’appa i-
ennen pas à l’UE econnaissen sa quali é d’ac eu lo squ’ils
son p oches su le plan géog aphique ou qu’ils dépenden
économiquemen de l’UE, andis que les égimes illibé aux e
les g andes puissances é i en sys éma iquemen de p ésen e
l’UE au a e s de sa capaci é d’ac ion su la scène in e na io-
nale. La econnaissance de la quali é d’ac eu de l’UE co e-
spond donc di icilemen à un phénomène mondial. Elle e lè e
plu ô la puissance e les con li s ondés su la aleu au sein
du sys ème in e na ional.
RESUMEN
La Unión Eu opea a menudo se p esen a como un ac o global
del que se dice que eje ce pode «económico» o incluso «no -
ma i o». Es as pe spec i as p esuponen que los Es ados den o
del sis ema in e nacional econocen la «agencia» de la UE con
elación a las capacidades de polí ica ex e io , las cuales han
c ecido mode adamen e con el iempo. ¿Es cie o es o? ¿En
qué con ex os sucede es o? ¿Y qué e ce os Es ados ienen un
incen i o pa a hace lo? Es e a ículo es udia el econocimien o
explíci o de la agencia de la UE en el escena io in e nacional
aplicando, pa a ello, no edosos algo i mos de p ocesamien o
de lenguaje na u al a 8481 discu sos en el Deba e Gene al de
las Naciones Unidas en e 1970 y 2020. Los analizado es de
dependencias ayudan a iden i ica odas las ases en las que
se p esen a a la UE como un en e con capacidad de agencia,
mien as que los modelos de encaje léxico ayudan a a e igua
en qué con ex os iene luga es o. A a és de es as medidas,
se puede obse a que el econocimien o de la agencia in e -
nacional de la UE ha aumen ado e ec i amen e a ni eles com-
pa a i amen e al os con el iempo. Pe o es o es á impulsado
p incipalmen e po los p opios Es ados miemb os de la UE y
sucede con mucha más ecuencia en con ex os económicos
que en con ex os no ma i os. Los Es ados no pe enecien es a
la UE econocen la capacidad de agencia de la UE cuando
es án geog á icamen e ce ca o son económicamen e dependi-
en es de la UE, mien as que los egímenes ilibe ales y las
g andes po encias e i an sis emá icamen e p esen a a la UE
con su capacidad de agencia en el escena io in e nacional. El
econocimien o de la agencia de la UE es, po lo an o, di ícil-
men e un enómeno global y más bien e leja los con lic os
basados en el pode y los alo es en el sis ema in e nacional.
1. In oduc ion
The Eu opean Union’s ole in he global in e na ional sys em is no o iously
ambiguous. On he one hand, he e is no lack o ambi ion. The Union’s
ounding ea y (A . 2, pa a. 5, TEU) de ines “ ela ions wi h he wide
794 C. RAUH
wo ld”—amongs o he hings in he name o “ ee and ai ade,” “p o-
ec ion o human igh s,” o “peace” and “secu i y”—as key pu poses o
poli ical in eg a ion. In his ein, allusions o he EU’s global impo ance
abound in i ually any g and speech o Eu opean poli icians. Du ing he
i s inaugu a ion as p esiden o he Eu opean Commission, o example,
U sula Von de Leyen announced a “geopoli ical” Commission o shape
no hing less han a “be e wo ld o de .”1
On he o he hand, he EU aces nume ous in e nal and ex e nal obs a-
cles in li ing up o hese ambi ions. In e nally, a lack o o eign policy
cohesion o EU membe s a es is o en lamen ed and he e has been only
slow p og ess in pooling o delega ing o eign policy compe ences o
sup ana ional ins i u ions. Ex e nally, he peculia na u e o he EU as a
mul i-le el go e nance sys em wi h only pa ially in eg a ed o eign policy
compe ences appea s alien o an in e na ional sys em ha is s ill o en
s uc u ed along s a es. The in e es o o eign s a es, u he mo e, o en
s and in sha p con as o he common ade in e es s o decla ed alues
o he EU. As demons a ed by he lead-up o he Russian agg ession
agains Uk aine, China’s Bel and Road Ini ia i e in ol ing coun ies like
Hunga y and G eece, o he bila e al alks ollowing he agg essi e a i
policies o he second T ump adminis a ion, majo in e na ional powe s
o en seem o p e e engaging wi h indi idual Eu opean membe s a es
a he han wi h he EU as a whole.
In his ield o ension, a ib an li e a u e on EU’s global “ac o ness”
has de eloped (a.o. B e he on and Vogle 2006; Niemann and B e he on
2013; Sjös ed 1977). This mul i- ace ed li e a u e deals wi h capabili ies,
cohesion, o au onomy o EU ins i u ions in speci ic o eign policy a eas.
Bu i also ag ees ha ecogni ion by o he s is a highly ele an indica o ,
i no a necessa y condi ion o es ablishing EU ac o ness on he global
s age (esp. Geh ing, Obe hü , and Mühleck 2013; Jupille and Capo aso
1998; K a och íl, Cibulko á, and Beník 2011). In his iew, EU ac o ness
esides, o is a leas obse able in he ex en o which o he ele an
ac o s in he in e na ional sys em—mos no ably o eign s a es— iew and
p esen he EU as an en i y ha is capable o ac ing on i s own. I is his
in e na ional ecogni ion o EU ac o ness ha he p esen s udy ocusses on.
I aim o make wo con ibu ions. The i s one is empi ical. I p opose
and alida e a gene ic me hod o ex ac ing ac o ness ecogni ions om
o eign policy discou se by combining dic iona y-based en i y ecogni ion
wi h linguis ic dependency pa sing. While ex an wo k on EU ac o ness
has o en ocussed on speci ic o a, ins i u ions, o policy a eas, his
1 h ps://ec.eu opa.eu/commission/p essco ne /de ail/en/speech_19_6408 (las accessed: 15.02.2023).
INTERNATIoNAL INTERACTIoNS 795
me hod allows me o explo e a b oade , compa a i e, and long- e m pe -
spec i e on he explici in e na ional ecogni ion o EU ac o ness. I analyse
8,481 speeches o na ion s a es in he Uni ed Na ions Gene al Deba e
be ween 1970 and 2020, he b oades and mos egula o um o publicly
isible in e na ional exchange on a my iad o o eign policy opics and
ex ac all ins ances in which any o he speeches asc ibes an ac ion o
he EU. Then I employ wo d ec o models o s udy in which seman ic
con ex s such ecogni ion o EU ac o ness occu s. This unco e s empo al
and seman ic pa e ns o EU ecogni ion which a e benchma ked agains
o he egional o ganiza ions, in e na ional ins i u ions, and e en s a es.
My second con ibu ion is mo e subs an i e. I wan o complemen he
ex an capabili y-based explana ions o EU ac o ness ecogni ion by empha-
sizing he a ying incen i es o hi d coun ies mo e s ongly. In his iew
in e na ional ecogni ion o EU ac o ness should a y wi h he deg ee o
which hi d s a es depend on and ac ually in e ac wi h he EU. Fu he mo e,
ex e nal ecogni ion con ains an elemen o s a egic choice: o eign s a es
migh ha e di e en p e e ences on whe he he EU should be seen as a
global ac o in he i s place. Speci ically, I expec ha g ea powe s a es
as well as au ho i a ian egimes ha e incen i es o downplay he EU’s
ac o ness on he global s age, as hei na ional in e es s can clash wi h
he EU’s ambi ions a he undamen ally.
Explo ing hese a gumen s in an in eg a i e manne , he o iginal da a
p esen ed he e ini ially show ha he explici ecogni ion o EU ac o ness
has no ably inc eased a e he end o he Cold Wa and wi h he enhanced
ins i u ionaliza ion o EU o eign policy compe ences in he Maas ich
T ea y. A e 1992, he likelihood ha EU ac o ness is ecognized in UNGD
speeches exceeds ha o mos o he majo egional o ganiza ions (excep
o he A ican Union), key in e na ional ins i u ions, and e en mos s a es.
Bu a e wa ds his no able le el o EU ecogni ion seems o s agna e and
also does no inc ease u he wi h he addi ional in eg a ion o o eign
policy compe ences in he 2009 Lisbon ea y.
Mo eo e , I show ha his in e na ional ecogni ion o EU ac o ness in
he UNGD is e y Eu ocen ic: i is p ima ily d i en by EU membe s a es
hemsel es while explici ecogni ion om coun ies ou side o Eu ope is,
in ac , a e y a e e en . Ex e nal ecogni ion u he mo e a ies ac oss
coun ies: while geog aphical p oximi y o and ade dependence on he
EU end o inc ease he likelihood o ac o ness ecogni ion, la ge ex e nal
ading powe s such as he U.S. and China as well as especially au oc a ic
egimes end o wi hhold i .
The in e na ional ecogni ion o EU ac o ness, and he co esponding
sel -pe cep ion ha Eu opean poli icians o en p opaga e, should hus no
be seen as a globally accep ed o as lowing quasi-au oma ically om he
EU’s o mal and in o mal o eign policy capabili ies. Ra he , whe he and
796 C. RAUH
by whom he EU’s ac o ness is delibe a i ely ecognized is as much d i en
by powe and alue-based con lic s in he con empo a y in e na ional sys em.
2. Recogni ion o EU “ac o ness”: Rele ance and Expec a ions
F om i s beginnings he poli ical in eg a ion o Eu ope s i ed ques ions
abou i s wide in e na ional signi icance. A cus oms union, an in e nal
ma ke , and he ha moniza ion o co esponding indus ial and la e also
social policies among a se o coun ies ha accoun o la ge sha es o
he wo ld’s economy unques ionably ma e in he in e na ional sys em.
Ye , obse e s we e also quick o no e ha he in e na ional signi icance
o he eme ging block does no au oma ically equa e in e na ional in lu-
ence. As ea ly as 1977, Sjös ed he e o e p oposed he concep o “ac o -
ness,” which he de ined as he Eu opean Communi y’s “capaci y o beha e
ac i ely and delibe a ely in ela ion o o he ac o s in he in e na ional
sys em” (Sjös ed 1977, 16).2
To cap u e his ac o ness, he a gued, one needs o s udy whe he he
EU ( hen s ill he EC) can be delinea ed om o he in e na ional ac o s,
whe he i has au onomy in aking o eign policy decisions, and whe he
i con ols s a e-like diploma ic esou ces. This emphasis on compe ences
and capaci ies igu es in all subsequen concep ualiza ions o EU ac o ness.
In a highly ci ed con ibu ion, Jupille and Capo aso (1998) likewise s ess
“au ho i y,” he e meaning legal compe ence, as well as “au onomy,” de ined
as dis inc i eness o he EU in nego ia ions and disc e iona y goal o ma-
ion and decision-making, as impo an elemen s o ac o ness. In ano he
highly ci ed con ibu ion, B e he on and Vogle (2006) combine hese
poin s in o a “capabili y” pe spec i e on EU ac o ness.
I is hus uncon o e sial ha he EU needs o de elop capabili ies om
wi hin o become an in e na ional ac o in i s own igh . Bu i is also
uncon o e sial ha he EU is an eme ging poli y: i s ac o ness mus be
analyzed as a ma e o deg ee. The in e nal capabili ies unde pinning he
EU’s in e na ional ac o ness ha e de eloped only slowly and selec i ely
o e ime. Along he EC’s ini ial impe us as a cus oms union and a join ly
egula ed ma ke , o mal capabili ies a e mos p onounced in he a ea o
ade and he so-called “common comme cial policy.” As ea ly as 1957,
he six ounding membe s delega ed hei powe o nego ia e in e na ional
ade ag eemen s o he High Au ho i y, he p edecesso o he Eu opean
Commission. Common comme cial policy is also an exclusi e compe ence
2 This concep ualiza ion is consis en wi h he idea o ‘agency’ in he sociological o linguis ic s udy o
collec i e o co po a e ac o s (Bibe , Con ad, and Reppen 1998; Coleman 1982). Howe e , as ‘agency’ has
a speci ic concep ual meaning in poli ical science s udies o delega ion p ocesses and as ‘ac o ness’ is an
es ablished e m in he li e a u e on EU o eign policy, I s ick wi h Sjös ed ’s wo ding in his a icle.
INTERNATIoNAL INTERACTIoNS 797
o he Union, so ha membe s a es can no longe ac unila e ally in his
a ea. This has some limi s o ag eemen s on in es men o in ellec ual
p ope y, bu gene ally DG T ade o he Eu opean Commission has ema k-
able o mal compe ences, backed by highly skilled and expe ienced s a
ha is commonly seen as highly e ec i e on he in e na ional s age
(Meunie and Nicolaïdis 2017).
In o he a eas o o eign policy, in pa icula ega ding secu i y in e es s,
howe e , he EU membe s a es ha e been much mo e eluc an o pool
o delega e hei compe ences in o o join ins i u ions (Mo a csik 1993).
Ye and s ill, capabili y has de eloped beyond ex e nal ade. In 1970, o
example, EU membe s a es es ablished he Eu opean Poli ical Co-ope a ion,
an in o mal consul a ion p ocess mean o de elop common o eign policy
in a eas o sha ed EC in e es s.
In mo e o mal e ms, EU capabili ies in o eign policy de eloped espe-
cially h ough e o ms o he Union’s ounding ea ies. Mos no ably, he
1992 Maas ich T ea y in eg a ed he “Common Fo eign and Secu i y
Policy” as one o h ee pilla s o he newly es ablished Eu opean Union—
no he leas agains insu icien coo dina ion o membe s a es du ing he
Yugosla wa s. In con as o he s ong in eg a ion o egula o y in e nal
ma ke powe s, howe e , his domain was kep s ic ly in e go e nmen al.
La e on, he 1997 Ams e dam ea y es ablished he High Rep esen a i e
o he Common Fo eign and Secu i y Policy in an a emp o s uc u e
and s eng hen in e go e nmen al coo dina ion. Ins i u ionally, his was
especially consolida ed in he 2009 Lisbon T ea y, which made he High
Rep esen a i e a membe and ice-p esiden o he Eu opean Commission
and also es ablished a join diploma ic co ps, he so-called Eu opean
Ex e nal Ac ion Se ice (EEAS). Along hese own diploma ic esou ces,
he EU has e en become an obse e membe wi h enhanced s a us in
he Uni ed Na ions in 2011.
F om a capabili y pe spec i e, hus, EU ac o ness should be especially
s ong in he a ea o ade and should ha e inc eased o e ime especially
along he key ea y e isions co e ing o eign policy mo e gene ally. Ye ,
e en wi h g ea e pooling EU o eign policy emains cons ained by e o
powe s o indi idual membe s a es. Some schola s hus include “cohesion”
o na ional o eign policy in e es s in o he concep o EU ac o ness (Jupille
and Capo aso 1998), s imula ing a ich esea ch agenda on whe he
Eu opean go e nmen s speak wi h a “single oice” on he in e na ional
s age (Conceição-Held and Meunie 2016).
Fo he na owe ques ion o whe he he EU as a join and dis inc
en i y exhibi s au onomous ac o ness, howe e , ex an wo k s esses ha
he e is mo e han o mal o eign policy compe ence. The seminal con-
cep ualiza ion o EU ac o ness by B e he on and Vogle (2006), o
798 C. RAUH
example, subsumes “p esence” and “oppo uni y” in o he concep .
“P esence” e e s o he idea ha he EU exe s in luence beyond i s bo -
de s “by i ue o i s exis ence” (24). Fo example, by se ing s anda ds
o ma ke access o by using i s compe i ion policy powe s, he Eu opean
Commission c ea es adap i e p essu es o ou side ac o s. Rela edly, “oppo -
uni y” e e s o he ma ch be ween wha e e is salien in he in e na ional
con ex and he EU’s abili y o con ibu e by i ue o i s in e nal com-
pe ences. One may hink o he ising in e na ional salience o clima e
change as an example, whe e he sha e o global p oduc ion esiding in
Eu ope in conjunc ion wi h in e nal egula o y powe migh ende he
Eu opean Commission a ele an in e na ional in e locu o . Beyond o mal
o eign policy compe ences, hus, he ini ially in e nal compe ences o
sup ana ional EU ins i u ions a ec hei in e na ional o e en global
en i onmen —ei he inad e en ly (Geh ing, U banski, and Obe hü 2017)
o by p oac i e a emp s o “ex e nal go e nance” (La enex and
Schimmel ennig 2009).
Thus, he EU may be ex e nally ecognized as a ele an ac o on he
in e na ional s age e en beyond i s o mal o eign policy compe ences.
And since he o mal policy compe ences a e in e nally cons ained, such
ex e nal pe cep ions should ma e o he in luence ha he EU as a join
bu s ill un inished en i y can mus e on he in e na ional s age. Gi en
ha he Union’s o eign policy capabili ies emain s uck somewhe e in
be ween a loose in e go e nmen al ag eemen and an au onomous ade
powe , he deg ee o which ex e nal pa ies ecognize i as a ele an ac o
should ma e o i s in e na ional clou .
In ac , i ually all concep ions o EU ac o ness poin o such ex e nal
ecogni ion. In Sjöde s ed ’s o iginal accoun , s a e-like esou ces such as
a o eign policy se ice a e a means o ge ecognized by o he ac o s on
he in e na ional s age. The “oppo uni y” elemen in B e he on and Vogle
(2006) concep ion o ac o ness also explici ly in ol es ex e nal pe cep ions
(c . Niemann and B e he on 2013, 265). And also in cons uc i is
accoun s, he EU de elops ac o ness by seeing i sel “ h ough he eyes o
o he s” (Klose 2018, 1147; see also Wend 1992).
This impo ance o ex e nal ecogni ion has also been explici ly con-
cep ualized. Especially he seminal analysis o EU global ac o capaci y by
Jupille and Capo aso (1998, 214) anks ecogni ion—de ined as accep ance
o he en i y by hi d pa ies— i s among he o he elemen s o ac o ness
such as au ho i y, au onomy, and cohesion. Such ecogni ion can be de
ju e o de ac o. The o me e e s o diploma ic acc edi a ion and is quasi
au oma ically g an ed o na ions as a “de ini ional componen o so e eign
s a ehood.” Bu i does no au oma ically apply o he EU as a mul i-le el
en i y which is hus much mo e dependen on de ac o ecogni ion.
INTERNATIoNAL INTERACTIoNS 799
Ex e nali ies o i s in e nal powe s can p o ide a mo i e o such ecog-
ni ion, bu he c i e ion is only sa is ied i hese hi d pa ies ac ually ea
he Union as a co po a e en i y, “ a he han, o in addi ion o, going o
one o mo e EU membe s a e(s)” sepa a ely (ibid, 216).
K a och íl e al. (2011, 394) also a gue ha he ex e nal ecogni ion by
in luen ial in e na ional ac o s is as impo an as he “domes ic cons i u-
ion” o he EU’s o eign policy capabili ies, since “ ecogni ion om ou side
may inc ease he Union’s au ho i y and oom o manoeu e” on he
in e na ional s age. Geh ing, Obe hü , and Mühleck (2013) ag ee on he
independen impo ance o his ecogni ion, which, as hey a gue and
show empi ically, can e en ump he lack o o mal membe ship and
acc edi a ion o he EU in o he in e na ional ins i u ions o nego ia ions.
Bu hey insis ha he EU’s capabili ies and i s ex e nal ecogni ion a e
ela ed: hi d pa ies should ecognize he EU whe e i s o mal compe ences
and/o i s in e nal go e nance esou ces a e mos p onounced. While he e
a e di e en iews on how i is p oduced, all hese concep ions ag ee ha
he ex e nal ecogni ion o he EU by hi d pa ies is an impo an obse -
able implica ion o i s in e na ional ac o ness.
Wha , hen, explains whe he ex e nal pa ies—mos no ably s a es as
he “na u al” inhabi an s o he in e na ional sys em— ecognize he EU
as an ac o in i s own igh ? My heo e ical model ini ially sides wi h
hose a guing ha o mal capabili ies o he EU a e an impo an d i e
o in e na ional ecogni ion (Geh ing, Obe hü , and Mühleck 2013). I is
indeed plausible ha he EU’s in e nally de eloping capaci ies o coo dina e
o o ac mo e au onomously on he in e na ional s age inc ease he like-
lihood ha i is aken se ious by he es o he wo ld. The slowly inc eas-
ing coo dina ion and in eg a ion o EU o eign policy compe ences—especially
in ea ies o Maas ich and Lisbon as discussed abo e—should acco dingly
be e lec ed in a ia ion o i s in e na ional ecogni ion o e ime:
H1: The ecogni ion o EU ac o ness by hi d coun ies inc eased especially wi h
he 1992 Maas ich T ea y (CSFP) and he 2009 Lisbon T ea y (High Rep. and
EEAS).
This capabili y pe spec i e u he mo e p edic s a ia ion by issue
a ea, as he EU’s o mal and in o mal capabili ies a y along hose as
well. I should be g ea es in he a ea o ade and economic policy
mo e gene ally. He e, he EU con ols exclusi e compe ences in nego i-
a ing ag eemen s while he huge ex e nali ies o i s in e nal ma ke
egula ion powe s g an in o mal in e na ional ele ance ha should
enhance ecogni ion by hi d pa ies. In con as , he hesi ancy o EU
membe s a es in pooling hei o eign and de ense policies beyond
ade, he esul ing absence o EU mili a y capabili ies, and i s co e-
sponding na u e o a “ci ilian powe ” (Bull 1982) sugges ha hi d
806 C. RAUH
im package.5 I is calcula ed as he sum o annual impo s om and expo s
o he EU as a sha e o a coun y’s GDP in he yea o he espec i e speech.
GDP da a (measu ed in cu en USD) come om he Wo ld De elopmen
indica o s accessed ia he Niehaus Da a e se (G aham and Tucke 2019).
To measu e he deg ee o which a coun y’s poli ical sys em app oxima es
a libe al democ acy o no , I eso o he seminal V-Dem libe al democ acy
index (Lüh mann, Lindbe g, and Tannenbe g 2017). Me ging hese di e se
da a se s wi h he speech-le el da a was emendously acili a ed by he
coun ycode package (A el-Bundock, Ene oldsen, and Ye man 2018).
5 h ps://gi hub.com/ch is ophe gand ud/im (las accessed: 16.02.2023).
Table 1. example classi ica ions/ a ings o eal sen ences om UnGD speeches.
sen ences wi hou eU
e e ence
eU e e ence wi hou
ac o ness ecogni ion
explici eU ac o ness
ecogni ion
Pa icula ly s ong
“ ade & economy”
seman ics
all o us will bene i
om he expanded
ade and in es men
ha comes om a
ib an , g owing
wo ld economy.
(Usa, 1992)
I should ake in o
accoun economic
in e ela ions ha we e
o med in he cIs,
oppo uni ies o
o eign in es men in
ou economy, and a
s ep-by-s ep
in eg a ion o he
Uk ainian economy
in o ha o he
eu opean communi y
and he wo ld. (UK ,
1993)
Howe e , e en mo e se ious
o ou suga indus y is
he con inuance o
subsidy policies p ac iced
by he eu opean
economic communi y
(eec) o he bene i o
i s p oduce s which
subs an ially dep ess
p ices on he
in e na ional ma ke .
(DoM, 1985)
Pa icula ly s ong
“libe al democ acy”
seman ics
hese a e p o es s o
democ acy and
eedom, espec o
human igh s and
social jus ice. (sM ,
2011)
omania, now a membe
o he eu opean Union,
e ol ed unde he
poli ical idea ha
democ acy, human
igh s and he ule o
law a e essen ial o
he de elopmen o
ou socie ies. ( oU,
2007)
he eu opean Union will
ac i ely pu sue i s wo k
on consolida ing human
igh s and undamen al
eedoms, wi h pa icula
insis ence on he
uni e sal, indi isible and
in e dependen na u e o
all human igh s. (Bel,
2001)
Pa icula ly s ong
“secu i y”
seman ics
secu i y is mo e han
he absence o wa ;
i is he p esence o
peace. (can, 1990)
We belie e ha
accep ance by he
pa ies o he con lic
o he p inciples
al eady enuncia ed by
he membe s a es o
he eu opean
communi y, namely,
he igh o secu i y
and exis ence o all
s a es in he egion,
including Is ael, and
jus ice o all i s
peoples, is essen ial i
p og ess is o be made
owa ds a peace
se lemen . (I l, 1981)
I welcome he commi men
made by he eu opean
Union and ou bila e al
pa ne s o suppo ing
he aining and
bols e ing o ou de ence
and secu i y o ces and
o suppo ing he
implemen a ion o he
na ional de ence plan and
he deploymen o he
cen al a ican a med
Fo ces, wi h a iew o
se ing up a ga ison
a my and es ablishing
con ol h oughou he
na ional e i o y. (caF,
2018)
INTERNATIoNAL INTERACTIoNS 807
4. Desc ip i e Pa e ns: o Wha Ex en is EU Ac o ness Recognized
in UNGD Speeches?
To s a wi h, we can ini ially no e ha 1,012 o he 8,481 speeches in
he Uni ed Na ions Gene al Deba e be ween 1970 and 2020 indica e some
kind o EU ac ion a leas once. In o he wo ds, he likelihood ha a
gi en s a e ep esen a i e in a gi en yea ecognizes EU ac o ness in his
cen al o um o in e na ional o eign policy exchange amoun s o 11.9%.6
Figu e 1 plo s a ia ion in his sha e o UNGD speeches o e ime, sep-
a a ing he h ee majo phases o ea y-based ins i u ionaliza ion o he
EU’s o eign policy compe ences in o de o shed ligh on he capabili y
hypo hesis (H1).
Ini ially one no es qui e subs an ial a ia ion om one yea o he
nex — he obse ed annual s anda d de ia ion amoun s o abou i e pe -
cen age poin s. Following B e he on and Vogle ’s oppo uni y a gumen ,
his migh e lec he ebbs and lows o issue salience in UNGD deba es
and he deg ee o which he issues on he agenda i he EU’s in e nal
capabili ies—an a gumen we es along he issue con ex measu es below.
On a e age, howe e , he es ima ed linea ime ends show ha he
ecogni ion o EU ac o ness has indeed been g owing—a leas om he
6 The e a e 978 u he speeches men ioning he EU in passing, bu wi hou asc ibing any speci ic ac ion
o his en i y. To gi e a andom example ( u he ones can be inspec ed in he eplica ion package):
‘Se e al Wes e n and Eu opean ies o solida i y al eady bind us, and you know how happy we should
be i he accession o No way o he Eu opean Communi ies we e o b ing us e en close oge he .’
(Belgium, 1970, sen ence 208).
Figu e 1. annual sha e o UnGD speeches ecognizing eU ac o ness.
808 C. RAUH
70ies o he mid-2000s. Recogni ion o EU ac o ness in UNGD speeches
inc eased mos d as ically wi h collapse o he So ie Union and he
Yugosla wa s in he ea ly 1990ies, ha is wi h d as ic geopoli ical e en s
in he close neighbo hood o he EU. EU ac o ness ecogni ion peaks wi h
abou 24% o speeches in 1991, when he EU membe s a es happened
o be in he inal s ages o nego ia ing he Maas ich ea y. The en y
in o o ce o his ea y, which made he Common Fo eign and Secu i y
Policy he “ hi d pilla ” o Eu opean in eg a ion, howe e , is no associa ed
wi h he clea jump in EU ac o ness ecogni ion ha he capabili y pe -
spec i e would imply o his ea y e ision. Bu we no e ha he s a is-
ically signi ican upwa d end con inues in he subsequen decade.
Howe e , his end b eaks a e he Lisbon ea y en e ed in o o ce. In
2009 we obse e a d op and a sligh ly dec easing endency a e wa ds (e en
mo e isible in a coun -based pe spec i e, Supplemen a y Appendix A6).
Gi en ha he Lisbon ea y es ablished he Eu opean Ex e nal Ac ion Se ice
led by he High Rep esen a i e o he Union o Fo eign A ai s and Secu i y
Policy, ende ing he pos also a ice p esiden o he Eu opean Commission,
he obse ed pa e n is no immedia ely consis en wi h he capabili y pe -
spec i e.7 Howe e , his desc ip i e pa e n canno ule ou ha i is jus
he opical ocus in he deba es ha di e s om he EU’s “pe issues.”
To see whe he such “pe issues”—a eas in which he EU has s ong
capabili y and/o ambi ion—a e indeed e lec ed in he in e na ional ec-
ogni ion o i s ac o ness as sugges ed by H2, Figu e 2 picks ou all 1,012
sen ences in which EU ac o ness was explici ly ecognized. Fo hese
sen ences i a e ages hei seman ic simila i y o he h ee b oad a ge
concep s in he join wo d ec o space desc ibed abo e. The esul ing
cosine simila i ies ha e been z-s anda dized o his exposi ion, so ha
hey can in e p e ed as de ia ions o sen ences wi h EU ac o ness ecog-
ni ion om he g and means ac oss all almos one million sen ences in
UNGD speeches.
We see ha s a emen s ecognizing EU ac o ness a e much mo e simila
o concep s ci cumsc ibing ade and economy issues when compa ed o
andom sen ences. This bodes well wi h he capabili y pe spec i e and he
“EU as a ade powe ” a gumen s. EU ac o ness is pa icula ly ecognized
in mo e economic con ex s. No ably, his is e en mo e p onounced o
UN speeches gi en by s a es ou side o he Eu opean Union.
7 No e ha he EU also became an obse e membe o he UN wi h speaking igh s in he Gene al
Deba e in 2011 (whe e i ually all o EU speeches unsu p isingly ecognize EU ac o ness). As p oposed
by an anonymous e iewe , his could ha e dec eased EU membe s’ incen i es o emphasize EU ac o -
ness hemsel es. Indeed, he sha e o Ge man speeches ecognizing EU ac o ness d ops om 74%
be o e o only 20% a e 2011. Ye and s ill, his decline and hen s agna ion in o e all ecogni ion
appea s inconsis en wi h a pe spec i e claiming ha he EU’s o mal (i.e. ea y-based) capabili ies d i e
in e na ional ecogni ion o i s ac o ness.
INTERNATIoNAL INTERACTIoNS 809
In con as o H2, howe e , he ecogni ion o EU ac o ness appea s
no e y s ongly d i en by a “no ma i e powe Eu ope” logic: Sen ences
ecognizing EU ac o ness a e sligh ly close o concep s o “democ acy,”
“ igh s,” o “law” han he a e age sen ence in UNGD speeches, bu his
desc ip i e e ec is compa a i ely weak. I amoun s o only .24 s anda d
de ia ions o o eign s a es, and a ound .35 s anda d de ia ions o EU
membe s a es only. Membe s a es a e appa en ly somewha mo e eage
o p esen EU ac o ness in he con ex o libe al democ acy hemes han
hi d s a es. Somewha su p isingly—a leas in he ligh o H2 abo e—we
also see a posi i e de ia ion om he a e age pa e n when i comes o
secu i y hemes. A leas some imes, EU ac o ness is ecognized in con ex s
ha a e seman ically close o espec i e seed e ms such as “secu i y,”
“wa ,” “peace,” “ e o ism” o “mili a y.”
The empo al and con ex ual a ia ion unco e ed hus a , howe e ,
does no ye eally help us assessing whe he his is eally much o a he
li le ecogni ion o ac o ness ha he EU eally enjoys in his leading
in e na ional o um o s a e-based o eign policy exchange. To acco dingly
benchma k his be e , Figu e 3 ini ially compa es ecogni ion o EU
ac o ness (in blue) o ha o o he egional o ganiza ions (ligh blue), o
o in e na ional ins i u ions in he economic o ade (pink) and secu i y
policy domain (g ey).
In his compa a i e pe spec i e, ac o ness ecogni ion o he EU is only
umped by ha o he A ican Union (and i s p edecesso , he O ganiza ion
o A ican Uni y)—an o ganiza ion wi h a much la ge s a e membe ship
ha is also c ucial o UN coo dina ion o A ican s a es on ques ions o
decolonializa ion and egional peace (Mu i hi 2017). Bu wi h his excep-
ion, he EU is indeed a s ong posi i e ou lie in e ms o in e na ionally
ecognized ac o ness amongs compa a i ely au ho i a i e o ganiza ions
and ins i u ions beyond he na ion s a e. UNGD speake s ecognize ac ion
capabili ies o some in e na ional ins i u ions a speci ic poin s in ime—e.g.
Figu e 2. seman ic simila i y o eU ac o ness ecogni ion o h ee a ge concep s.
810 C. RAUH
he Wo ld T ade O ganiza ion in he ea ly 2000s—bu he g and a e age
o EU ac o ness ecogni ion in UNGD speeches mo e han doubles ha
o key IOs such as he IMF, he Wo ld Bank o NATO, o ha o o he
egional o ganiza ions such as ASEAN, which all igu e as ac o s in only
less han 5% o UNGD speeches on a e age.
We can hen also compa e he ecogni ion o EU ac o ness o ha o
s a es as he “na u al” inhabi an s o he in e na ional sys em (Figu e 4).
Looking a he op-25 lis s o s a es p e- and pos -Maas ich ini ially
p o ides some hin s on whose ac o ness is ecognized in global discou se.
Figu e 3. annual sha e o UnGD speeches ecognizing ac o ness o di e en os and Ios.
Figu e 4. Benchma king he ecogni ion o eU ac o ness o ha o he op-25 s a es wi h ec-
ognized ac o ness in UnGD speeches.
INTERNATIoNAL INTERACTIoNS 811
We see, o example, ha g ea powe s a us ma e s, wi h he Uni ed
S a es anking pa icula ly high in bo h pe iods. All o he P5 s a es ( alues
o Russia include he USSR o ea lie pe iods) and o he leading ade
powe s also make i o he op-25 lis s o ecognized s a e ac o s in UNGD
speeches. Bu one also sees ha secu i y conce ns and con es ed s a ehood
seem o ma e o ac o ness ecogni ion in hese deba es. Many s a es in
he op-25 lis a e coun ies in ol ed in a med con lic s wi h ei he in e -
na ional ex e nali ies o in e na ional in ol emen . P ime examples a e
Is ael and he Pales inian Te i o ies h oughou bo h pe iods, bu also
s a es like A ghanis an, I aq, I an, Libya, Sy ia, o Vie nam. Mo eo e , we
no e ha he dis ibu ion is la e a e 1992, suppo ing he pe spec i e
o a mo e mul ipola wo ld o de a e he end o he Cold Wa . This
highligh s ha ac o ness ecogni ion in UNGD deba es appea s as s a e-
and secu i y-d i en. Fu u e esea ch could hus exploi he measu es p o-
posed he e o s udy he discu si e cons uc ion o s a e so e eign y mo e
b oadly (c . K asne 1999).
Bu o he p esen pu poses we no e ha he EU a es ema kably
well in ha compa ison. E en be o e 1992, he EU would ha e made i
o he op-25 lis o ecognized “s a e” ac o s. In he pos -Maas ich
pe iod, he EU e en achie es he i h spo in his a e age anking, com-
ing close o F ance, one o i s la ges membe s a es ha also has a
P5 s a us.
In desc ip i e e ms, we can hus conclude ha he ecogni ion o EU
ac o ness in his majo o um o in e go e nmen al exchange has inc eased
o e he 50 yea s obse ed he e, i happens p ima ily in economic bu
pa ially also in secu i y con ex s, i umps he ecognized ac o ness o
mos o he key ins i u ions beyond he na ion s a e, and i can e en pa -
ially keep up wi h he ac o ness asc ibed o indi idual s a es in he
in e na ional sys em.
Ye and s ill, cau ion is wa an ed: he obse ed a e age o 14% o
speeches ecognizing EU ac o ness in he pos -Maas ich pe iod in e sely
implies ha 86% o na ional ep esen a i es do no explici ly ecognize
EU ac o ness when gi ing hei p obably mos impo an in e na ional
o eign policy speech in a gi en yea . In o he wo ds, he e is signi ican
c oss-na ional a ia ion.
5.Which S a es Recognize EU Ac o ness in hei UNGD Speeches?
To ge a desc ip i e sense o such c oss-na ional a ia ion, Figu e 5 maps
he sha e o speeches ha ecognize EU ac o ness along he coun y ha
UNGD speake s ep esen — ocusing on he mo e meaning ul pos -Maas-
ich pe iod om now on.
812 C. RAUH
This geog aphical dis ibu ion sends a e y s ong isual message: ecog-
nizing EU ac o ness on he in e na ional s age is a p ima ily a Eu opean
hing. While he e is some in e nal a ia ion, s a es loca ed in o immedia ely
a ound he Union asc ibe EU ac o ness in a much la ge sha e o UNGD
speeches han coun ies om he es o he wo ld. Ini ially i is no o e ly
su p ising ha membe s o a bloc emphasize ac o ness o ha bloc mo e
s ongly han he ou side wo ld—along he da a gene a ed he e, simila
pa e ns can be e ie ed o he A ican Union o ASEAN, o example.
Bu agains he EU’s epea edly o mula ed ambi ion o be ecognized
as a global ac o , he di e ences be ween po ayals om wi hin and
ex e nal ecogni ion a e qui e sobe ing. In he 1992–2020 pe iod, he
likelihood ha speake s link he EU o some kind o ac ion in hei annual
UNGD speech is a ound 47% when hey ep esen a con empo a y EU
membe s a e, ha is his occu s in oughly e e y second speech. These
chances d op o 30% o ep esen a i es o o he s a es loca ed on he
Eu opean con inen , ha is e e y hi d speech. Ye , o speake s ep e-
sen ing s a es ha a e no loca ed in Eu ope, EU ac o ness is ecognized
in only 7% o speeches, on a e age. Explici ecogni ion o EU ac o ness
om ou side o Eu ope is, in ac , a a e e en in his cen al o um o
global poli ics. E en a e he Maas ich ea y has ins i u ionalized he
CSFP-pilla , he ecogni ion o he EU’s in e na ional ac o ness hus s ill
e lec s la gely an ambi ion om wi hin Eu ope a he han a high amoun
o decidedly ex e nal ecogni ion.
Ye and s ill, he e is no able a ia ion among s a es ou side o Eu ope.
Rep esen a i es om Tu key (34%), Papua New Guinea (28%), Pa aguay
Figu e 5. ecogni ion o eU ac o ness by speake s’ coun y in he 1992–2020 pe iod.
INTERNATIoNAL INTERACTIoNS 813
(27%), bu also Tunisia (24%), Russia (21%), o Sain Lucia (21%), o
example, ecognize EU ac o ness in hei speeches a leas somewha e-
quen ly. O he s, in con as , ecognize EU ac o ness in he 28 yea s o
UNGD speeches obse ed he e only once, among hem Chile, U uguay,
India, and—s ikingly— he Uni ed S a es.8 Finally, a no able numbe o
43 coun ies ne e associa e he EU wi h some kind o di ec ac ion du ing
he h ee decades we obse e he e—among hem decidedly au ho i a ian
egimes such as I an, Uzbekis an, o Venezuela, bu also majo ade
powe s such as Sou h A ica and, pa icula ly no ewo hy, China (which,
in ac , ne e men ions he EU a all). Again, hese pa e ns a e sobe ing
o he EU’s global ac o ambi ions and hey poin o he abo e heo ized
a gumen s acco ding o which he ecogni ion o EU ac o ness migh be
d i en by dis ance, ade dependence, bu also by egime ype and s a egic
compe i ion mo e b oadly.
To es whe he his heo ized co- a ia ion is sys ema ic, le us mo e
down o he le el o indi idual annual speeches by ep esen a i es om
non-EU coun ies. In he 1992–2020 pe iod, we ha e ele an coun y/
yea da a o es he abo e speci ied hypo heses on con ex ual and c oss-na-
ional a ia ion o a o al o 3,638 o such speeches (desc ip i es in
Supplemen a y Appendix A7). Figu e 6 summa izes a linea model o he
p obabili y ha EU ac o ness is ecognized in hese speeches.
8 The U.S. does men ion he EU i e imes du ing he 1992-2020 pe iod bu links i only once o an
explici ac ion ( he mul ila e al nego ia ions o e I an’s nuclea p og am in 2013). In o he U.S. speeches
he EU is me ely lis ed among o he mul ila e al ins i u ions while he 2019 U.S. speech (T ump I admin-
is a ion) men ions he EU only in he con ex o suppo ing he U.K.’s exi om i .
Figu e 6. eg ession model o ex e nal eU ac o ness ecogni ion 1992–2020.
814 C. RAUH
The uppe panel ini ially shows ha he seman ic con en o a s a e-
men —he e measu ed on he le el o he ull speech—ma e s o whe he
EU ac o ness is ecognized he ein. In line wi h he capabili y pe spec i e
on EU ac o ness, an inc ease in he emphasis o economy- and ade- ela ed
e ms by one s anda d de ia ion is associa ed wi h a oughly wo pe cen age
poin s highe chance ha EU ac ion is ecognized in ha speech. Su p isingly,
also his mul i a ia e, speech-le el analysis sugges s a posi i e link be ween
EU ac o ness ecogni ion by o eign ac o s when hei speeches e ol e
a ound secu i y e ms ha a e seman ically close o “wa ,” “peace,” “ e o -
ism” o “secu i y” i sel . Bu we also see ha his link is no ully obus
in s a is ical e ms. Bu e en mo e s ongly con as ing hypo hesis 2, a
speech using a ound one s anda d de ia ion mo e wo ds associa ed wi h
key e ms ci cumsc ibing libe al democ acy—“democ acy” i sel , bu also
“law,” “ igh s” o “ eedom”—comes wi h a wo pe cen age poin s lowe
p obabili y ha EU ac o ness is ecognized he ein. In ac , his is he
s onges nega i e e ec in he es ima ed model, which is ha dly consis en
wi h he “no ma i e powe Eu ope” a gumen s o ambi ions—a leas in
hei UNGD speeches, hi d coun ies do no ecognize i as such.9
The middle panel o Figu e 6 ocusses on he in e ac ional logics o
EU ac o ness ecogni ion. In line wi h hypo heses 3a and b, we see ha
a la ge geog aphical dis ance o he EU dec eases he likelihood ha a
speake ecognizes EU ac o ness, while coun ies whose GDP is mo e
dependen on ade wi h EU clea ly ecognize i s ac o ness mo e o en.
In ac , ade dependency is he s onges posi i e p edic o iden i ied in
his se ing. I is hus no jus EU capabili y ha explains ex e nal ecog-
ni ion, i is he likelihood ha hi d s a es expe ience hese capabili ies
in mo e di ec in e ac ion.
Finally, he lowe panel ocuses on he po en ial s a egic (dis-)incen i es
ha hi d coun ies migh ha e o ecognizing he EU as an in e na ional
ac o in i s own igh . We ini ially see ha he expec a ion o P5 s a es
does no bea ou — his s a e cha ac e is ic shows a weak posi i e endency,
which is no obus in s a is ical e ms a all. A plausible eason is ha
he ou non-EU s a es among he P5 a e be e explained by o he in e -
ac ional o s a egic ac o s in he model. Russia and, since 2017, he UK
a e, o example, loca ed compa a i ely closely o he EU and migh hus
ecognize i mo e o en along he in e ac ional logics.
China and he U.S. a e no only P5 s a es bu also he leading ade
powe s on he globe which migh mean ha he heo ized economic
9 No e ha democ acy- ela ed alk in in e na ional exchanges o en appea s o se e as indi ec speech
o couch speci ic posi ions o demands in cloudy legi imacy language (S ephen 2015), which may pa -
ially explain he pa e n obse ed he e.
INTERNATIoNAL INTERACTIoNS 815
compe i ion logic cap u es hese cases be e . Wi h ega d o his hypo h-
esis, he model shows ha a highe sha e o a coun y’s economy in he
wo ldwide g oss p oduc is indeed associa ed wi h a lowe likelihood ha
EU ac o ness is ecognized. Ye , his expec ed e ec does no each con-
en ional le els o s a is ical signi icance in his pa icula model
speci ica ion.
In sum, his mul i a ia e pe spec i e indica es ha he con ex ual and
especially he a ia ion ac oss coun ies ma e s o he ex e nal ecogni ion
o EU ac o ness o e and beyond he slow de elopmen o i s o eign
policy capabili ies om wi hin. To illus a e his in mo e subs an i e e ms,
a one-s anda d-de ia ion dec ease in a capi al’s dis ance o B ussels—
a ound 3,500 kms, which app oxima es he dis ance be ween he EU capi al
and Cai o (Egyp ) o Ye e an (A menia)—dec eases he likelihood ha a
speake om a espec i e coun y ecognizes he EU as an ac o al eady
by mo e han wo pe cen age poin s. This is qui e ema kable i we ecall
ha he a e age likelihood o ex e nal ecogni ion is 7% o e all only.
And, again, his neighbo hood e ec is ha dly in line wi h he EU’s ambi-
ion o be a uly global ac o .
Ye , some s a is ical cau ion is wa an ed. Mos impo an ly, he eade
should ecall ha ex e nal ecogni ion o EU ac o ness is a e y a e e en
o e all. This is i s and o emos impo an as an empi ical ac in i sel ,
bu also c ea es s a is ical challenges. The linea model migh be o a
he inges o he p obabili y dis ibu ion, bu also logi models unde es-
ima e e en likelihoods in such ins ances and su e om small sample
and sepa a ion p oblems (King and Zeng 2001). Supplemen a y Appendix
A8 hus e-es ima es he model by a logi and hen a penalized maximum
likelihood logi speci ica ion ha accoun s o he a e e en na u e o he
da a. Mo eo e , gi en ha we obse e panel da a—a la gely s able numbe
o coun ies o e 28 yea s—we migh o e es ima e he s a is ical obus ness
o he e ec s i he es ima ion esiduals a e no iden ically and inde-
penden ly dis ibu ed. Since a ixed-e ec s speci ica ion does no help
he e—we would abso b he subs an ially in e es ing a ia ion o he slowly
changing a iables on he coun y le el—Supplemen a y Appendix A8
applies consecu i ely s ic e e o co ec ion me hods ha conside he -
e oskedas ic e o dis ibu ions as well as po en ial e o clus e ing on
ei he he yea o he coun y le el.
Ye and s ill, hese obus ness checks lead o he same in e ences. The
heo ized e ec o GDP wo ld-sha e e en inds mo e obus suppo in
some o he 11 es ed model speci ica ions. Gi en hese mino luc ua ions
and he my iads o idiosync a ic logics ha migh d i e EU ac o ness
ecogni ion in any gi en yea —among hem c owding ou e ec s by o he
issues o he day— hese models a e ha dly exhaus i e explana ions o
whe he and when he EU is ecognized as an in e na ional ac o . Bu he
