The panel attempts to analyse the notion of raison d'état in the context of the EU's capacity as a supranational organisation. We would like to deepen our reflection that we have started during the UACES 2021 Virtual Conference in the context of current turbulent times, which may change the position of the EU internally (versus its Member states and citizens) and externally. The aftermath of COVID-19, financial and energy crises, and finally the war in Ukraine are the turbulences, which shape new legal and political reality, in which the EU shall determine its position. The raison d'etat, traditionally associated with the state's interest as a subject of international law, for the EU, is one of the determinants of its legal and political capacities. The question remains if it is possible to derive a common interest or a group of interests of an overriding character, understood as a raison d’etat, which would exist without conflicting with the interests of the Member States. Is it possible to determine the relevant areas of the EU's raison d'état? The reflection developed within the present panel undertakes such a task. Our goal is to focus on the areas of EU law and policy fields, which may best identify the possible EU’s raison d’etat. The enlargement policy, the process of transfer of legislative powers by the Member States to the Union in the area of climate-energy policy, health policy or further development of participatory mechanisms at the EU level, may be indicated as the relevant ones. Transfer of competencies to the EU level can be treated as an emanation of the Member States’ raison d'etat. On the other hand, the transferred areas may become priorities for the Union itself and thus define its raison d’etat.

The EU being a supranational organisation is deeply rooted in democratic values. Art. 2 TEU provides the bedrock for European identity driven by axiology, where democracy, rule of law and fundamental rights protection take the lead. Those principles are translated into institutional frameworks and decision (law) making processes at the EU level. Nevertheless, the EU is struggling with the democratic deficit, which is inherent in its structures due to the non-state character of the EU itself. One cannot expect the full translation of democratic state systemic rules into the EU’s institutional frameworks. Yet, the stronger democratisation of existing mechanisms at the EU level should be considered the EU’s raison d’etat, which will strengthen its position internally - versus its member states and externally – versus global partners. One of the most important pressing needs is thus enhancing the civic society mechanisms at the EU level and providing a sound framework for participatory democratic mechanisms, which will engage EU citizens and will position them as one of the decision-making centres for the EU policies. In terms of the participatory toolbox, the treaty itself contains some guarantees like the European citizens Initiative or the right of petition to the European Parliament. The impact of those tools is relatively weak, due to serious procedural constraints. In 2021 the participatory democracy within the EU made a step forward with the Conference on the Future of Europe, which was the first major pan-European citizen-led series of debates and discussions and deliberations. The Conference on the Future of Europe with its European Citizens’ Panels, Conference Plenaries and multilingual digital platform connecting engaged citizens was supposed to show a new, citizen-centric dimension of EU policy-making. The proposed paper will provide an analysis of its true impact on the decision-making system and will reflect if it opened a new phase of citizen engagement in the supranational and transnational dimensions.

In light of current geopolitical challenges and democracy threats caused by Russia’s full-scale military attack on Ukraine, the issue of the EU enlargement came back to the table of the EU political discussion on both, supranational and intergovernmental, levels. Such discussion, however, illustrated not only common vision but also the different interests of Member States that directly impact the transformation of the enlargement agenda.

Drawing on analysis of political discourses of key EU political leaders (individual and collective), this paper puts forward a thesis that the further enlargement as the EU’s raison d’etat is dependent on the type of political leadership of the EU institutions and Member States’ governments in the context of the EU structural foreign policy. In the meantime, the major focus is put on the Ukrainian case as a trigger of the EU eastern policy change and the transformation of the EU leadership (from transactional to transformational) in light of Russian full-scale invasion.

Conceptually, the paper uses the classification of political leadership defined by James MacGregor Burns (Leadership, 1978) who underlined the moral constituent and complex long-termed goals of transformational leadership. The paper includes the major findings of the fieldwork research based on a set of in-person interviews conducted in Brussels with members of the European Parliament and Commission officials engaged into external Europeanization processes.

The main purpose of the paper is to show the research gap related to the defense of Polish national interests after the Russian attack on Ukraine. The article analyzes the articulation and promotion of Polish interests at the level of the European Union in the context of the Russian attack on Ukraine and/or the change in the intensification of Poland’s priorities within the energy, defense and economic sectors. The article will also focus on non-state entities involved in lobbying at the European and national level within the framework of Polish grand strategy in the context of Russia's attack on Ukraine.

The main research problem of this study is the verification of the effectiveness of Polish lobbying in the pursuit of its national interests and the change of priorities in the implementation of Polish grand strategy in the context of Russia's attack on Ukraine.

Taking into account the implementation of Polish strategies and based on the paradigm of neofunctional theory (Niemann, Schmitter 2009: p. 45; Rosamond 2000: p. 50; Haas 1964: p. 230) the following hypothesis will be tested: the pursuit of Polish national interests since February 24, 2022 has undergone sectoral prioritization in key areas related to the security of critical infrastructure, due to Russia's attack on Ukraine. In addition, Polish national strategy has taken on a different focus in three key areas: economic, energy and military affairs.

Taking into account the deficit regarding the analysis of the Polish assertion of national interests in the context of this research area, the article addresses two key research questions: what is Polish grand strategy after Russia's attack on Ukraine and how is it being implemented? (Lerche, Said, 1963: p. 6).

The subject of the proposed presentation is the question of the existence of a raison d’état as a common, unifying interest of the EU in the context of the proposed energy and climate “Fit for 55” legislative package.

Raison d’état is a category usually applied to evaluation of nationwide decisions. For these decisions it is a criterion for pursuing long-term unifying objectives despite of the existence of other – sometimes significant – short-term differences. It is therefore a unifying and community-building factor. In view of the current challenges facing Europe, the following question whether raison d'état may also be referred to the EU's as a supranational organisation becomes topical. This question is always actual in case of significant risks for the entirety that incline various players to resign from their particular interests.

Raison d’état of the EU may manifest in multiple areas. However, among numerous challenges ahead of the EU, the shared responsibly towards energy scarcity problem appears as one of the most existential. The multidimensional discussion about the energy security within the EU derives from contradicting interests of the Member States and refers to solidarity as a fundamental value upon which the Union has been built. The EU takes a strong position in this discussion proposing the complex “Fit for 55” legislation package that not only addresses the problem of energy deficit but also the climate challenges.

Another fundamental feature of the raison d’état concept refers to the fact that it requires concessions from all the parties (Member States of the EU) involved. The overarching common benefit of all wins over particular interests of some. Ultimately, a properly identified raison d’état of the EU may have an integrating and strengthening role towards both its internal and external position.

The proposed paper discussed if the transfer of the Member States’ competencies - including the legislative powers - to the EU level that strengthens its position and contributes to defining its single interest that can be regarded as the EU’s raison d’état.