Analysis uncovers the pitfalls of current sanction processes in the EU, suggesting improvements to enhance decision-making efficiency.
The EU’s sanctions framework is meant to work in two steps: unanimity for decisions defining the Union’s approach to “a particular matter of a geographical or thematic nature” under Article 29 TEU, and qualified majority voting for the necessary measures implementing these decisions under Article 215 TFEU. In reality, the two steps are collapsed into one, which magnifies the leverage of a single veto. This post makes the case for resequencing this practice which would realign decision-making with the Treaties’ design, reduce the risk of impasse, and improve speed and flexibility.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
J Schäffer (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: