Small States of Europe in International Negotiations (Case of Benelux Countries)

With a multicentric world forming and stratification of resource potential taking place, as well as with more small states in Europe and the world and emerging big multinationals here, small states receive more and more researchers’ attention: there appear papers analyzing activities of small states in Europe in the international arena in general and in international negotiations in particular. This article answers the following research question: What strategies and tactics allow small European states to strengthen their positions in negotiations (based on the case of the Benelux countries)? The strategies used by small countries in negotiations to compensate for limited resources is of scientific and practical interest as it can be applied by other states, namely Russia. Theoretically, the study is based on constructivist methodology as negotiation tactics effectively (re)formulate the issue, changing it through the use of a different context and/or lexical units, as well as on structural invariants of activity in negotiations. Discourse analysis and case study are used as research methods. The analysis identified the limitations that small European states, in particular the Benelux countries, face at each stage of international negotiations. The authors conclude that the types of behavior small European states demonstrate in international negotiations can be divided into those (1) aimed at increasing the “weight” of the state (e.g., interaction within international institutions, with NGOs and lobbies, organizing side events, etc.) and (2) focused on influencing the course of negotiations: tactics within the bargaining strategy (coalition-building, bargaining, etc.) and tactics based on persuasion ((re)framing, appealing to one’s own “example”, etc.). For small European countries, namely the Benelux countries, persuasion tactics are most typical, although other tactics are also used.

1. Bailer, S. (2011). Bargaining Resources and Strategies in Climate Change Negotiations. Swiss Network of International Studies, Zurich.

2. Calvo, G., Végh Gramont, C.A. (1990). Interest Rate Policy in a Small Open Economy: The Predetermined Exchange Rates Case. IMF Staff Papers, 004, A002, 753-776. DOI: 10.5089/9781451930788.024. A002

3. Hansson, S. (2015). Discursive Strategies of Blame Avoidance in Government: A Framework for Analysis. Discourse & Society, 26(3), 297–322. DOI: 10.1177/0957926514564736

4. Kanie, N. (2003). Leadership in Multilateral Negotiation and Domestic Policy: The Netherlands at the Kyoto Protocol Negotiation. International Negotiation, 8(2), 339–365. DOI: 10.1163/157180603322576158

5. Lehtonen, T. (2009). Small states – Big negotiations, Decision Making and Small State Influence in EU Treaty Negotiations. Florence European University Institute. URL: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/45676303.pdf (accessed: 06.12.2023)

6. Manners, I. (2002). Normative Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms? Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(2), 235–258. DOI: 10.1111/1468-5965.00353

7. Mattern, J.B. (2005). Why `Soft Power’ Isn’t So Soft: Representational Force and the Sociolinguistic Construction of Attraction in World Politics. Millennium, 33(3), 583–612. DOI: 10.1177/03058298050330031601

8. Meerts, P. (2014). Diplomatic negotiation: essence and evolution. Clingendael Institute. URL: https:// www.clingendael.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/Diplomatic_Negotiation_Web_2015.pdf (accessed: 06.12.2023)

9. Panke, D. (2012a). Dwarfs in International Negotiations: How Small States Make Their Voices Heard. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 25(3), 313–328. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2012.710590

10. Panke, D. (2012b). Small States in Multilateral Negotiations. What Have We Learned? Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 25(3), 387–398. DOI: 10.1080/09557571.2012.710589

11. Thorhallsson, B. (2004). Can Small States Influence Policy in an EU of 25 Members? In: Busek, E., Hummer, W. (Eds.) Liechtenstein Politische Schriften, 39, 330-347, Verlag der Liechtensteinischen Akademischen Gesellschaft.

12. Thorhallsson, B., Steinsson, S. (2017). Small State Foreign Policy. The Oxford Research Encyclopaedia of Politics, May 24. URL: https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.484 (accessed: 06.12.2023)

13. Galperin, P.YA. (1976). Vvedenie v psihologiyu [Introduction to Psychology.] Mocsow, Izd-vo Moskovskogo universiteta. (In Russian)

14. Krasnyak, O.A., Shaternikov, P.S. (2023). Diplomatiya malyh gosudarstv: analiz vozmozhnostej i ogranichenij na primere Vostochnogo Timora. Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta [The Diplomacy of Small States: Exploring Opportunities and Limitations in the Case of Timor-Leste. MGIMO Review of International Relations] 16(3), 138–152. DOI: 10.24833/2071-8160-2023-3-90-138-152. (In Russian)

15. Lebedeva, M.M. (1993). Vam predstoyat peregovory [You are expecting negotiations.] Moscow, Ekonomika. (In Russian)

16. Lebedeva, M.M. (2017). “Myagkaya sila”: ponyatie i podhody [Soft Power: The Concept and Approaches]. MGIMO Review of International Relations, 3(54), 212–223. DOI: 10.24833/2071-8160-20173-54-212-223. (In Russian)

17. Panova, E.P. (2010). Sila privlekatel’nosti: ispol’zovanie «myagkoj vlasti» v mirovoj politike [Force of appeal: use of the «soft power» in world politics]. MGIMO Review of International Relations, 4(13), 91–97. DOI: 10.24833/2071-8160-2010-4-13-91-97. (In Russian)

18. Romanova, L.A. (2014). Malye strany Evropy: osobennosti konkurentosposobnosti. [Small countries of Europe: features of competitiveness]. Nauchno-analiticheskij zhurnal Obozrevatel’ — Observer, 7(294), 61–69. (In Russian)