Research Collection

Report

Constructing Europe’s Borders Project: Codebook

Author(s): Bélanger, Marie-Ève; Mikalayeva, Liudmila; Schimmelfennig, Frank

Publication Date: 2020-05-13

Permanent Link: https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000414771

Rights / License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International

This page was generated automatically upon download from the ETH Zurich Research Collection. For more information please consult the Terms of use.

ETH Library Constructing Europe's Borders: Membership Discourses and European Integration

Funded by: The Swiss National Science Foundation Project number: 1001A_172558 Institution: ETH Zürich Research Centre: Centre for Comparative an International Studies Coordinators: Frank SCHIMMELFENNIG Marie-Eve BELANGER

CODEBOOK For the analysis of parliamentary discourses and actors

Authors: Marie-Eve BELANGER Liudmila MIKALAYEVA Frank SCHIMMELFENNIG

Date: 13 May 2020

Cite this document: Bélanger, M-E, Liudmila Mikalayeva, Frank Schimmelfennig. 2020. “Constructing Europe’s Borders Project: Codebook”. ETH Research Collection. ETH Zürich. DOI : https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000414771

For helpful comments on previous versions of the codebook, we thank, Nicole Olszewska and Alper Baysan. For coding assistance, we thank Alper Baysan, Cristina Gherasimov, Léa Iaru, Kata Isenring-Szabo, Johann Krümmel, Jelena Mihajlovic, Nadia Mondini, Nicole Olszewska, Sina Özdemir, Müge Özlütiras, Marina Petrossian, Susanna Sargsyan, Ioannis Vergioglou and Dominik Wiedmann. TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ...... 3 INTRODUCTION: THE “EUROPE’S BORDERS” PROJECT ...... 4 1 TRANSCRIPTS OF PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES ...... 5

1.1 WHICH TRANSCRIPTS? ...... 5 1.2 WHICH PARTS OF THE TRANSCRIPT? ...... 5 1.3 HOW TO APPROACH THE TRANSCRIPT? ...... 5 2 TWO-STEP CODING PROCESS: IDENTIFYING STATEMENTS AND CODING ...... 6

2.1 IDENTIFYING STATEMENTS...... 6 2.2 CODING STATEMENTS ...... 7 3 CATEGORIES ...... 8

3.1 SETTING: DATE, PARLIAMENT, TYPE OF SESSION ...... 8 Date ...... 8 Parliament ...... 8 Type ...... 8 3.2 ACTOR: SPEAKER, TYPE, PARTY, ORIGIN ...... 9 Name ...... 9 Type ...... 9 Party ...... 9 Origin ...... 9 3.3 ISSUE: ORGANIZATION, COUNTRY ...... 9 Organization ...... 9 Country ...... 9 3.4 POSITION ...... 9 3.5 KEYWORDS ...... 10 4 CODE ALLOCATION ...... 10

4.1 CODING THE CATEGORY “PARLIAMENT” ...... 11 4.2 CODING THE CATEGORY “TYPE” (SETTING)...... 11 4.3 CODING THE CATEGORY “PARTY” ...... 12 4.4 CODING THE CATEGORY “TYPE” (ACTOR) ...... 12 4.5 CODING THE CATEGORY “ORIGIN” ...... 12 4.6 CODING THE CATEGORY “ORGANIZATION” ...... 13 4.6.1...... 13 Definition of the values for the Category Organization ...... 14 4.6.2 Informal Organizations ...... 16 4.7 CODING THE CATEGORY “COUNTRY” ...... 17 Code 10 “General” ...... 18 4.7.2. Groups of countries ...... 19 4.8 CODING THE CATEGORY “POSITION” ...... 19 For (ID 1) ...... 19 Conditional (ID 0) ...... 19 Against (ID 2) ...... 20 4.8.3.1 Proximity of contradictory statements ...... 20 4.9 CODING THE CATEGORY “KEYWORDS” ...... 20

1

What is a keyword? ...... 20 Why do we code keywords and how will we use them? ...... 21 Examples of keywords in the text...... 21 General rules to code keywords ...... 21 4.10 TECHNICAL NOTES ON CODING ...... 22 5 AMBIGUITIES ...... 22

5.1 SOURCES OF AMBIGUITY ...... 23 5.2 DEALING WITH AMBIGUITY ...... 23 Ambiguity of language ...... 23 Ambiguity of a Statement because of complexity (Delimitation of a single Statement) ...... 23 Statements containing several messages ...... 24 Statements with many Keywords ...... 24 Proximity of contradicting codes ...... 24 6 EXAMPLES OF CODING ...... 25

6.1 CODING WITH FORMAL ORGANIZATIONS ...... 25 6.2 CODING WITH INFORMAL ORGANIZATIONS ...... 26 7 ANNEXES ...... 28

7.1 ANNEX 1: CASES ...... 28 7.2 ANNEX 2: INDEX LISTS ...... 29 7.3 ANNEX 3: CODING POLITICAL PARTIES ...... 29 Not specified ...... 29 UK ...... 30 France ...... 30 European Union ...... 30 Germany...... 31 Switzerland ...... 31 Russia ...... 32 Poland ...... 32 Turkey ...... 32 Greece ...... 33 Armenia ...... 33 Hungary ...... 34 Serbia ...... 34 Ukraine ...... 36

2

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1: PARLIAMENTS AND THEIR CODES ...... 11 TABLE 2: TYPE OF SESSION...... 11 TABLE 3: ROLE OF THE SPEAKER ...... 12 TABLE 4: ORIGIN OF THE SPEAKER ...... 12 TABLE 5: ORGANIZATIONS ...... 13 TABLE 6: ISSUE COUNTRY ...... 18 TABLE 7: ISSUE, GROUPS OF COUNTRIES ...... 19 TABLE 8: CODING OF CASES ...... 28 TABLE 9: LIST OF SEARCH TERMS FOR DEBATES IN NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS ...... 29 TABLE 10: UK POLITICAL PARTIES ...... 30 TABLE 11: FRENCH POLITICAL PARTIES ...... 30 TABLE 12: EUROPEAN POLITICAL GROUPS ...... 31 TABLE 13: GERMAN POLITICAL PARTIES ...... 31 TABLE 14: SWISS POLITICAL PARTIES ...... 31 TABLE 15: RUSSIAN POLITICAL PARTIES ...... 32 TABLE 16: POLISH POLITICAL PARTIES ...... 32 TABLE 17: TURKISH POLITICAL PARTIES ...... 32 TABLE 18: GREEK POLITICAL PARTIES ...... 33 TABLE 19: ARMENIAN POLITICAL PARTIES ...... 33 TABLE 20: HUNGARIAN POLITICAL PARTIES ...... 34 TABLE 21: SERBIAN POLITICAL PARTIES ...... 34 TABLE 22: UKRAINIAN POLITICAL PARTIES ...... 36

3

INTRODUCTION: THE “EUROPE’S BORDERS” PROJECT

The “Europe’s Borders” project traces and maps the transformation of the institutional political discourses on Europe’s borders and membership, both in the European Union (EU) and in its contested neighbourhood (See Annex 1 for the list of cases). It aims to show how the positions and arguments of political actors on membership issues have shifted over time in a variety of European countries, and allows to explore how these changes influence membership practices. Two main research questions organize the project:

(1) How do European political actors frame membership in institutional discourses? (2) How do European political actors align around positions and frames?

First, we are interested in how political actors talk about membership of different countries in Europe and in European and Eurasian regional organizations, where they ‘draw the line’ between Europe and non-Europe (Asia, Middle East, Africa, non-European civilization), and how they explain such differentiation (which reasons do they give for it, how they ‘frame’ it). Second, we aim to compare the way actors talk about membership in Europe based on their party affiliation and country of origin. We will establish coalitions and alliances across parties and countries, and trace them over time. The dynamic analysis expands over 14 years: 2004-2017.

To establish positions of European political actors on membership in Europe, we look at plenary speeches in national parliaments. Our main documents in this project are transcripts of parliamentary debates on topics of European and Eurasian integration. Transcripts contain speeches by members of parliament as well as other institutional actors invited as rapporteurs, experts or guests.

The goal of the coding is to distinguish in the speeches Statements about European and Eurasian membership. For each Statement, we code two components: Context and Claim. Context refers to the speaker and time of the statement, the Claim refers to the speaker’s argument about European borders and membership, supported by reasons. Statements are coded for several Western and Eastern European parliaments, all according to the same scheme to allow data comparison.

We will use quantitative content analysis to reduce the various positions of the actors to a limited number of types, making aggregation and comparison possible. We derive our methodology from political claims analysis (PCA) which bridges content oriented and actor centred approaches by including variables referring to the identity of the actors as well as the semantics of the claims. This allows us to account for and establish political and discursive cleavages and coalitions among actors.

The overall objective of the coding is to gather an extensive database of membership discourse in and around Europe through time. The objective of these coding instructions and of the coding scheme is to guide the coders in their work with the material by providing definitions, procedures and examples to guarantee high quality coding of each country case.

4

1 TRANSCRIPTS OF PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

Transcripts of debates in national parliaments are usually available online in a database, administered by the parliament’s secretariat. The transcripts give an account of the speeches by all participants in parliamentary sessions, with more or less editing depending on the country. Audio or video recordings of the debates may be available as well; however, in this project we only use the text.

1.1 WHICH TRANSCRIPTS?

We are interested in those sessions of the parliament between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2017, where speakers explicitly address processes of European and Eurasian integrations. All speeches in parliament, including those by members of parliament, members of government, and invited guests (such as experts or representatives of other states or international organizations) are recorded.

Depending on the country, the databases of parliamentary speeches are more or less user-friendly organized, allowing to search transcripts by date, keyword, speaker, and other criteria. In cases where the database contains information on the main topics / agenda of the sessions, the selection of the relevant debates proceeds by searching for ‘index words’ in the topic / agenda items list. The ‘index words’ include names of countries and regional organizations (See Annex 2). The result of the search is a list of potentially relevant debates. In the next step, coders check the debates for relevance “by hand”: we are only interested in statements about the membership of countries in the main European and Eurasian regional organizations (See the full list of organizations under 4.6). Other statements about integration processes, for example, debates about the application of European Union’s regulations in different countries, are not relevant for the project; those debates are discarded.

1.2 WHICH PARTS OF THE TRANSCRIPT?

For each selected transcript, the coder records the date and the type of the session (See 3.1). Procedure- related parts of transcripts, such as the announcement of the agenda, the checking of the quorum, the voting, and so on, are not coded.

If the coder chooses to edit the transcript before coding, for example, by removing procedural points and other agenda topics, the full names of the speakers of coded statements and the information on their party affiliation should always be kept track of.

1.3 HOW TO APPROACH THE TRANSCRIPT?

Code discourse itself, not your interpretation of the speaker’s intentions or hidden meaning. The rule is to code what is "said", not what is "meant". At the same time, coders are experts on the country case and their knowledge of the political discourse in the country should be used to interpret the meaning of the speakers’ statements, such as in the case where metaphors and historical examples are used to convey a position.

Coders need to pay attention not to let their personal attitude and political stance have an impact on the coding. First, all speakers need to be given the same attention in the process of coding: coders should not skip or skim any of the transcript’s part because of personal attitude to the speaker or lack of interest. Second,

5 coders may find some arguments and formulations used by the speakers inappropriate, rude, ridiculous, or simply false. This should not have an influence on the coding. Third, some actors present illogical or insensible arguments. Even if coders understand the statement as incoherent and think that the reasons given do not support the argument, in their coding they should stay true to the statement just as the actor uttered it. In this project, we record the actors’ positions as expressed in their speeches. Any personal judgement on the content or quality of the argument needs to be avoided.

2 TWO-STEP CODING PROCESS: IDENTIFYING STATEMENTS AND CODING

Once the list of the relevant transcripts established (see 1.1.), coders can proceed to identifying Statements about European and Eurasian integration processes, before coding each Statement according to the coding scheme.

2.1 IDENTIFYING STATEMENTS

Coding starts with identifying Statements in the text of the speech. To identify a Statement, look for Claims of speakers about a Country’s/Group of Countries’ membership in an Organization from the list in the coding scheme. Statements will always contain these elements, without them there is no Statement.

A Statement is a contextualized claim by the speaker about a country’s membership in an organization.

As a general, always look for a position about membership, and work your way around that to fill every coding category.

Here are some important points about identifying Statements: - It is important to familiarize yourself with all countries and regional organizations relevant to this project, and to be attentive to always code statements about membership of these countries / groups of countries in these organizations. - Be aware of the fact that speakers will often formulate claims about their own country; these should be coded. - It is possible that one paragraph or even one sentence contains several Statements: this happens when the speaker formulates a position about several countries or several organizations at once. Code each Statement as one observation. - It is also possible that a Statement extends over several paragraphs: this happens when the speaker develops an argument by giving examples, citing statistics, testimonials, making digressions. The length of the formulation in such cases does not have an impact on the coding, as long as the speaker speaks about the same Issue, with the same Position. - A change in Organization, Country or Position leads to the coding of a new Statement. - Statements can be formulated as questions: in such cases, check if the speaker in fact formulates her own position as part of the question (then code as a Statement) or if the question is neutral and open (then do not code it).

6

- Statements contained in reported speech (when the speaker refers to somebody else’s position or quotes somebody else’s words) are not coded. - In the case where the actor speaks on behalf of their constituents (“the electorate”), code as her own speech, as they represents them in parliament. The same goes if she speaks in terms of “my party” or “my government” (code as her own position). - If the speaker states that she “agrees with her colleague” who made a coded Statement earlier in the debate, code this as a Statement and use using the frames coded for the Statement she is referring to. - Discussions on past positions about membership are not coded as statements. For example, when a speaker says: “I was in favour of Croatia’s membership, but other Balkan countries are not ready to join”, code the second part of the Statement only, because the first part (“I was in favour of Croatia’s membership”) refers to a position of the speaker she no longer holds. - Avoid coding discourses where the actor speaks about what the Country “brings” to an Organization, unless this is used as a reason to support or reject the membership of this Country in the Organization. - When the statement is about “general benefit” or “harm” of being part of an Organization: o Code if the issue is related to membership. For example: “The EU brought peace so we should join”. o Do not code if there is no mention of membership, only a comment about the EU. For example: “The EU is bad for our economy”.

2.2 CODING STATEMENTS Once you find a position on a country’s membership in a European or Eurasian organization, identify all the other components of the Statement (see Sections 3 and 4 below for an explanation of each coding category).

For each Statement, code 11 elements (Categories):

1) Date

2) Parliament

3) Type of session

4) Name of the speaker Context 5) Type of the speaker

6) Party of the speaker

7) Origin of the speaker

8) Organization

9) Country Claim 10) Position

11) Keywords

7

For each category, the range of possible values is pre-defined. Date, Name of the speaker, and Keywords are the only open Categories, where no pre-established list of values is available. Some values can be country- specific: Type of session, Type of the speaker, Party of the speaker; for other Categories, the values are the same across all countries (all of these are detailed in section 4 below).The coding needs to be exhaustive: select a value for each Category.

3 CATEGORIES

In each Statement, we differentiate 11 elements (for country-specific codes and code allocation: section 4):

STATEMENT CONTEXT CLAIM SETTING SPEAKER ISSUE POSITION KEYWORDS Date Parliament Type Name Type Party Origin Organization Country 1 ; 0 ; 2

The Setting (see 3.1.) of the Statement will be the same for all the Statements coded from the single debate’s transcript. The Speaker (see 3.2.) coding will be the same for all claims formulated by the same actor during a single debate. The Issue (see 3.3.) is the central element of the Statement: a change in any of the Categories here leads to the coding of a new Statement. The Position (see 3.4.) is the speaker’s stance to the Issue. The Keywords (see 3.5.) are reasons and arguments the speaker gives to support her Position.

3.1 SETTING: DATE, PARLIAMENT, TYPE OF SESSION Setting refers to the material environment of the debate: date of the debate, parliament in which the debate takes place, and type of the session.

STATEMENT CONTEXT CLAIM SETTING SPEAKER ISSUE POSITION KEYWORDS Date Parliament Type Name Type Party Origin Organization Country 1 ; 0 ; 2

Date The date of the parliamentary session, recorded in the format year-month-day (Example: for the 6th of October 2008, use “20081006”).

Parliament The national parliament in which the debate takes place (Example: “154 UK – House of Commons”).

Type The type of the parliamentary session (Example: “201 Plenary session”).

8

3.2 ACTOR: SPEAKER, TYPE, PARTY, ORIGIN Actor refers to the person making the statement.

STATEMENT CONTEXT CLAIM SETTING SPEAKER ISSUE POSITION KEYWORDS Date Parliament Type Name Type Party Origin Organization Country 1 ; 0 ; 2

Name The first name and the surname of the speaker (Example: “Jean Smith”). Discard additional information (titles such as Sir or Dr), we record only the first name and the surname, in this order.

Type The type of the actor making the speech (Example: “301 Member of parliament”).

Party Political party affiliation of the speaker. Party or parliamentary group the actor belongs to at the time of the speech (Example: “5403 Liberal democrats”).

Origin Origin refers to the state the speaker represents at the moment of speech, not the citizenship of the speaker (Example: “525 France”).

3.3 ISSUE: ORGANIZATION, COUNTRY Issue refers to the object of the Statement and includes a Country (single country or group of countries) and its membership in a regional Organization.

STATEMENT CONTEXT CLAIM SETTING SPEAKER ISSUE POSITION KEYWORDS Date Parliament Type Name Type Party Origin Organization Country 1 ; 0 ; 2

Organization Organization refers to the formal or informal regional organization discussed (Example: “610 European Union”).

Country The country or countries which membership is discussed (Example: “88 Baltic Countries”)

3.4 POSITION Position refers to the stance of the speaker on the Country’s membership in the Organization. - 1 is used for positive statements, in support of membership - 0 is used for conditional statements, supporting membership under conditions - 2 is used for negative statements, opposing membership

9

STATEMENT CONTEXT CLAIM SETTING SPEAKER ISSUE POSITION KEYWORDS Date Parliament Type Name Type Party Origin Organization Country 1 ; 0 ; 2

3.5 KEYWORDS Keywords refer to words or short phrases speakers reflecting the justifications of the speaker’s Position. For example, a speaker claims to be in favour of Turkey membership because it brings economic growth. In this case, “economic growth” is the keyword since it is the reason given for the position. Another example: an actor claims to be against Ukraine’s membership in the EU because it would lead to instability and threaten peace. The Keywords to code are “instability” and “threaten peace”. Keywords should be coded very closely to the language used by the speaker, not reformulated by the coder. This category is inductive. General framing categories are constructed on the basis of the first coding.

STATEMENT CONTEXT CLAIM SETTING SPEAKER ISSUE POSITION KEYWORDS Date Parliament Type Name Type Party Origin Organization Country 1 ; 0 ; 2

4 CODE ALLOCATION

When coding the Context elements of the Statements, coders should indicate the corresponding values for each of the Categories. The coding of the Setting is usually unproblematic; the main issue is attention to detail. Coders should avoid typos and respect the order of the data entry in the date and the name of the speaker, and correctly select values from the pre-established list for the Categories Parliament, Type (of the session), Type (of the speaker), Party, and Origin of the speaker. When coding Claims, coders should ask themselves the following questions: What is the speaker’s position on the country’s membership in the organization? How does the actor explain or support their position?

Coders should stay as close as possible to the explicit formulations of the speaker and not interpret too generously. However, the context of the claim should be taken into account; therefore, it makes sense to read the paragraph above and below the claim itself to make sure that the coding values are selected correctly. Technically, code allocation happens differently for two types of Categories: - open Categories – Date, Speaker, Keywords. For these Categories, the coder types in the value, there is no pre-set list of values. - closed Categories – Parliament, Type (of the session), Type (of the speaker), Party, Origin, Organization, Country, Position. Here, the coder selects from a limited number of pre-set values. Each value is given an ID.

10

4.1 CODING THE CATEGORY “PARLIAMENT” Parliament refers to the country’s parliament in which the debate is taking place.

Table 1: Parliaments and their codes

ID Country ID Country 110 EU – European Parliament 136 Lithuania – Seimas 111 Albania - Kuvendi i Shqipërisë 137 Luxembourg – D’Chamber 112 Armenia – National Assembly 138 Malta – Parlament ta’ Malta 113 Austria - Österreichisches Parlament 139 Moldova – Parl. Republicii Moldova 114 Azerbaijan - Milli Məclis 140 Montenegro - Skupština Crne Gore 115 Belarus – Palata Pradstaunikou 141 Netherlands – Staten-Generaal 116 Belgium – Belgian federal parliament 142 Norway – Storting 117 Bosnia-Herz. – Parliamentary Assembly 143 Poland – Sejm Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej 118 Bulgaria - Narodno sabranie 144 Portugal - Assembleia da República 119 Croatia - Hrvatski sabor 145 Romania - Parlamentul României 120 Cyprus – House of Representatives 146 Russia - Federalnoye Sobraniye 121 Czech Rep. - Parlament České republiky 147 Serbia - Narodna skupština 122 Denmark – Folketinget 148 Slovak Rep. - Národná rada 123 Estonia – Riigikogu 149 Slovenia - Slovenski parlament 124 Finland – eduskunta 150 Spain – Cortes Generales 125 France – Assemblée Nationale 151 Sweden – Riksdag 126 FYROM – Ass. of the Rep. of Macedonia 152 Switzerland - Bundesversammlung 127 Georgia - sakartvelos p'arlament'i 153 Turkey - Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi 128 Germany – Bundestag 154 UK – House of Commons 129 Greece – Parliament of Hellenes 155 Ukraine - Verkhovna Rada 130 Hungary – Országgyűlés 157 Andorra – General Council 131 Iceland – Althing 158 Lichtenstein – Landtag 132 Ireland – Oireachtas 159 Monaco – Conseil National 133 Italy – Parlamento Italiano 160 San Marino – Grand and Gen. Council 134 Kosovo – Kuvendi I Kosoves 135 Latvia – Saeima

4.2 CODING THE CATEGORY “TYPE” (SETTING) Type refers to the type of session analysed.

Table 2: Type of session

ID Type 201 Plenary session 202 Oral questions 203 Committee meeting

11

4.3 CODING THE CATEGORY “PARTY” Party refers to the party of which the speaker is a member at the time of their speech. This section is country specific, see full list in Annex 3.

4.4 CODING THE CATEGORY “TYPE” (ACTOR) Type refers to the role of the speaker at the moment of speech.

Table 3: Role of the speaker

ID Type 301 Member of Parliament 302 Head of government 303 Member of government 304 European Commissioner 305 Member of Council of the EU 306 Member of foreign parliament 307 Head of state or government of a foreign state 308 Civil society representative 309 External speaker/Expert 310 Head of state

4.5 CODING THE CATEGORY “ORIGIN” When coding the Origin of the speaker, choose the value corresponding to the country of the parliament (for example, UK for the UK House of Commons) or another country of origin if the speaker is a guest (for example, a member of a foreign parliament or a head of another state).

Table 4: Origin of the speaker

ID Country ID Country ID Country 511 Albania 528 Germany 545 Romania 512 Armenia 529 Greece 546 Russia 513 Austria 530 Hungary 547 Serbia 514 Azerbaijan 531 Iceland 548 Slovak Republic 515 Belarus 532 Ireland 549 Slovenia 516 Belgium 533 Italy 550 Spain 517 Bosnia-Herzegovina 534 Kosovo 551 Sweden 518 Bulgaria 535 Latvia 552 Switzerland 519 Croatia 536 Lithuania 553 Turkey 520 Cyprus 537 Luxembourg 554 UK 521 Czech Rep. 538 Malta 555 Ukraine 522 Denmark 539 Moldova 556 Yugoslavia 523 Estonia 540 Montenegro 557 Andorra 524 Finland 541 Netherlands 558 Lichtenstein 525 France 542 Norway 559 Monaco 526 FYROM 543 Poland 560 San Marino 527 Georgia 544 Portugal

12

4.6 CODING THE CATEGORY “ORGANIZATION” Speakers can discuss formal as well as informal regional organizations. They can discuss membership in organizations as a whole (EU) or in specific institutional arrangements/instruments of these organizations (such as the Schengen Area of the EU, the Eastern Partnership sponsored by the EU, Association with the Commonwealth of Independent States, Observer status in the Eurasian Economic Community).

4.6.1. Formal membership ties: for example, EU, NATO, Commonwealth of the Independent States.

Table 5: Organizations

ID Organization 610 European Union 611 Schengen Area 612 Eurozone 613 Candidacy (for membership) 614 (Stabilisation and) Association agreement 615 Bilateral agreements ("Swiss solution") 616 Single Market (EEA, "Norwegian solution") 617 Customs union 618 Eastern Partnership 619 European Neighbourhood Policy 620 Non-member association/partnership/cooperation (unspecified) 710 Commonwealth of the Independent States - Membership 711 Commonwealth of the Independent States - Association 712 Collective Security Treaty Organization - Membership 713 Collective Security Treaty Organization - Cooperation 714 CIS Free Trade Area – Membership 715 Eurasian Economic Community Single Econ. Space - Membership 716 Eurasian Economic Community Single Market - Membership 717 Eurasian Economic Community - Observer 718 Eurasian Customs Union - Membership 719 Eurasian Economic Union - Membership 720 Eurasian Economic Union – Observer 721 Union State of Belarus and Russia - Membership 723 Shanghai Cooperation Organization - Membership 724 Shanghai Cooperation Organization - Observer 725 Shanghai Cooperation Organization - Dialogue partnership 726 Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation - Membership 727 Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation - Observer 728 Organization for democracy and economic development - Membership 729 Organization for democracy and economic development - Observer 810 NATO – Membership 811 NATO - Membership Action Plan (Formal candidacy) 812 NATO - Intensified dialogue

13

813 NATO – Partnership/Cooperation 814 Council of Europe – Membership 815 Council of Europe - Special guest status / Candidacy

Note that values with numbers starting with 6 refer to the European Union and different institutional formats centred on it; numbers starting with 7 refer to various Eurasian regional organizations with mostly Eastern European membership; numbers starting with 8 refer to other European regional organizations. See also information on the informal regional organizations with numbers starting with 9, below. - The first rule to code this category is to follow the speaker’s words. For example, if she mentions an existing association agreement of a Country with the EU, code 614. If she mentions her wish to implement a new instrument such as a privileged partnership with a Country, code 620. - Only one value must be selected for each Statement. There is no overlap among the values. Do not code bilateral relations: relations between two countries are not coded, only relations that have a membership component (i.e. do not code if a speakers declares that Serbia wants to strengthen its relations with Turkey; however, code if Poland is discussing strengthening Serbia’s relation with the EU, see code 620). - Do not code membership to organizations outside of the list provided: we do not code sub-regional organizations, topical organizations or organizations with fixed membership.

Definition of the values for the Category Organization

European Union (600’s): 1. Code “610 European Union” when the Country discussed is already a member or is formally in the process of becoming a member (when it is a candidate country). Check if the country is on the list of candidate states before coding. If it is not - use the code "613", not "610". Also use 610 when a speaker is making a general Statement about membership in the European Union (in this case, use the Country code “10”). 2. Code “613 Candidacy” when the speaker refers to the membership process of a Country that is not yet candidate. We follow the formal membership process rather than the exact wording used by the speaker: when membership is discussed for a Country, code “613” until the country signs a membership agreement with the EU and becomes a candidate. For groups of countries which are mixed in terms of different stages of accession (Balkans, Western Balkans, Eastern European Countries…), also code 613 (as the smallest common denominator). 3. Code “614 (Stabilisation and) Association agreement” when the speaker refers to specific instruments (on trade, cooperation, partnership) the EU is implementing with third countries, whether the latter are on the path of membership or not. 4. Code “615 “Bilateral agreements” (“Swiss solution”) when the speaker refers directly to specific institutional arrangements with Switzerland, or the implementation of a Swiss-type extensive cooperation (e.g. in the case of redefining relations with the UK). 5. Code “616 Single Market (EEA, “Norwegian solution”) when the speaker discusses implementing EEA- type agreements with a country (e.g. new form of relations with the UK). 6. Code “617 Customs Union” when the speaker refers to membership in the EU Customs Union (be especially aware of this category in the cases of Turkey and the UK).

14

7. Code “620 Non-member association/partnership/cooperation (unspecified)” when the speaker advocates for developing cooperation and “deepening of the relations” or the “implementation of new instruments” between a Country and the EU, without reference to an existing formal institutional arrangement or organization.

Commonwealth of Independent States (710-713):

8. Commonwealth of the Independent States (CIS) is a Eurasian regional organization, created after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991. For our study, membership (code 710) of the following states is relevant: Russia, Belarus, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, and Georgia (until 2008). Ukraine is an associate state (code 711) as it did not ratify the CIS Charter. Within the framework of CIS, an Inter-parliamentary Assembly functions as a consultative deliberative forum; CIS members and Ukraine take part. 9. Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) was created on the basis of CIS to promote military and security cooperation between Eurasian states. Since 1999, it counts Russia, Belarus, and Armenia among its members (code 712). Since 2013, Serbia is an observer (code 713).

Stages and institutions of economic integration in Eurasia (714-720): 10. CIS Free Trade Area (code 714), aimed at free trade and liberalization of commerce, improvement of infrastructure and harmonization of energy markets, exists since 09.2012 and extends to CIS member states and Ukraine. Discussions of agreements, leading to its creation, took place mainly between 2002 and 2011. 11. Eurasian Economic Community Single Economic Space (code 715) exists since 2012 and includes Russia, Belarus, and Armenia. Its aim is internal economic liberalization and external protectionism. It includes about 20 agreements in different economic areas and is developing further. Negotiations took place between 2003 and 2011. This organization is often referred to as Single Economic Area (or Space), with corresponding abbreviations (in Russian, ЕЭП). 12. Eurasian Economic Community Single Market (code 716) existed between 2012 and 2015, when Eurasian Economic Union (codes 719 and 720) was created. Relevant members for our study: Russia and Belarus. 13. Eurasian Economic Community (EEC) existed between 2000 and 2014 and was succeeded by Eurasian Economic Union (codes 719 and 720) since 2015. Russia and Belarus were among the members. A Single Economic Space (code 715) and a Single Market (code 716) were created on its basis, and continue to exist within the Eurasian Economic Union (codes 719 and 720). Observer status in the EEC (code 717) is applicable to Moldova and Ukraine (2002-2014) and Armenia (2003-2014). 14. Eurasian Customs Union (code 718) exists since 2010 as part of the Eurasian Economic Community and since 2015 as part of the Eurasian Economic Union, and includes Russia, Belarus, and Armenia (joined in 2015). 15. Eurasian Economic Union (membership, code 719 and observer status, code 720) counts Russia, Belarus, and Armenia among its members. It was created in 2015 on the basis of the Single Economic Space (code 715) and Customs Union (718), which continue to exist. Moldova has observer status since April 2017 and continues negotiations. Moldova and Ukraine have free trade agreements with the Eurasian Economic Union (Ukraine’s agreement was suspended by Russia since 1 January 2016).

15

Large organizations overlapping between East and West (721 – 729): 16. Union State of Belarus and Russia (code 721) was formed in 1997 and hosts a very slow integration process. Between 2001 and 2009, Moldova expressed interest in this organization. Code 722 is not used. 17. Shanghai Cooperation Organization (codes 723-725) exists since 2001 and includes Russia and Central Asian and Asian states (incl. China, India, and Pakistan). Belarus is observer (code 724). Moldova, Turkey, and Azerbaijan are Dialogue partners (code 725). It focuses on economic, political, and security cooperation and strives for geopolitical influence, helped by its demographic strength. Full member lists here. 18. Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation, or BSEC (codes 726-727), is a regional economic organization, counting Russia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, Turkey, Georgia and Serbia among its members. Germany, France, Austria, Poland, the Czech Republic, Croatia, and Belarus have an Observer status (code 727). Full member lists here. 19. Organization for democracy and economic development (GUAM) (codes 728 and 729) was created in 2001 to further democratic development and security, ideologically turned more towards Europe than Russia. It included Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Moldova. Less active between 2009 and 2014, GUAM has regained some momentum in 2017. Turkey and Latvia have Observer status (code 729); Turkey expressed special interest in reanimating GUAM as an anti-Russian organization in 2016.

Other pan-European organizations (800’s): 20. North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has three types of formal status: full membership (code 810), Membership Action Plan, which is equivalent to formal candidacy (code 811), Intensified Dialogue format (code 812), created for Ukraine in 2005 and offered to other states since. In addition, to code all types of bilateral partnership/cooperation not leading to membership, use 813. If the partnership is specified (e.g. “Partnership for Peace”) add the name in the keywords. When coding statements on NATO, follow the speaker's words. If the speaker mentions membership, use the code "810", even if the country is not a candidate yet. Code other integration stages when explicitly mentioned. 21. Council of Europe (code 814) can be discussed, namely in relation to financial contributions and the work of the European Court for Human Rights (ECHR). Only Belarus has special Guest status (code 815).

4.6.2 Informal Organizations We introduce the values “Europe” and “Eurasia” as special types of Organizations to grasp the claims about belonging and membership, formulated in essentialist, cultural, identity ways. Such claims are different from claims about formal, legally defined, membership in international institutions, such as the European Union or NATO. We introduce the category “Eurasian organization” to account for discourse about integration processes centered on Russia. For many states in the ‘contested zone’ (Belarus, Ukraine, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Turkey), actors can support or oppose integration into either European institutions or Russia-centred ones. “Eurasian organization” is used specifically because of the early, dynamic character of Eurasian integration. Eurasian

16 organizations thus appear as an alternative to the European Union and its components (Single Market, Schengen), and possibly to NATO, Council of Europe, and so on.

1. Code “900 Europe” if speakers refer to the geographic or cultural ideas of the European continent. It can be defined in terms of civilization, geography, history and identity beyond formal EU institutions. Inclusive of countries and/or times outside of the EU but constructed as “European”. May include a range of informal constructions such as “European countries”, “the West”, “Western institutions”, “euro-transatlantic institutions”, and countries such as Switzerland, Norway, Iceland and – in a much contested fashion – Turkey. May be referred to as opposite to other geopolitical entities such as Russia, Asia, Eurasia, the Middle East, etc. “900 Europe” should not be used when the speaker refers to a formal organization in Europe or when she uses the word “Europe” to refer to the European Union or its components. In this case, always use the category corresponding to the formal organization (the 610-620 values).

2. Code “910 Eurasia” if speakers refer to Eurasia defined as a civilization, a continent. It includes Asian countries (often China, India). Eurasia may mean a general reference to informal Eurasian identity, history, continental construction, or a geopolitical bloc with variable membership, but necessarily with an Asian orientation. Eurasia may include Europe, but extends beyond it. In the context of self- reference (for example, discourse in the Russian parliament about Russia), it is often used for self- depiction as an independent international actor, a participant in an important “strength pole” of the multi-polar international system, often together with China, opposed to other “poles” such as “Europe” or “the West”. “Eurasia” should not be used when the speaker refers to integration processes centered on Russia, with some level of formality (agreements, treaties, cooperation projects). Use “Eurasian organization” (920) then.

3. Code “920 Eurasian organization” if speakers refer to an organization centered on Russia as the heir of the Russian empire and the Soviet Union, a “Big Russia”, with some level of formality: agreements or treaties, cooperation programs, cultural, social, economic exchange, or shared media space. Indexes include the following key words: brotherhood, one family / land, Russian world (Russian- speakers worldwide), legacy of the (Soviet) Union. “Eurasian organization” should not be used when the speaker refers to an existing formal organization in Eurasia: the Commonwealth of Independent States, the Customs Union, the Eurasian Economic Union, and so on. In this case, use the category corresponding to the formal organization (the values starting with 7). For Examples of the Statements with informal Organizations, see 6.2.

4.7 CODING THE CATEGORY “COUNTRY” It is important to differentiate this Category from the Category “Origin”. “Origin” refers to the country, which the speaker represents at the moment of speaking, while “Country” refers to the object of the speech – the country, the membership of which is discussed by the speaker.

The speaker can formulate a claim in relation to a single country, a group of countries, or unspecified countries (“General”, code 10).

17

Table 6: Issue country

ID Country ID Country 10 General 36 Lithuania 11 Albania 37 Luxembourg 12 Armenia 38 Malta 13 Austria 39 Moldova 14 Azerbaijan 40 Montenegro 15 Belarus 41 The Netherlands 16 Belgium 42 Norway 17 Bosnia-Herzegovina 43 Poland 18 Bulgaria 44 Portugal 19 Croatia 45 Romania 20 Cyprus 46 Russia 21 Czech Rep. 47 Serbia 22 Denmark 48 Slovak Rep. 23 Estonia 49 Slovenia 24 Finland 50 Spain 25 France 51 Sweden 26 FYROM 52 Switzerland 27 Georgia 53 Turkey 28 Germany 54 United Kingdom 29 Greece 55 Ukraine 30 Hungary 56 Yugoslavia 31 Iceland 57 Andorra 32 Ireland 58 Lichtenstein 33 Italy 59 Monaco 34 Kosovo 60 San Marino 35 Latvia

Code 10 “General” The code “10 General” is used when actors take a position about enlargement/membership of an Organization, without reference to a specific country or group of countries. Three rules apply: 1. Code as "10 General" if the speaker is only discussing her general stance on membership or enlargement of an Organization (“I am in favour of enlargement because it consolidates democracy”). 2. Do not code if the speaker refers to a specific enlargement in the past or to the success/failure of the enlargement process in the past. If you need to code past enlargements, use country names or group of countries (“2004 enlargement countries”, for example). 3. When coding, stay as close to the speaker's words as possible. Do not group countries, which are not grouped by the speaker: if she lists countries, code one statement per country. Do not sub-divide groups of countries introduced by the speaker.

18

Table 7: Issue, groups of Countries

ID Group of countries ID Group of countries 80 Western Countries 89 Baltic countries 81 2004 enlargement countries 90 Central European countries 82 2007 enlargement countries 91 Eastern European countries 83 Candidate countries 92 Western Balkans 84 Potential candidate countries 93 Post-Soviet countries 85 Balkans 94 (Southern) Caucasus 86 Mediterranean countries 95 Southern Europe 87 Former Yugoslavia 96 Black Sea countries 88 Accession countries 97 Eastern Partnership countries

4.7.2. Groups of countries

The groups of countries under codes 80-97 follow three different grouping principles: 1. Codes for regions: 85 - Balkans, 92 - Western Balkans, 86 - Mediterranean countries, 96 - Black Sea countries, 89 - Baltic countries, 90 - Central European countries, 91 - Eastern European countries, 94 - (Southern) Caucasus. 2. Codes for indicating countries that used to form one political unit: 87 - Former Yugoslavia, 93 - Post- Soviet countries. These labels carry information about the speaker's stance; they should not be substituted with region labels. 3. Codes that refer to a stage in the integration process or are defined by the time of their accession to an Organization: 81 - 2004 enlargement countries (referring to the 2004 enlargement of the EU), 82 - 2007 (EU) enlargement countries, 83 – Candidate countries (to any organization), 84 - Potential candidate countries (to any organization), 88 - Accession countries (to any organization), 97 - Eastern Partnership countries (of the EU). Again, code according to the speaker’s words.

4.8 CODING THE CATEGORY “POSITION” The Category Position has three values: “For”, “Conditional”, “Against”.

For (ID 1) The Position of the speaker on the membership ties of a Country with an Organization is positive, the speaker supports membership / cooperation.

Conditional (ID 0) The speaker supports membership / cooperation under conditions, with limitations or restrictions. Good markers of conditional statements are the qualifying words "but" and "if", as well as "in the case", "only when", "not before", etc. Examples: “Ukraine should be part of the EU if it develops further its market economy.” “Moldova has vocation to join the EU but a lot of work has to be done in the justice sector.”

19

Against (ID 2) The speaker opposes membership / cooperation of a Country with an Organization.

4.8.3.1 Proximity of contradictory statements Positive, negative, and conditional statements can be found in one speech and even one paragraph. When speakers use different arguments, statements should be coded individually, not grouped. To determine if there are contradictory statements, look at the keywords supporting the position. If all keywords support the same position, code only one statement. If keywords support different positions, code different statements.

Example 1: Positive Statement – Conditional Statement “Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, since Turkey forms part of European history, since Turkey is a component of European culture, since Turkey constitutes a considerable economic and demographic opportunity for the EU, this position in favour of accession means that I can demand even more: more with respect to democratic principles, more with respect to secularity and more with respect to human rights. The European Union was built on values and principles that we cannot disown with a deafening silence during an accession procedure for the sake of diplomacy. Turkey must acknowledge the Armenian genocide, a historic and symbolic act, and this will bear witness to its political maturity.”

Positive Statement: 610 – 53 – 1 – European history; European culture; economic opportunity; demographic opportunity Conditional Statement: 610 – 53 – 0 – respect democratic principles; secularity; human rights; European values and principles; acknowledge Armenian genocide

Example 2: Conditional Statement (only) “My group, the ECR, does, however, fully support Albanian EU accession once they satisfy all the Copenhagen criteria and, in particular, improve their poor record on fighting corruption and organised crime.”

Conditional Statement: 613 – 11 – 0 – satisfy Copenhagen criteria; fight corruption; fight organised crime

4.9 CODING THE CATEGORY “KEYWORDS” What is a keyword?

It’s a significant word that serves as key as to the meaning of another word, a sentence, a passage.

“Over and above the first reform priorities, Ukraine needs to continue the extensive task of ensuring regulatory approximation with European Union standards. This is a prerequisite to ensure that Ukraine can enjoy the full benefits of the new and ambitious EU-Ukraine association agreement which we are currently negotiating with Ukraine – including a deep and comprehensive free trade area.”

This can be interpreted as “I support Ukraine’s association agreement with the EU ONLY IF it ensures regulatory approximation with European Union standards”. In other words, the speaker defends the position that Ukraine’s (55) Association Agreement membership (614) is CONDITIONED (0) by “regulatory approximation with EU standards” (Keyword).

20

Why do we code keywords and how will we use them?

In this project, one of our main objectives is to identify patterns of argumentation: how actors defend or frame their position. Our goal is to identify these frames, that is, ways to talk about issues and justify decisions, and then map them through time and across space. Frames cannot be directly measured or simply “found” in texts. They emerge as a combination of concepts, more or less coherently used by the speaker. For example, we can say that the speaker uses the frame “Identity” if she explains her positions and choices by referring to “national values”, “European preferences”, “shared history”, “common future”, etc. When we find such terms in texts, we record them as keywords, which can later be aggregated into frames, compared, generalized, traced in time and across countries. Keywords are our indicator and building blocks for aggregated frames. The quality of our frames depends on the quality of the building blocks. This inductive method of keyword aggregation has been chosen because of its versatility for the end-user of the data. It allows researchers to group keywords according to their research interests, unconstrained by the limits of the research design. In the framework of this project, researchers have experimented with different types of aggregation. An exemplary list of frames and their explanation is provided in a separate document1.

Remember: - Each keyword entry is a single fragment of information that will later be processed into a frame. - Keywords need to be complete, precise and meaningful on their own.

Examples of keywords in the text

Example 1: Ukraine’s internal political stability and concentration on internal reform are a precondition for the further continuation of relations between the European Union and Ukraine. It is a crucial precondition for bilateral and multilateral cooperation that Ukraine’s Government continues to implement its objectives. We have to continue talks on the association agreement between Ukraine and the European Union. Keywords: “internal political stability”, “internal reform”. Example 2: We do not feel that Turkey’s membership is either realistic or opportune for many reasons. Firstly, because Turkey is not geographically located within Europe. Keyword: “not geographically located within Europe”. Example 3: However, the question of energy security and Turkey’s crucial geographical location mean that it is slowly becoming indispensable for securing European interests. It may, therefore, not be long before Turkey’s accession to the European Union is more important to us than to Turkey itself. Keywords: “energy security”, “crucial geographical location”, “European interests”.

General rules to code keywords Never code the Country or the Organization as a key word (Ukraine, NATO, EU); these elements are coded in other segments of the Statement. In the examples below, keywords are separated by a semicolon. 1. Length

1 See the document “Europe’s Borders Project Dataset: Frames Aggregation protocol and definitions”.

21

Keywords are usually a single word or a phrase: whenever possible, coders are asked to limit each “keyword” to a maximum of three words. A keyword must be meaningful as an explanation or justification of the speaker’s position. Not a keyword: members; with much; not part; no intention; lightly; on behalf of; understand; consider offering; no appetite; bob stewart. These words are not good key words because if you put them in a Statement, you do not receive a meaningful sentence. Try it: “I do not support Ukraine’s membership in NATO because…” members? With much? No part? Keyword: lacks credibility; Baltic states are the red line. Now try this: “I do not support further membership in NATO because…” [it] lacks credibility. Or: “because Baltic states are the red line”. These sentences make sense and present an argument (position supported by reasons).

2. Unit Do not copy the full sentence as a keyword; try to find the central phrase, which justifies the position (the smallest unit, which means the same as the whole sentence). Not a keyword: not making threats that we cannot fulfill; not offering NATO membership to countries that we are not prepared to send our children to defend and put their lives on the line for. Keyword: threats we cannot fulfill; [if] not prepared to send children to war.

3. Multiple keywords Do not split a phrase into single keywords if they do not have the same meaning separately: Not keywords: making threats; we cannot fulfill; not offering; NATO membership; to countries; prepared; to send our children; to defend; put their lives on the line; agree; with much; member for new forest east; not making threats; cannot fulfill; not prepared. Keywords: threats we cannot fulfill; [if] not prepared to send children to war.

4.10 TECHNICAL NOTES ON CODING When coding Keywords, use lower case. When copy-pasting: do not leave spaces at the end of words (R can’t recognize the words).

5 AMBIGUITIES2 “Often political actors are very clear in their statements and candidly say what they seek: more of one thing, less of another. In this case, assigning codes is straightforward: coders identify the position and assign the corresponding category. … There are, however, times when statements are not very clear and are more difficult to code” (Werner, Lacewell, Volkens, 2015: 9). When facing an ambiguous sentence, coders should always first identify the position about a country’s membership in an organization (does the speaker support membership, reject it or advances conditions for membership?).

2 This section heavily relies on the Manifesto project coding instructions, (Werner, Lacewell, Volkens, 2015: 9-10).

22

5.1 SOURCES OF AMBIGUITY

Intentionally or unintentionally, the way politicians and experts speak in general can be vague or ambiguous. This can be due to the use of technical or legal terms, figures of speech, unclear examples, rhetorical questions, and so on. It can be unclear whether the speaker formulates a position about a country’s membership in an organization or discusses this country and / or the organization in general, for example, by praising or critiquing policies or institutions.

Discussions about institutional arrangements, legal procedures and domestic politics of different countries are complex by nature. Speakers can speak about them in unclear ways or even get confused about them. Complexity of the issues thus often leads to complex formulations, extending over several paragraphs of transcripts.

It is important to be aware of these sources of ambiguity when coding statements. We provide guidance on how to address these challenges, even though a single, simple procedure cannot be developed and case-by- case interpretation choices will be made by coders based on the context and their background case knowledge.

5.2 DEALING WITH AMBIGUITY

Ambiguity of language Political actors can use rhetorical questions or figures of speech, which look negative, but express the speaker’s positive attitude towards membership. For example, a speaker may rhetorically ask “Is the UK not part of Europe?”. While the language used is both that of questioning and negation, the coder should code this as a claim in favour of the UK’s membership in Europe, unless the context of the sentence makes it impossible to interpret it in this way. Also, apparently negative language can in fact be used to formulate conditional claims: “Ukraine will never be part of the EU except if it fully embraces democratic institutions”. This is a conditional claim in support of Ukraine’s membership and should not be coded as a negative claim. At the same time, coders should not over-interpret the language used by the speaker. If she says: “At this point I cannot decide whether I am in favour of Turkey’s membership. We wish to keep the options open for now”, this non-committal language should not be interpreted as support of Turkey’s membership. It is not a statement since the speaker refuses to take a position.

Ambiguity of a Statement because of complexity (Delimitation of a single Statement) When the sentence in which the position is identified does not convey an obvious message, take into account that a statement may be scattered over a larger part of the text. In this case, you might have to extend your search to further sentences and paragraphs to make sure the Statement is accurately coded. You might find information relevant to a specific Statement in:  the rest of the sentence  the previous and the following sentences  the whole paragraph  the whole speech Remember: a new Statement is coded when any fragment of the Issue (Organization, Country) or the Position (positive, neutral, negative) changes. This can happen in the same sentence (“Ukraine should definitely

23 become a member but Turkey is not a European country”), or over the course of several paragraphs. When deciding to code a new Statement, length is not an issue, change in the discourse is.

Statements containing several messages Again, code a new Statement every time the Issue or the Position changes, even if the actor is listing countries (“Ukraine and Turkey both have vocation to join the EU” = two Statements).

Statements with many Keywords In many cases, a sentence by itself does not contain the whole Statement. Rather, arguments are added as the speech is delivered. If neither the Position nor the Organization or Country change, list Keywords (reasons for a Position) as they come, in the same order, for one Statement. This can mean that one Statement runs over a couple of pages and has many Keywords (large costs; instability; economic difficulties; conditions; social policies; problems at the borders can all be mentioned in one Statement).

Proximity of contradicting codes Coders should keep in mind that speakers can take positive and negative Positions on the same issue in one speech or even in one paragraph. In fact, debates often include mutually contradictory statements. In these cases, code based on the transcript and do not worry about internal consistency.

24

6 EXAMPLES OF CODING

6.1 CODING WITH FORMAL ORGANIZATIONS Example 1: Simple claim “Were Turkey ever to join, the concerns we have now about the present level of immigration to this country from the European Union would be magnified several times over.”

STATEMENT CONTEXT CLAIM SETTING SPEAKER ISSUE POSITION KEYWORDS Date Parliament Type Name Type Party Origin Organization Country 1 ; 0 ; 2 20160505 UK house of commons Westminster hall debate Philip Hollobone MP Con UK EU Turkey 2 immigration

Example 2: A claim with several Keywords “Remaining in the EU is better for British jobs, for security and for our economy.”

STATEMENT CONTEXT CLAIM SETTING SPEAKER ISSUE POSITION KEYWORDS Date Parliament Type Name Type Party Origin Organization Country 1 ; 0 ; 2 20160505 UK house of commons Westminster hall debate Keir Starmer MP Lab UK EU UK 1 jobs; security; economy

Example 3: Coding a separate claim because more than one Country is mentioned A new claim is coded when: the context change or the context remains the same while the issue or the position changes: “I and my constituents are worried about that wave of crime being magnified with new entrant countries if they include Albania and Turkey.”

25

STATEMENT CONTEXT CLAIM SETTING SPEAKER ISSUE POSITION KEYWORDS Date Parliament Type Name Type Party Origin Organization Country 1 ; 0 ; 2 20160505 154 201 Philip Hollobone MP Con UK EU Turkey 2 crime 20160505 154 201 Philip Hollobone MP Con UK EU Albania 2 crime

6.2 CODING WITH INFORMAL ORGANIZATIONS See Sections 4.2. to 4.9. for the explanation of the values.

Example 1: Europe Russia is a European country, but some people have probably forgotten that the countries of the continent have been inextricably connected not only via trade, tourism and cultural exchange, - we have become connected through common democratic values, long cooperation within a range of international organizations, as well as legal principles based on the continental law system. Claim: Organization Europe – Country Russia – Position Conditional – Key words: trade, tourism, cultural exchange, democratic values, cooperation in international organizations, law system

Example 2: Eurasia Still, Russia is not only a European, but also a huge Eurasian country, and we will continue to methodically widen Eurasian integration, strengthen cooperation with our partners at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, with the BRICS group, develop interaction with other partners on all continents. The intrigues of short-sighted politicians in some European countries and in the United States of America will not hinder our plans! Claim: Organization Eurasia – Country Russia –Position For – Key words: widen integration, strengthen cooperation, counter intrigues of European and American politicians In addition, from this extract of the speech, an additional Statements on the membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (a formal organization) is coded.

Example 3: Eurasia There is an understanding that the Turkish politicians have an increased interest in Russia and a political will to build mutually beneficial relationships. Turkey has tired of playing backstage roles in the region and of executing the will of the USA and the EU, of acting as a retainer for the flow of refugees (which has been artificially created in the Middle East). Its aspiration to run an independent policy creates an aspiration to build good neighborly and mutually beneficial relations with Russia.

26

This is why the historic reorientation of Turkey towards Russia, towards the north – the reorientation discussed by the leader of our party Vladimir Volfovich Zhirinovsky – has to take place in the near future, according to our estimates. Claim: Organization Eurasia – Country Turkey – Position For – Key words: aspiration for an independent policy, flow of refugees, good neighborly relations, mutual benefit, historic reorientation towards Russia

Example 4: Eurasia I have already mentioned an agreement about the beginning of coordination between Eurasian integration with the project of the Silk Road Economic Belt, advanced by China… This is our reality right now, I will repeat myself: the reserves and resources of the Eurasian integration, the perspective of its enlargement and its coordination with the Silk Road Belt create very serious competitive position, and I am convinced that we need to use them with maximum efficiency. Claim: Organization Eurasia – Country Russia – Position For – Key words: integration, serious competitive position, cooperation with China

Example 5: Eurasian Organization Honorable Leonid Eduardovich, I have seen multiple times how professionally you conducted negotiations with multiple foreign delegations, and therefore I would like to ask you: Do you really think that the text that we have been preparing today can somehow influence the situation in Ukraine? Don’t you think that it needs to be stricter, that we need to announce unequivocally that Ukraine is not just a territory, that this land is the cradle of the Russian state, that Kiev is the mother of the Russian cities, that we cannot let Ukrainian people go away from us, that we have to live as one family in accordance with the agreement of Pereiaslavl! We need to stress that the Ukrainian territory includes lands, which had never been really Ukrainian; these are essentially Russian lands… Claim: Organization Eurasian organization – Country Ukraine – Position For – Key words: cradle of Russian state, historic ties, one family, Russian lands

Example 6: Eurasian Organization We refer to history again when we consider the situation in Ukraine today, and we declare again that we are on one side with our brotherly Ukrainian people! We, the State Duma, are ready to offer legislative support to those grand scale projects, which have been initiated by the Presidents of Russia and Ukraine at the 6th meeting of the interstate commission on December 13th. We are ready to conduct the next session of the inter-parliamentary commission, which will consider issues of the integration of our capacities in such important cooperation domains as the peaceful space exploration and nuclear energy industry. We are ready to ultimately activate our cooperation with the Supreme Rada, with its various parliamentary groups, which are ready to strengthen Russian-Ukrainian partnership. Claim: Organization Eurasian organization – Country Ukraine – Position For – Key words: brotherhood, presidents of both states, integration of capacities, cooperation, space exploration, nuclear energy, partnership

27

7 ANNEXES

7.1 ANNEX 1: CASES

In term of country-cases, 13 national parliaments and the European Parliament have been selected for this study. The cases cover old and new EU member states, Eastern and Western countries, EU candidate states, potential candidates to the EU, and regional powers outside the EU. The table below lists the countries selected, the number of coders who participated in the coding of each case, the type of coding that was performed, and the documents used for the analysis.

Table 8: Coding of cases

ID COUNTRY CASE CODERS CODING TYPE DOCUMENTS NO. STATEMENTS 12 Armenia 1 Semi-Automated All debates 377 10 EU 3 Hand coding Targeted debates 6114 25 France 2 Hand coding Targeted debates 667 28 Germany 4 Semi-Automated All debates 1659 29 Greece 1 Hand coding Targeted debates 574 30 Hungary 1 Hand coding All debates 1199 39 Moldova 1 Hand coding Targeted debates In process 43 Poland 1 Both Targeted debates 1394 46 Russia 1 Semi-Automated All debates 1606 47 Serbia 1 Semi-Automated All debates 866 52 Switzerland 4 Semi-Automated All debates In process 53 Turkey 3 Semi-Automated All debates 404 54 UK 4 Hand coding Targeted debates 1950 55 Ukraine 2 Semi-Automated All debates In process TOTAL: 16811

Semi-automated coding used MaxQda to identify relevant portions of the parliamentary debates. The procedure consisted in establishing a list of country-specific keywords, covering all countries and organizations in the project as well as integration-related terms such as “membership”, “accession”, “supranational institutions”, etc. All transcripts of parliamentary debates between 2004 and 2017 were searched in MaxQda for these terms and the portions of transcripts containing these words or phrases were read by the coders in search for Statements. Statements were then hand-coded in MaxQda and the results were exported into Excel, where additional the coding was finalized. Semi- automated coding was used in country cases where the transcripts’ databases did not provide detailed information on the agenda / topics discussed in each session.

In hand coding, the transcript databases could be searched for key terms (see Annex 2), and only those debates, which contained relevant topics were then coded. In this procedure, the full text of the debate was read by the coder, who identified Statements in it, without the support of text coding software. Coding of each Statement was directly performed in Excel.

Two cases that do not fit exactly in either those two categories: Poland, where both hand coding and MaxQda were used depending on the year, and Hungary, where the online parliamentary database allows for in-text search (similar to MaxQda), so statements were directly identified from the Hungarian parliament website. 28

7.2 ANNEX 2: INDEX LISTS

Table 9: List of search terms for debates in national parliaments

2004 enlargement countries 2007 enlargement countries Accession countries Albania Armenia Association agreement Austria Azerbaijan Balkans Baltic Countries Belarus Belgium Belgium Bilateral agreements Bilateralism Black Sea Bosnia and Herzegovina Bosnia-Herzegovina Brexit Bulgaria Candidacy Candidate countries Central European Countries Coll. security Treaty Org. Commonwealth Cooperation agreement Council of Europe Croatia Customs Union Cyprus Czech Rep. Denmark Eastern European Countries Eastern Partnership Enlargement Enlargement fatigue Estonia EU EU commission EU council Eurasia Eurasian Customs Union Eurasian Econ. Community Eurasian Organization Euromed Europe European European agreement European Econ. Association European Neighbourhood Policy European partnership European referendum European Union Eurozone Exit Finland Former Yugoslavia France Georgia Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Integration capacity Internal Market Ireland Italy Kazakhstan Kosovo Kyrgyzstan Latvia Leaving the EU Lithuania Luxembourg Macedonia (FYROM) Malta Mediterranean Partnership Mediterranean zone Membership Moldova Monaco Monitoring Montenegro NATO Negotiations Netherlands Norway Organization for democracy and Organization of the Black Sea OSCE economic development Economic Cooperation Partnership Poland Portugal Post-soviet countries Potential candidate countries Pre-Accession countries Romania Russia Schengen area Serbia Shanghai Cooperation Organization Slovak Rep. Slovenia Southern European countries Spain Stabilisation Stability pact Stab. and asso. agreement Sweden Switzerland Tajikistan Trade agreement Turkey UK Ukraine Union State of Belarus and Russia Uzbekistan Western Balkans Western Countries Western European Union

7.3 ANNEX 3: CODING POLITICAL PARTIES Party refers to the political party/group to which the speaker is affiliated at the time of her speech. The country code is included in the party code (the first two digits).

Not specified If the speaker is not affiliated to a political party (e.g. expert or bureaucrat), code 9900.

29

UK Table 10: UK political parties

ID Party 5401 Labour Party 5402 Conservative Party 5403 Liberal Democrats 5404 Ulster Unionist Party 5405 Scottish National Party 5406 Democratic Unionist Party 5407 Plaid Cymru 5408 Sinn Féin 5409 Social Democratic and Labour Party 5410 Independent 5411 Health Concern 5412 Respect – The Unity Coalition 5413 Independent Labour 5414 UK Independence Party (UKIP) 5415 Alliance Party of Northern Ireland 5416 Green Party of England and Wales 5417 Respect Party 5418 Lab/Co-op

France Table 11: French political parties

ID Party 2501 Groupe Union pour un Mouvement Populaire (UMP) 2502 Groupe Union pour la Démocratie Française 2503 Groupe Socialiste 2504 Groupe Communiste et Républicain 2505 Non-Inscrits 2506 Groupe Nouveau Centre 2507 Groupe Socialiste, Radical, Citoyen et Divers Gauche 2508 Groupe de la Gauche Démocrate et Républicaine 2509 Groupe Socialiste, Républicain et Citoyen 2510 Groupe Socialiste, Ecologiste et Républicain 2511 Les Républicains 2512 Groupe Union des Démocrates et Indépendants 2513 Groupe écologiste 2514 Groupe Radical, Républicain, Démocrate et Progressiste 2515 MoDem 2516 France Insoumise 2517 Groupe de la république en marche (LREM)

European Union The political groups of the European parliament are the formal representation of European political parties, or coalitions of parties in the EP. Speaking time is organized on the basis of the political groups, so we use them as the party of reference in the EU.

30

Table 12: European political groups

ID Party 1001 European People’s Party – European Democrats (EPP – ED) 1002 Party of European Socialists (PES) 1003 Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) 1004 Union for Europe of the Nations (UEN) 1005 The Greens – Europeans Free Alliance (Greens – EFA) 1006 European United Left – Nordic Green Left (GUE – NGL) 1007 Independence/Democracy (IND/DEM) 1008 Non-Inscrits (NI) 1009 Identity, Tradition, Sovereignty (ITS) 1010 European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR) 1011 Europe of Freedoms and Direct Democracy (EFD - EFDD) 1012 Europe of Nations and Freedoms (EFD)

Germany Table 13: German political parties

ID Party 2801 Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (SPD) 2802 CDU/CSU 2803 Bündnis 90/Die Grünen (Grüne) 2804 Freie Demokratische Partei (FDP) 2805 Partei des Demokratischen Sozialismus (PDS) 2806 Die Linkspartei.PDS (Die Linke.PDS) 2807 Die Linke (Linke) 2808 Alternative Für Deutschland 2909 Fraktionslose

Switzerland Table 14: Swiss political parties

ID Party 5201 Groupe Radical-Libéral/FDP-Liberale Fraktion/RL 5202 Groupe Démocrate-Chrétien PDC/CVP-Fraktion /C 5203 Groupe Socialiste/Sozialdemokratische Fraktion/S 5204 Groupe de l’Union démocratique du Centre/Fraktion der Schweizerischen Volkspartei/V 5205 Groupe Parti Evangélique/Union démocratique Fédérale PEV- UDF/EVP/EDU-Fraktion/E 5206 Groupe des Verts/Grüne Fraktion/G 5207 Non-Inscrits/ohne Fraktionszugehörigkeit 5208 Groupe Démocrate-chrétien/PEV/Vert’libéral PDC-PEV- PVL//CVP/EVP/glp//CEg 5209 Groupe du Parti Bourgeois-Démocratique/BDP Fraktion BP 5210 Groupe PDC/PEV//CVP/EVP//CE 5211 Groupe Vert Libéral7Grünliberale Fraktion7GL

31

Russia Table 15: Russian political parties

ID Party 4601 ЕДИНАЯ РОССИЯ (Russia United) 4602 КПРФ (Communist Party) 4603 ЛДПР (Liberal Democrats, LDPR) 4604 СПРАВЕДЛИВАЯ РОССИЯ (Just Russia) 4605 Родина (Motherland) 4606 Независимый (Independent)

Poland Table 16: Polish political parties

ID Party 4301 Platforma Obywatelska (PO) 4302 Prawo i Sprawiedliwość (PiS) 4303 Sojusz Lewicy Demokratycznej (SLD) 4304 Polskie Stronnictwo Ludowe (PSL) 4305 Socjaldemokracja Polska (SDPL) 4306 Samoobrona Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej (Samoobrona) 4307 Liga Polskich Rodzin (LPR) 4308 Polska Jest Najważniejsza (PJN) 4309 Zjednoczona Prawica (ZP) 4310 Nowoczesna (.N) 4311 Unia Pracy (UP) 4312 Niezrzeszeni (niez.) 4313 Kukiz`15 4314 Unia Europejskich Demokratów (UED) 4315 Wolni i Solidarni (WiS) 4316 Ruch Palikota (Ruch PL) 4317 Biało-Czerwoni (BC) 4317 Ruch Ludowo-Narodowy (RLN) 4318 Stronnictwo Gospodarcze (SG) 4319 Dom Ojczysty (D_OJCZYSTY) 4320 Stronnictwo Konserwatywno-Ludowe (SKL) 4321 Ruch Katolicko-Narodowy (RKN) 4322 Porozumienie Polskie (PP) 4323 Ruch Odbudowy Polski (ROP) 4324 Ruch Patriotyczny (RP) 4325 Prawica Rzeczpospolitej (Prawica)

Turkey Table 17: Turkish political parties

ID Party 5301 Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi 5302 Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi 5303 Milliyetçi Hareket Partisi 32

5304 Halkların Demokratik Partisi 5305 Bağımsızlar

Greece Table 18: Greek political parties

ID Party 2901 Panellínio Sosialistikó Kínima 2902 Panellínio Sosialistikó Kínima - Dimokratikí Parátaxi 2903 Dimokratikí Simparátaxi (PA. SO. K. - DIM. AR. ) 2904 Dimokratikí Aristerá 2905 Néa Dimokratía 2906 Kommounistikó Kómma Elládas 2907 Sinaspismós tis Aristerás kai tis Proódou 2908 Sinaspismós Rizospastikís Aristerás 2909 SIRIZA Enotikó Kinonikó Métopo 2910 Laïkós Orthódoxos Sinayermós 2911 Laïkós Síndesmos - Khrisí Afyí 2912 Anexártiti Éllines 2913 Anexártiti Éllines Ethnikí Patriotikí Dimokratikí Simmakhía 2914 To Potámi 2915 Énosi Kentróon 2916 Independent 2917 Independent Parlamentary Group

Armenia Table 19: Armenian political parties

ID Party 1201 ՀայաստանիՀանրապետականԿուսակցություն Խմբակցություն/Հանրապետական Խմբակցություն/Hayastani Hanrapetakan Kusakts'utyun Khmbakts'utyun/HanrapetakanKhmbakts'utyun (Republican Party of Armenia / Republican) 1202 Արդարություն Խմբակցություն/Ardarutyun Khmbakts'utyun (Justice) 1203 ՀայՅեղափոխականԴաշնակցություն Խմբակցություն/ՀայՀեղափոխականԴաշնակցություն Խմբակցություն/Hay Heghap'okhakan Dashnakts'utyun Khmbakts'utyun (Armenian Revolutionary Federation) 1204 ՕրինացԵրկիր Խմբակցություն/Orinats' Yerkir Khmbakts'utyun (Rule of Law /Country of Law) 1205 ԱզգայինՄիաբանություն Խմբակցություն/Azgayin Miabanutyun Khmbakts'utyun (National Unity) 1206 ՄիավորվածԱշխատանքայինԿուսակցություն Խմբակցություն/Miavorvats Ashkhatank'ayin Kusakts'utyun Khmbakts'utyun (United Labour Party) 1207 ԺողովրդականՊատգամավոր ՊատգամավորականԽումբ/Zhoghovrdakan Patgamavor Patgamavorakan Khumb (People's Deputy Deputy Group) 1208 Գործարար ՊատգամավորականԽումբ/Gortsarar Patgamavorakan Khumb (Entrepreneur Deputy Group) 1209 Անկախ/Ankakh (Independent) 1210 ԲարգավաճՀայաստան Խմբակցություն/Ծառուկյան Խմբակցություն /Bargavach Hayastan Khmbakts'utyun/Tsarukyan (Tsarrukyan) Khmbakts'utyun (Prosperous Armenia /Tsarukyan (Tsarrukyan) ) 33

1211 Ժառանգություն Խմբակցություն/Zharrangutyun Khmbakts'utyun (Heritage) 1212 ՀայԱզգայինԿոնգրես Խմբակցություն/Hay Azgayin Kongres Khmbakts'utyun (Armenian National Congress) 1213 Ելք Խմբակցություն/Yelq/Yelk' Khmbakcutyun (Way Out)

Hungary Table 20: Hungarian political parties

ID Party 3001 Fidesz 3002 Magyar Szocialista Párt (MSZP) 3003 Jobbik Magyarországért Mozgalom (Jobbik) 3004 Kereszténydemokrata Néppárt (KDNP) 3005 Lehet Más a Politika (LMP) 3006 Párbeszéd Magyarországért (PM) 3007 Demokratikus Koalíció (DK) 3008 Együtt – a Korszakváltók Pártja (E2014) 3009 Magyar Liberális Párt (MLP) 3010 Szabad Demokraták Szövetsége (SZDSZ) 3011 Magyar Demokrata Fórum (MDF) 3012 Független Kisgazda-, Földmunkás- és Polgári Párt (FKgP) 3013 Magyar Igazság és Élet Pártja (MIÉP) 3014 Magyar Demokrata Néppárt (MDNP) 3015 Egyesült Kisgazdapárt (EKgP) 3016 Függetlenek (Independent)

Serbia Table 21: Serbian political parties

ID Party 4701 Српска радикална странка (Serbian Radical Party) 4702 Демократска странка Србије (Democratic Party of Serbia) 4703 Социјалистичка партија Србије (Socialist Party of Serbia) 4704 Демократска странка (Democratic Party) 4705 Српска напредна странка (Serbian Progressive Party) 4706 Г17 Плус (G17+) 4707 Нова Србија (New Serbia) 4708 Либерално демократска партија (Liberal Democratic Party) 4709 Листа за Санџак (List for Sandžak) 4710 Лига социјалдемократа Војводине (League of Social Democrats of Vojvodina) 4711 Српски покрет обнове (Serbian Renewal Movement) 4712 Партија уједињених пензионера Србије (Party of United Pensioners of Serbia) 4713 Савез Војвођанских Мађара (Alliance of Vojvodina Hungarians) 4714 Социјалдемократска партија Србије (Social Democratic Party of Serbia) 4715 Јединствена Србија (United Serbia) 34

4716 Социјалдемократска Унија (Social Democratic Union) 4717 Демократска левица Рома (Democratic Left of Roma) 4718 Покрет Ветерана (Veteran's movement) 4719 Бошњачка демократска странка Србије (Bosniak Democratic Party of Serbia) 4720 Partija za demokratsko delovanje (Party for Democratic Action) 4721 Демократски савез Хрвата у Војводини (Democratic Alliance of Croats in Vojvodina) 4722 Социјално либерална партија Санџака (Social-liberal party of Sandzak) 4723 Странка демократске акције Санџака (Party of Democratic Action of Sandžak) 4724 Демохришћанска странка Србије (Christian Democratic Party of Serbia) 4725 Бошњачка демократска заједница (Bosniak Democratic Union) 4726 Покрет Живим за Крајину (Movement I live for the Krajina) 4727 Заједно за Шумадију (Together for Sumadija) 4728 Покрет снага Србије (Strength of Serbia Movement) 4729 Зелени Србије (Greens of Serbia) 4730 Социјалдемократска Унија (Social Democratic Union) 4731 Демократски савез Хрвата у Војводини (Democratic Alliance of Croats in Vojvodina) 4732 Коалиција удружења избеглица у Републици Србији (Coalition of Refugee Associations in the Republic of Serbia) 4733 Бошњачка народна странка (Bosniak People's Party) 4734 Покрет за привредни препород Србије (Movement for the economic revival of Serbia) 4735 Београдске иницијативе (Belgrade Initiatives) 4736 Покрета влашког уједињења (Movement of the Vlachs unification) 4737 Асоцијација малих и средњих предузећа и предузетника Србије (Association of Small and Medium Enterprises and Entrepreneurs of Serbia) 4738 Народна сељачка странка (People's Peasant Party) 4739 Демократска партија Македонаца (Democratic Party of Macedonians) 4740 Ромска партијa (Roma Party) 4741 Покрет социјалиста (Movement of Socialists) 4742 Богата Србија (Rich Serbia) 4743 Социјалдемократски савез Србијe (Social Democratic Union of Serbia) 4744 Заједно за Србију (Together for Serbia) 4745 ПРЕОКРЕТ (Turnover) 4746 Нова странка (New Party) 4747 Уједињена сељачка странка (United Peasant Party) 4748 Српска народна партија (Serbian People's Party) 4749 Српски покрет Двери (Serbian Movement Dveri) 4750 Народна странка (People's Party) 4751 Покрет обнове Краљевине Србије (Movement of the restoration of the Kingdom of Serbia) 4752 Боља Србија (Better Serbia) 4753 Комунистичка партија (Communist Party) 4754 не припада ни једној посланичкој групи (does not belong to any parliamentary group)

35

Ukraine Table 22: Ukrainian political parties

ID Party 5501 Комуністична партія України (Communist party of Ukraine) 5502 Соціалістична партія України (Socialist party of Ukraine) 5503 Виборчий блок політичних партій "Блок Віктора Ющенка "Наша Україна" (Election bloc of Political Parties "Viktor Yushchenko's Bloc" Our Ukraine ") 5504 Виборчий блок політичних партій "Виборчий блок Юлії Тимошенко" (Election bloc of Political Parties "Yulia Tymoshenko” election bloc") 5505 Виборчий блок політичних партій "За Єдину Україну!" (Election bloc of Political Parties "For One Ukraine!") 5506 Соціал-демократична партія України (об'єднана) (Social-Democratic Party of Ukraine (united)) 5507 "Блок Литвина" (Народна Партія, Трудова партія України) (“Lytvyn's Bloc" (People's Party, Labor Party of Ukraine) 5508 Not part of any faction 5509 фракція "Регіони України" (Faction "Regions of Ukraine")

36