Why EU democratic theory needs a decolonial turn: Racism, colonialism and the ‘we’ of democracy
After coming into force in 2009, the Lisbon Treaty required the creation of new institutions and procedures. This article analyses the response by the General Secretariat of the Council to two key innovations which generated both opportunities as well as risks in terms of its institutional role: the...
Enregistré dans:
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Langue: | Français |
| Publié: |
2025
|
| Accès en ligne: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Résumé: | After coming into force in 2009, the Lisbon Treaty required the creation of new institutions and procedures. This article analyses the response by the General Secretariat of the Council to two key innovations which generated both opportunities as well as risks in terms of its institutional role: the establishment of full-time, fixed-term presidents for the European Council and the Foreign Affairs Council. The paper first examines the GSC’s institutional preferences with regard to its role in supporting these new two players and successively identifies strategies and resources that were used. It argues that in both cases the GSC was successful in realizing its preferences even though in the case of the HR/VP, this was more challenging. |
|---|