The main aim of this dissertation is to test the extent to which the EU is a normative power in the field of conflict transformation. Although much has been written on Normative Power Europe (NPE), the concept is still empirically under-explored. This dissertation, therefore, applies the NPE analytical framework to explore the EU’s role in Cyprus and Kosovo. Specifically, a three-part framework is used which analyses the EU’s goals, means and impact.

The contribution of this thesis to the existing literature is twofold. Firstly, the application of the NPE framework offers a fresh theoretical perspective regarding the EU’s role in conflict transformation. Secondly, the empirical focus of this research allows for conclusions to be drawn for the ways norms can be spread in cases of ethnic conflict and for the ways local conditions can potentially hamper the internalisation of norms. The main argument of this thesis is that the EU’s normative power in the field of conflict transformation can be challenged by reference to dichotomies that are important within the NPE analytical framework like, for example, normative interests versus materialistic interests, persuasion versus coercion and genuine internalisation of norms versus instrumental behaviour on the part of local actors.

This dissertation is divided into seven chapters. Following the introduction, the second chapter discusses the NPE concept and presents the theoretical framework of the thesis. The third chapter provides the historical context of the two conflict cases. Then, the next three chapters focus on applying the NPE framework to the two cases. Each chapter is concerned with one of the three dimensions of the analytical framework (goals, means and impact). Lastly, chapter seven summarises the main argument and reflects on its methodological and theoretical implications.