Skip navigation
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://arks.princeton.edu/ark:/88435/dsp01db78tf626
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisorSuleiman, Ezra N.-
dc.contributor.authorPetkova, Natali-
dc.date.accessioned2017-07-13T17:56:14Z-
dc.date.available2017-07-13T17:56:14Z-
dc.date.created2017-04-03-
dc.date.issued2017-4-3-
dc.identifier.urihttp://arks.princeton.edu/ark:/88435/dsp01db78tf626-
dc.description.abstractThis study attempts to understand the European Union’s reasoning for becoming and remaining a normative power after the Maastricht Treaty in 1992. Legal texts are explored in efforts to understand towards what direction the legal text pushes the international entity. Political and economic arguments are broken down in efforts to weigh the costs and benefits of maintaining normative power. I build a figure to visually represent the reasons behind the EU embracing normative power. Based on the research, the most rational direction for the European Union, taking into consideration most of its main contemporary concerns, is that which leads the entity towards combining ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ power in efforts to create “smart power,” a concept coined by Joseph Nye Jr. (Nye Jr., 2008).en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.titleCOMMITMENT, PREFERENCE, OR NECESSITY: THE EUROPEAN UNION AND NORMATIVE POWER AFTER THE MAASTRICHT TREATYen_US
dc.typePrinceton University Senior Theses-
pu.date.classyear2017en_US
pu.departmentPoliticsen_US
pu.pdf.coverpageSeniorThesisCoverPage-
dc.rights.accessRightsWalk-in Access. This thesis can only be viewed on computer terminals at the <a href=http://mudd.princeton.edu>Mudd Manuscript Library</a>.-
pu.contributor.authorid960885194-
pu.contributor.advisorid010004037-
pu.mudd.walkinyesen_US
Appears in Collections:Politics, 1927-2020

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat 
Petkova_Natali.pdf520.56 kBAdobe PDF    Request a copy


Items in Dataspace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.