International Conditionality: Easing Ethnic Politics

REVIEW BY CORNELIU BJOLA

Department of Political Science, University of Toronto, Canada

Ethnic Politics in Europe: The Power of Norms and Incentives. By Judith G. Kelley.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004. 264 pp., $35.00 (ISBN: 0-691-11798-5).

In Ethnic Politics in Europe: The Power of Norms and Incentives, Judith Kelley takes aserious look at the role that international institutions play in reducing ethnic ten-sions. In the process, she provides a refreshing theoretical counterbalance, espe-cially in the current international context, to the view that military power andrealpolitik hold the key to international stability. Kelley’s research topic is, obvi-ously, hardly new. The debate about the importance of international institutions inshaping domestic policy has been around for some time (Keohane and Nye 1989;Moravcsik 1998; Hooghe and Marks 2001), but what Kelley adds to this literatureis a detailed empirical account of two mechanismsFnormative pressure andmembership conditionalityFby which international institutions can affect policychange in target countries, even when faced with a strong domestic opposition.Kelley investigates the influence of three major European organizations (theCouncil of Europe, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, andespecially the European Union) on the ethnic minority policies of four East Eu-ropean transitional democracies (Latvia, Estonia, Slovakia, and Romania). She ad-vances the argument that political incentives associated with membership in theseinstitutions have played a decisive role in reducing ethnic tensions in the fourcountries.

Ethnic Politics in Europe has three parts. The first section outlines the theoreticalframework and the methodological apparatus. The second part examines the fourcase studies. The third section assesses the validity of the results. In general terms,Kelley’s inquiry is located at the intersection of three sets of literature. From theonset, she steps into the rationalist–constructivist debate on international social-ization. Specifically, she takes aim at the issue of whether a logic of expected con-sequences, based on material or normative incentives, can prevail over a logic ofappropriateness, shaped by ethnic prejudice. Her answer to this question is em-bedded in a second literature that describes how the challenges associated with thepolicy of conditionality in general, and the process of Europeanization in particular,can change actors’ behavior and preferences. The third side of the theoreticaltriangle that frames Ethnic Politics in Europe involves some of the political dilemmasshaping the relationships between ethnic minorities and majorities. Kelley’s find-ings flow logically from this three-fold theoretical context.

According to Kelley, the logic of expected consequences generally did prevailover the policy of ethnic prejudiceFas long as the former was clearly linked to theissue of institutional membership. Normative persuasion aloneFwhether takingthe form of verbal pressures or written official reprimandsFwithout linkage tomaterial sanctions or inducements has rarely achieved the desired results. This wasespecially the case when domestic opposition to external influence was strong, as inSlovakia and Romania before 1996. The effectiveness of international efforts toinfluence the minority policies of the four countries depended on two other factorsas well: the credibility of the threats and promises made by the international

r 2005 International Studies Review.PublishedbyBlackwellPublishing,350MainStreet,Malden,MA02148,USA,and9600GarsingtonRoad,OxfordOX42DQ,UK.

International Studies Review (2005) 7, 308–310

institutions, and the presence of minority representation in the government. Theresults of Kelley’s study reinforce two important arguments. First, internationalconditionality is indeed effective in the case of ethnic politics. Second, it can beemployed preemptively (p. 189). Put differently, ethnic politics does not need tolead to violence and political instability as long as international institutions taketheir potential impact seriously.

Although Ethnic Politics in Europe makes clear contributions to the study of ethnicpolitics and violence, two of its contributions do not go far enough. First, Kelley’sattempt to juxtapose and assess the joint value of constructivist and rationalistexplanations of domestic change under external pressure is definitely commend-able. However, her use of constructivist arguments raises some questions. In fact,Kelley’s treatment of constructivism is very thin. The selection of ‘‘normative pres-sure’’F‘‘an instance in which an institution expresses a concern about a policyand makes recommendation on the direction of the policy’’ (p. 55)Fas the keyconstructivist variable to be tested against rational interests does significant injusticeto the constructivist theory of international socialization. From the latter theory’spoint of view, the issue is not whether governments respond to the concerns ex-pressed by the international community. In the early stages of the socializationprocess, they rarely heed international concerns, or at most they pay lip-service tothem (Risse-Kappen, Ropp, and Sikkink 1999). Rather, the issue is whether theseconcerns trigger a process of social deliberation and learning for the actors in-volved. Because she does not treat normative pressure in this way, Kelley cannotclaim to have tested her conclusions against constructivist and rationalist theories,but only against two slightly different versions of rationalism. In short, in Kelley’sfour case studies, the constructivist component of the interaction between the in-ternational organizations and the governments has essentially been left out of theanalysis.

Second, Ethnic Politics in Europe relies on an impressive methodological apparatusthat combines both quantitative and qualitative tools, including game theory, sta-tistical analysis, process tracing, and counterfactual analysis. This approach allowsKelley to draw important analytical distinctions concerning the political effective-ness of normative pressure, conditionality, and domestic opposition in facilitatingminority policy change. Yet, the validity of these distinctions is compromised by afew epistemological ambiguities. For example, can the strength of domestic oppo-sition be causally separated from external pressure, or is the relationship betweenthe two variables one of mutual constitution? Similarly, can the credibility of con-ditionality be assessed independently of the process through which the targetcountries contest the conditions? Kelley’s application of game theory to the cred-ibility question (pp. 42–46) fails to clarify this issue. Last but not least, can theexamination of the issue of minority policy change be reduced to a matter ofinterest-driven calculations and negotiations? Are not the identities of the con-cerned actors also part of the picture, primarily as they affect the definition of theseinterests? These epistemological tensions seem to suggest that Kelley’s main sourceof inspiration for her research design (namely, King, Keohane, and Verba 1994)might have been part of the problem rather than the solution to her ambitiousproject.

These criticisms should not, however, overshadow the important contributionthat Ethnic Politics in Europe makes to the field of ethnic politics. Kelley’s findingsabout the role of international institutions in reducing ethnic tensions will be dif-ficult to overlook by future research. A more serious engagement with the con-structivist literature and a better clarification of the epistemological frameworkcould, indeed, have strengthened the thrust of her thesis. Nevertheless, the qualityof the theoretical analysis, the breadth of the empirical evidence, and the clarity ofthe research design make this a valuable resource for graduate students, academics,and policymakers alike.

CORNELIU BJOLA 309

References

HOOGHE, LIESBET, AND GARY MARKS. (2001) Multi-Level Governance and European Integration. Lanham,MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.

KEOHANE, ROBERT O., AND JOSEPH S. NYE. (1989) Power and Interdependence. 2nd edition. New York:HarperCollins.

KING, GARY, ROBERT O. KEOHANE, AND SIDNEY VERBA. (1994) Designing Social Inquiry: ScientificInference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

MORAVCSIK, ANDREW. (1998) The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina toMaastricht. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

RISSE-KAPPEN, THOMAS, STEVE C. ROPP, AND KATHRYN SIKKINK. (1999) The Power of Human Rights:International Norms and Domestic Change. New York: Cambridge University Press.

International Conditionality: Easing Ethnic Politics310