This is a study in ambiguities. They are inevitable and important ambiguities, and this book is well timed and was well worth producing. It will be of use to scholars of the European Union, of diplomacy both in general and in particular relation to EU practice, and of global politics as they are evolving. To some extent, all foreign ministries face fissiparous responsibilities as a result of the effects of globalization. The three main areas involved are shifting patterns of administration within states, the need to deal with important external interlocutors whose constituencies are not legitimized in a state form, and the ever-increasing difficulty of identifying what a “national interest” might be. This context applies equally to the member states of the European Union, but in their case, it occurs in a particularly concentrated form and their own situation adds further complications. The editors have tackled the problem of describing all this in two ways: They have commissioned snapshots of each member state's foreign ministry and they have supplied three chapters of their own that take the broader view.

The accounts of individual states show, predictably perhaps, that those with a long tradition of powerful foreign ministries have and are adapting more readily to contemporary pressures; secondly, that there are differences between each one, partly derived from their internal situations and partly from their external needs; and thirdly, that in no case does it appear that a foreign ministry is in danger of extinction. This last is quite important since there has been for some time a sense that foreign ministries may not have a real job to do for much longer and that the European Union might show the first examples of mergers or abolitions as responsibilities pass to a centralized organization in Brussels. Among these chapters, it should be noted that there is a particularly interesting contribution on Belgium contributed by Rik Coolsaet.

However, it is in the editors' own contributions that the real meat lies. Brian Hocking's introduction and conclusion is both the clearest available account of the pressures that globalization has put upon the traditional conduct of foreign affairs and a very effective treatment of the particular evolution in the European Union. The ambiguities abound. When dealing with the creation of EU policies, foreign ministries are pressured to achieve both internal coordination and external consensus and not to allow presidents' or prime ministers' offices to scoop the role; but when the policy is foreign policy under the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) regime, the task can return to the more familiar effort to articulate and successfully insist upon the inclusion of what are national interests. But then again, if a question of economic competition arises outside the EU, there may be no place for any common policy, and dog will continue to attempt to eat dog. Moreover, this situation continues in any case as far as most, but not all, of the individual foreign relations of member states with non-EU states are concerned. There arises therefore at times a Jekyll and Hyde character in the behavior of member states.

The ambiguity between having and taking the initiative at some times and over some matters and the growing role of coordination between the internal departments dealing with EU questions is a reflection of the structural state of flux. Here, David Spence's chapter on the EU itself emerges as probably the most significant element in the book. The cause of the ambiguity is clear: The states of the EU are not full states in that capacity, but the EU itself is not a state either; nor is it certain that it will inevitably become one. He suggests that this paradox may eventually be resolved in a way that is not derived from the forms of the evolved state, but that even allowing for such a possibility, it is improbable that the flow of responsibility toward the center will cease at its present stage. If that judgment is correct, then the significance of the coordinative function will rise and the remaining initiative-taking role will fall off further, particularly in relations with non-EU states.

Brian Hocking has this to say by way of conclusion and it is an effective description of the ground covered in Foreign Ministries in the European Union: [w]e are in a condition of ‘betweenness’ operating at three interlinked levels: that of the European project, the nature of the state as it adapts to the pressures of globalization and regionalization, and the role and structure of the foreign ministry itself” (p. 285). It was brave to attempt a description of something so fluid. It was also extremely valuable and has been done as well as it could be. It is, furthermore, a most welcome addition to the extremely slight discussion that exists about the role of foreign ministries in general. That slightness is undeserved because foreign ministries, as this book makes quite clear, are able to serve as fascinating litmus tests for other questions, particularly those arising out of the new contexts that globalization has created.