ABSTRACT
Introduction The legitimacy of the EU in the global arena has been historically questioned. From the outset, politicians, observers and scholars have criticized the supranational institutions for not having the capacity to develop an effective foreign action. This lack of confidence prompted a discourse on actorness, unity, coherence,1 consistency, effectiveness and accountability of its external agency that informed both actions and perceptions, within and outside Europe. As noted by Diez, the academic focus on discourses and foreign policy gradually shifted from exploring ‘how “speaking Europe works in EU foreign policy” ’ to ‘how others “speak Europe” ’.2 Between these two dimensions lies the issue of the outward perceptions of the EU. External perceptions are a relevant source of knowledge about foreign policy. As Elgström shows in his study of the EU in international trade negotiations, they contribute to shaping identity and they are means of international accreditation and legitimacy.3 Yet, not only scholars have so far overlooked image or role theory4; external perception studies have all concentrated on the EU identity and international agency rather than questioning specific cases.5 Lucarelli, for example, evaluates how outsiders’ perceptions influence the self-representation processes of actors.6 Such a focus, though highly relevant, disregards the explanatory potential that perceptions may have when it comes to the impact of EU policies in the targeted countries and the quality of EU-third countries relations. In fact, as Mišík rightly argues, ‘perceptions can be characterised as the individual attitudes of state actors (decision makers) not only towards other states, but also their own country’.7 This chapter contributes to this debate and to this book’s interpretive framework by focusing on what discourses on Europe prevailed in Euro-Mediterranean relations before and after the Arab uprisings and how external perceptions of these discourses may affect dialogue and policy choices. Assuming that ‘perceptions of the other’ frame and inform decisions in international relations,8 we argue that the outward image of the EU in the negotiation processes contradicts the widespread representation of the EU as fragmented and non-unitary actor.
