Resume

• 2000

  Ph.D.

  President's Fellowship

  Politics

• 1995

  A.B.

  Government

  Harvard Crimson

  Harvard Political Review

  Harvard Ballet Company

  Harvard Ballroom Team

• International Relations

  Non-profits

  Foreign Policy

  Public Speaking

  Politics

  Public Diplomacy

  Higher Education

  European Union

  University Teaching

  Intercultural Communication

  Government

  Political Science

  Blogging

  Teaching

  Public Policy

  International Development

  Policy Analysis

  Editing

  Diplomacy

  Research

  Secrecy and the Making of CFSP

  Article\nHow can we understand the role of secrecy in the making of the European Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)? This article analyses the nature of secrecy and questions some of the main assumptions surrounding the concept. In this respect

  it argues that secrecy may be of functional necessity for policy-makers and actually compatible with good governance. Moreover

  we must not put too much stock in transparency alone in that the relationship between secrecy and transparency is not zero-sum ‒ historically

  transparency has sometimes been an instrument of control and domination. The article considers the case of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) to shed light on what kind of secrecy exists in the foreign policy area

  and argues that this is mainly a combination of functional and compound secrecy.

  Secrecy and the Making of CFSP

  This article advances the argument that security integration is occurring in the European Union (EU) as a result of the influence of certain knowledge-based networks or epistemic communities. Given that EU member states consistently resist integration in areas that are central to traditional state sovereignty

  security integration presents a puzzle. The case of the EU Military Committee (EUMC) will serve as an example of how and why epistemic communities matter in security decision-making. Although the EUMC and the Common Security and Defence Policy are relatively new

  the power of shared expertise among high-level military officers has already begun to dismantle sovereign barriers to security integration. In considering the puzzle of security integration

  this article suggests that the epistemic community framework provides a better explanation for the emergence of a European security space than alternative arguments

  such as principal-agent theory

  intergovernmental bargaining

  and regime theory. The case of a military epistemic community also serves to broaden the epistemic community literature

  which tends to focus somewhat narrowly on cases of environmental and economics experts.

  The Military Dimension of European Security: An Epistemic Community Approach

  Jan Melissen

  The time is ripe for European public diplomacy to take centre stage. Europe

  and particularly the EU

  is often misunderstood and seen in unnecessarily negative terms. The Eurozone crisis exacerbated the existing image of pre-vailing self-doubt. We argue that the EU myopically devotes too great a pro-portion of its communication resources to outreach with its own citizens. It is important to bridge the existing gap between the intra-EU and interna-tional communication spheres. Communicating Europe in other parts of the world will become increasingly important to Europeans and to business in-terests. The erosion of European influence and attractiveness is already evi-dent in a number of policy areas. With international opinion in flux

  it is ur-gent to prevent foreign publics from looking at Europe as a shopping para-dise for high-end luxury items

  or a continent suffering from endemic pessi-mism. As far as the EU does engage with the rest of the world

  the problem is that communication is too often based on one-way informational practices rather than true dialogue. EU member-state governments

  still behaving as though state-based diplomacy remains the name of their age-old Westphali-an game

  should be more conscious of the strengths of Europe's pluralistic and multi-level governance environment. Sharing excellence in public diplo-macy practices is in their own interest as well as that of other international actors in Europe.\n\nAlso see the related op-ed in EUobserver: http://euobserver.com/opinion/121855

  Communicating Europe: At Home in Tomorrow's World

  in Jozef Batora and David Spence (eds)

  The European External Action Service: European Diplomacy Post-Westphalia\n\nBook chapter

  The Public Diplomacy Role of the EEAS: Crafting a Resilient Image for Europe

  There are many factors driving the development of European Union (EU) foreign policy. While much of the literature focuses on how particular interests

  norms or internal processes within Brussels institutions

  this article sheds light on the role of external factors in shaping EU foreign policy through an in-depth examination of the recent development of EU Arctic policies. We find that increased Russian aggression

  not least in Ukraine

  is key to understanding why the EU recently has taken a strong interest in the Arctic. In a more insecure environment

  Member States are more prone to develop common policies to counter other powers and gain more influence over future developments

  especially as it relates to regime-formation in the Global Commons. In effect

  the EU demonstrates a kind of reactive power when it comes to dealing with new geopolitical threats.

  Reactive Power EU. Russian aggression and the development of an EU Arctic policy (with Marianne Riddervold)

  This article makes the case that the most important developments in the European intelligence arena actually have little to do with member states’ willingness to cooperate. Rather

  the context for the intelligence profession has changed fundamentally in the past few years in light of globalization and the information revolution

  and this has made the creation of a single EU intelligence space far more likely

  even despite member states’ resistance. The author argues that the emerging European intelligence space is increasingly consolidating around a transgovernmental network of intelligence professionals that draw upon open-source knowledge acquisition

  with IntCen at its centre. One implication of this is that the field of EU intelligence may be a rare example in which integration can be achieved before cooperation

  rather than the latter serving as a stepping stone to the former.

  A European Transgovernmental Intelligence Network: The Role of IntCen

  Even a casual look at the history of the European Union (EU) since\nits inception in 1957 shows that at numerous junctures through its development the\nEU (or European Economic Community/European Community [EEC/EC] in its AQ1 previous incarnations) has been portrayed as being in severe crisis. Of course

  the ¶ EU continues to exist today

  and it is arguably stronger and more integrated than\never. This article focuses on the role of international media coverage in framing certain events as crises and seeks to draw out a pattern across three prominent case studies: the 2003 Iraq crisis; 2005 constitutional crisis; and 2010–12 eurozone\ncrisis. Detailed media content analysis shows that the international media was not\njust reporting on crises

  it was framing challenges and setbacks to EU integration\nas existential threats. The authors introduce the concept of integrational panic to conceptualize the media’s role in potentially contributing to the social construction\nof EU crises.

  EU Crises & Integrational Panic: The Role of the Media

  This book seeks to explain the resilience of the European Union in the face of repeated crises that are often seen as likely to derail its very existence. While it is often observed that these crises serve as opportunities for more integration

  scholars have yet to offer an explanation for why this is true. This book is the first to identify a pattern across EU crises – specifically

  the 2003 Iraq crisis

  2005 constitutional crisis

  and 2010-12 Eurozone crisis. I argue that we cannot understand the nature and severity of these crises without delving into the role of societal reaction to events and the nature of social narratives about crisis

  especially those advanced by the media. The EU is plagued by episodes of what I call integrational panic – periods of often overblown

  existential crisis in which social narratives about events create the perception that the “end of Europe” is at hand. While most explanations of crisis focus on systemic or structural flaws in the European institutional structure

  this narratives approach also explains a renewed will to find consensus post-crisis. Using the concept of catharsis

  I argue that narratives about crises provide the means to openly air underlying societal tensions that would otherwise remain under the surface

  and impede further integration.

  The Politics of Crisis in Europe (2017)

  The proposed creation of a US Space Force has led to a ratcheting up of a sense of competition and threat among spacefaring powers. Many top government officials and experts around the world believe that space will inevitably become the next battlefield

  either among countries

  or private companies

  or both. India successfully blew up a satellite

  China landed a probe on the dark side of the moon

  and many other countries have rapidly developed launch capabilities. The term ‘Space Race 2.0’ is increasingly invoked. But are we in the midst of a new Space Race

  or on the verge of a new Space Age? This paper argues that despite many governmental efforts to militarize space over the past 70 years

  on the whole

  non-state actors have ensured that space has been a highly cooperative realm of human interaction

  even during the height of the Cold War. While on the surface

  there has been a narrative of threat- based competition

  the author argues that this has largely been socially constructed. Drawing upon fresh archival research and participation observation

  the author provides the historical context for understanding the increasingly diverse field of space actors today.

  The Social Construction of the Space Race: Then & Now

  Book chapter\n\nWill the EU become a significant security actor with the ability to protect its common borders and make important contributions to global security? I argue that networks of high-level diplomats based in Brussels play a key role in bringing together disparate interests across member-states to make security integration possible. Two key groups – the Committee of Permanent Representatives and the Political and Security Committee – are at the pinnacle of this diplomatic activity. Drawing upon dozens of interviews

  this chapter uses a constructivist approach and epistemic community framework to examine how the internal processes within these groups impact their ability to shape the trajectory of security integration.

  The Practice of Diplomacy and EU Security Policy

  There is arguably no security crisis so great as the one that stems from climate change. For some time

  the EU

  rather than the US

  has led the way in terms of far-ranging policies to reduce carbon emissions. But despite the fact that the EU has been able to bind itself to strong environmental norms internally

  it has – up until COP21 – been a relatively weak norm entrepreneur externally when seeking to convince others

  especially the US

  to adopt stronger environmental policies. Why was the EU finally able to increase its influence in the lead up and at the 2015 UN summit in Paris? This article argues that while the EU’s climate diplomacy has underperformed in the past

  it has been quick to adapt since the 2009 Copenhagen summit through effectively broadening its epistemic community of climate diplomats

  and engaging in a process of political learning.

  Partners at Paris? Climate Negotiations and Transatlantic Relations

  Cohesive epistemic communities are more likely to be persuasive diplomatic actors

  achieving security goals that would have otherwise been very difficult if left to the member states alone.

  European Integration and Security Epistemic Communities

  The European Defence Agency (EDA) was founded in 2004 with the aim of improving the EU’s defense capabilities through promoting collaboration

  common initiatives

  and innovative solutions to the EU’s security needs. This article examines the nature of the relationship between European Union member states and the EDA a decade after its founding. The agency has solidified a clear body of norms that it seeks member states to implement. To a surprising extent

  member states have publically embraced these norms as necessary for the future viability of European security. But they at the same time resist implementing these norms in certain fundamental ways. Building upon the framework article of this special issue

  the author applies the concepts of “public” and “hidden” transcripts to shed light on how member states simultaneously embrace and resist norms in a climate of supranational pressure.

  The European Defence Agency and the Member States: Public and Hidden Transcripts

  Jan Melissen

  Book (hardback and paperback)\nReview: https://networks.h-net.org/node/28443/discussions/40416/wulk-davis-cross-and-melissen-european-public-diplomacy-soft-power

  European Public Diplomacy: Soft Power at Work

  A resilient actor is one with the capacity to recover from setbacks and obstacles

  whether stemming from endogenous or exogenous factors. Beyond actual recovery

  this article argues that there is also an important perceptional dimension. Image resilience is the capacity on the part of actors to overcome and deal with the widespread negative perceptions that often follow on the heels of these setbacks. The article argues that the ability to cultivate image resilience rests significantly on the power of public diplomacy. Through establishing a strong image for an actor over the longer term

  public diplomacy enables that actor to be more resilient during times of crisis. The European Union is a particularly good case study to shed light on this. Using original interview evidence

  this article examines a specific example of how the European Union was ultimately able to strengthen its image resilience in the United States through public diplomacy.

  The European Union and Image Resilience during Times of Crisis (with Teresa La Porter)

  The renewed emphasis on national political boundaries across Europe would seem to go hand-in-hand with a weaker external personality for the EU. However

  there are several prominent examples of EU leadership that challenge this notion

  from the December 2015 UN climate change agreement to common sanctions against Russia to a new Global Strategy. This paper examines a policy area that lies at the intersection of populist outrage and external engagement: counter-terrorism. In the wake of the 2015 and 2016 Paris and Brussels terrorist attacks

  the EU has made significant strides in enhancing the external dimension of its counter-terrorism policies

  particularly in terms of intelligence sharing

  formal and informal diplomacy

  and the internal-external nexus of security. The article argues that major terrorist attacks in 2015-2016 have served as critical junctures of crisis

  driving counter-terrorism policies forward and emphasizing the notion of European boundaries beyond any functionalist or securitization explanation.

  Counter-terrorism in the EU's External Relations

  book chapter

  Transatlantic Cultural Diplomacy

  Co-editor of Special Issue\n\nWhat impact has the Russia–Ukraine crisis had on the EU as a foreign policy actor? Most studies examine how the EU has evolved as an actor over time of its own initiative

  but tend to discount the role that the external context or structure of the international system might play in constraining or enabling the EU's exercise of power. This Special Issue seeks to understand the EU's influence in the world through recognizing its embeddedness in an unpredictable and uncertain international system. Specifically

  we ask whether and to what extent the Russia–Ukraine crisis serves as a critical juncture and catalyst for shaping the EU's power.

  Europe's Hybrid Foreign Policy: The Russia-Ukraine Crisis

  This article examines the cases of the European Defence Agency (EDA) and EU Intelligence Analysis Centre (IntCen) to argue that although they are comprised of high-level security experts

  they do not constitute epistemic communities. Research on other groups of security experts based in Brussels has shown that epistemic communities of diplomats

  military experts

  security researchers

  and civilian crisis management experts

  among others

  have been able to influ- ence the trajectory of security integration by virtue of their shared knowledge. Importantly

  these security epistemic communities have been shown to significantly impact outcomes of EU security policy beyond what would be expected by looking only at member-states’ initial preferences. In exploring two examples of “non-cases” that are at the same time very similar to the other examples

  the author seeks to shed light on why some expert groups do not form epis- temic communities

  and how this changes the nature of their influence. In so doing

  the goal is to sharpen the parame- ters of what constitutes epistemic communities

  and to add to our understanding of why they emerge. The argument advanced in this article is that institutional context and the nature of the profession matter as preconditions for epis- temic community emergence.

  The Limits of Epistemic Communities: EU Security Agencies

  Article\n\nThe Global Strategy has significant implications for EU diplomacy

  both in terms of goals and means. This paper first analyzes the timing of the strategy as an exercise in diplomacy in its own right. Second

  the paper argues that the strategy outlines a more expansive and noticeably more smart-power oriented approach to diplomacy in practical terms. Finally

  the author emphasizes the strategy's new meta-narrative for EU diplomacy

  which seeks to project a blend of both realistic assessment and idealistic aspiration.

  The EU Global Strategy and Diplomacy

  Mai'a K. Davis

  Cross

  Colgate University

  University of Southern California

  Journal of European Integration

  Norwegian Nobel Institute

  Clingendael Institute

  Harvard University

  Northeastern University

  Palgrave Macmillan

  ARENA Centre for European Studies

  Council on Foreign Relations

  Oslo

  Norway

  Visiting fellow\nParticipant in the Nobel Symposium

  Nobel Fellow

  Norwegian Nobel Institute

  Boston

  MA

  Associate Professor of Political Science & International Affairs

  Northeastern University

  Colgate University

  Clingendael Institute

  the Hague

  the Netherlands

  Senior Visting Fellow

  Boston

  MA

  Director of Graduate Studies in Political Science

  Northeastern University

  Boston

  MA

  Assistant Professor of Political Science & International Affairs

  Northeastern University

  Boston

  MA

  Edward W. Brooke Professor of Political Science

  Northeastern University

  Palgrave Studies in International Relations

  Palgrave Macmillan

  Associate Editor

  Journal of European Integration

  Harvard University

  Cambridge

  MA

  Local Affiliate at the Minda da Gunzburg Center for European Studies

  University of Southern California

  ARENA Centre for European Studies

  Oslo Area

  Norway

  Senior Researcher

  New York

  NY

  Term Member of the Council on Foreign Relations

  Council on Foreign Relations

  Co-Chair

  EU as a Global Actor section

  European Union Studies Association

  International Studies Association

  French

  Steven B. Sample Teaching and Mentoring Award

  granted to one junior-faculty member university-wide annually

  University of Southern California

  2012 Best Book Prize in Contemporary European Studies

  Awarded to \"Security Integration in Europe: How Knowledge-based Networks are Transforming the European Union\" (University of Michigan Press

  2011)\n\nReviews:\nhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/misr.12109/full\nhttp://www.psqonline.org/article.cfm?IDArticle=19176\nhttp://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=37024\nhttps://eustudies.org/assets/files/eusa_review/fall_12final.pdf\nhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcms.12016_5/abstract\nhttp://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00396338.2013.802931\nhttp://www.ceeol.com/aspx/publicationdetails.aspx?publicationId=d8a76fe4-af3f-4beb-999a-46e89a9496fc\nhttp://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/10.1163/1871191x-12341258;jsessionid=6eaa5siu98u6n.x-brill-live-01

  University Association for Contemporary European Studies