Macron Wins Presidency in Decisive Fashion

See my comments on Le Pen’s defeat in Monday’s Boston Herald. I said, “Le Pen is not going away, but this is a major defeat for her.” As the article notes, I attribute Le Pen’s success to her charisma and name recognition and said it will be tough for another nationalist to pick up her momentum. “This is a family enterprise, in many ways.” 

Why the Populists Didn’t Win France’s Presidential Election

I was quoted at length today in the Washington Post on the French elections and why populism did not triumph there. I helped to make the case that compared with Britain and the United States, the countries history explains why the center held in France.

Read the article on the Washington Post’s website>> 

Comments for Izvestia on French Presidential Election

logo_izvestiya_en

I was quoted in an April 21, 2017 in the Russian outlet Izvestia for an article entitled “France Solves an Equation with Four Unknowns.

Here are my comments to the reporter:

There is likely to be higher turn out in the first round, if only because there has been so much build up with real debates between the many different candidates.  Macron and Melenchon are most likely to attract undecided voters.  Le Pen voters have been committed for quite a while, even if her rhetoric has ramped up in recent days, and may enable her to pick up disenchanted Fillon (center right) voters.

Anything is possible in this race.  The question is, if Melenchon is the second man, is Le Pen the first woman?  That is what most analysts suggest, and established politicians fear, because they think that will mean that Le Pen is elected.  ‘Strategic’ thinking among voters may mean that they pull back from Melenchon in the end, and vote Macron.  If the contest is Macron/Le Pen, Macron wins.  If, however, Fillon comes from behind, to make it a Fillon/Le Pen race, then the abstention on the left could mean a Le Pen victory.

The Way Forward for Europe

On the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome, the Friedrich-Ebert-Foundation asked a number of academics and politicians how to keep the EU together. Is it time for more or less EU integration? What does the EU look like in 60 years? The answers recall the peace project Europe or advocate an EU integration of different speeds – see my contribution below!

Other comments can be found here.

Europe Beyond Populism

On March 21, 2017, I took part in a conference celebrating the 60th anniversary of the European Union hosted by the Foundation for European Progressive Studies. 

Scmidt1-516x300

The event, entitled “Looking for a Different Europe: Reflections and Perspectives,” was attended by a number of major political officials responsible for their countries’ European affairs policy including former President of the European Parliament, Enrique Barón.

I spoke as part of panel entitled “More Inclusive, More Political, More Democratic: Europe Beyond Populism,” along with Barón.

The keynote at the event was delivered by Nicolas Schmit, Minister of Labour, Employment, Social Economy and Economic Solidarity in Luxembourg.

2017-03-21 Rome Treaties Conference_Programme

European Varieties of Capitalism: In the Shadow of the Eurozone Crisis

On March 8, I will take part in a conference-debate on the ”European Varieties of Capitalism in the Shadow of the Eurozone Crisis” at ULB. My presentation will be followed by a debate introduced by: Amandine CRESPY, Professor in the Department of Political Science, ULB, and Nicolas VERSCHUEREN, Professor attached to the Department of History, Arts and Archeology, ULB. The conference is organized by Faculty of Philosophy and Social Sciences of ULB with the participation of the Institute for European Studies

[View conference announcement]

 7wvalannh3e

SWIPE Mentor Award

I was honored to receive the SWIPE Mentor Award by the International Studies Association in February. The SWIPE Mentor Award pays tribute to women and men who have invested in the professional success of women in the IPE field. Originating in the early 1990s, the Society for Women in International Political Economy (SWIPE) observed that many women in IPE did not have the close mentoring relationships that their male counterparts seemed to benefit from. Indeed, while research across disciplines has shown that mentoring can be key to higher publication rates and successfully achieving tenure, women tend to get less mentoring than men.

SWIPE-Award-1

I attended the award ceremony during the International Political Economy Section reception at the International Studies Association Annual Meetings in Baltimore between February 22-25, 2017.  While in Baltimore, I spoke on the panel:  “Mentoring Women in International Political Economy and Honoring SWIPE Award Recipient 2017 Prof. Vivien Schmidt.”   

 

Recent Talks on The Future of Europe

On Wednesday, November 30, I took part in a panel discussion at Harvard’s Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies to discuss The Search for Europe: Contrasting Approaches, the eighth book in a series published annually by BBVA, aiming to analyze and generate discussion on the present and the future of Europe and its integration project. My presentation, based on my book chapter, was titled, “The Impact of European Integration on National Democracies: Democracy at Increasing Risk in the Eurozone Crisis.” Other presenters were Jeffrey Frieden, Arthur Goldhammer, and Peter Hall.

Then on Thursday, December 1, I gave a talk at the Boston Council on Foreign Relations entitled, “The European Union’s Many Crises: What Future for Europe?”

From Enlargement to Brexit: The Future of the European Union

ces_speaker_162c0526-1

On Monday, November 14, I took part in the Summit on the Future of Europe 2016: Europe and the Forces of Destruction at Harvard University. Launched in 2014, this annual conference at Harvard engages eminent scholars and public leaders in a debate on the challenges facing Europe.

Since 2008, the terms crisis and Europe have become inseparable. As the crisis has deepened and persisted and its dimensions multiplied, the future of a united Europe and its core values have been called into question. Yet, there is wide divergence of views among experts and politicians on the causes, symptoms, implications and policies needed to resolve it. Is it necessary for Europe and the European Union to discard old models and principles in order to find a way out of crisis? Or should traditional European approaches simply be refined and applied more consistently in order to find solutions? The 2016 Summit, entitled Europe and the Forces of Disunion, will examine the adverse political, economic and social trends that have both fueled the crisis and/or resulted from it. The proceedings will assess the options open to Europe in confronting its multiple challenges and reflect on Europe’s future.

I sat on a panel entitled “From Enlargement to Brexit: The Future of the European Union” with George Alogoskoufis, Karamanlis Chair of Hellenic and European Studies at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy; R. Daniel Kelemen, Professor of Political Science and Jean Monnet Chair in European Union Politics at Rutgers University; and Sir Paul Tucker, Chair of the Systemic Risk Council, Senior Fellow in the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government at the Kennedy School, and Former Deputy Governor at the Bank of England (2009-2013). The panel was chaired by Peter Hall, Krupp Foundation Professor of European Studies at Harvard University.

A summary of the day-long event can be found in the Harvard Gazette.

Europe’s Crisis of Legitimacy: Governing by Rules and Ruling by Numbers in the Eurozone

On Tuesday, November 15, I gave the European Horizons Lecture at the University of Michigan. The lecture was organized by the Weiser Center for Emerging Democracies and co-sponsored by the Center for European Studies, the International Institute, the  Weiser Center for Europe and Eurasia, and the European Horizons Group.

Although “Brexit” and the refugee crisis have grabbed the headlines, the Eurozone crisis also continues to be of major concern for the European Union. The EU’s comparatively poor economic performance and increasingly volatile politics have combined with its focus on “governing by the rules and ruling by the numbers” in the Eurozone to generate a crisis of democratic legitimacy. In this lecture I theorize this legitimacy crisis in terms of problems with “output” policies, “input” politics, and “throughput” processes. I argue that in response to such problems, EU institutional actors—ECB, Council, Commission, and EP—all incrementally reinterpreted the rules and recalibrated the numbers “by stealth,” that is, without admitting it in their public discourse.