Relational scaffolding of justifications in policy-making: Deploying the multi standard of identifications in EU policy negotiation

Abstract

This article explores discursive strategies deployed in international policy-making and highlights the relevance of interrelated identifications in political persuasion. Reconsidering some of the existing theories, it states that justifications in the acts of argumentation are not only ideational but also relational. The article demonstrates this by examining a case of European law initiative Single European Sky (SES) that was considered rational, progressive and beneficial, but never proceeded to completion. The art of argumentative premises applied in the negotiations on SES are analysed in detail in an illustrative public communique by a French Minister addressing the European Commission. The article exhibits the strategic deployment of multifold institutional standards of legitimacy regulating the interface between a nation-state and the EU. The policy arguments are built upon interrelational parameters and mutual expectations that motivate their persuasiveness. In the analysis this ‘relational scaffolding’ is carved out by applying the method of membership categorization analysis.