Europe has a strategy, but is the EU a strategic actor? (original) (raw)
The European Security Strategy: a framework for EU security interests?
International Peacekeeping, 2004
USNS emphasises the notion of 'pre-emption', a unilateralist approach to international security; the ESS commits the EU to a multilateral approach to security challenges, embodied in international law and the UN Charter. Both the ESS and the USNSS embrace a 'comprehensive concept of security' in proposing to tackle common security threats by drawing on a developed toolbox. The ESS does prescribe an alternative approach to 'unilateralism'. However, it presently provides a benchmark to assess European responses to international security rather than describe a manifest new approach.
The Deficiencies, Mistakes and Contradictions of the New EU Foreign and Security Strategy
2016
CERPESC 16/E/03/2016 - 20 December 2016 ; The events of the last 20 years, the first operations and missions, show that the Common Security and Defense Policy, the CSDP (the European Security and Defense Policy: the ESDP, before 2009) does not exist only on paper. Europe must act to prevent wars and crises or to stop them. The European Union and its member countries are confronted with decisive choices for the future of Europe as a political entity. The external (and above all, energy) dependence of the Union is particularly emphasized by the European security strategies. The documents that function as strategies (the first, the 2003 ESS and the most recent, 2016 EUGS) of the European Union are quite poor in terms of content and objectives. They list the challenges, without drafting the places and means of the overall strategic presence. The purpose of this analysis is to examine the major development issues of EU strategic thinking during the period 2003-2016. Can we talk about development, stagnation, or devolution? Is the new strategy capable of fulfilling its role and can really serve as the basis of our ambitions?
Introduction: strategy in EU foreign policy
The point of departure for the special collection is provided by the observation that the growing complexity of the crises in the neighbourhood and the internal ones faced by the Union provides a sense of urgency to any type of strategic thinking that the EU might embrace. Against this backdrop, the recent shift towards geopolitics and strategic thinking is contextualized and the understanding of key aspects of ways in which the shift is translated into strategies by EU actors is put forward. The analysis recognizes the recent developments within the institutional dimension of EU’s foreign and security policy, yet it confirms the fundamental meaning of the member states’ willingness to invest resources and harmonize their foreign policy strategies at the EU level.
2018
The aim of the study is to analyze what kinds of understanding of security does the European Union have and what themes are linked to security. Additionally, the study aims to analyze the European Union as a power in international politics. The research material consists of two security strategies. The focus is on the Global Strategy for European Union's Foreign and Security policy, which was published in June 2016. This strategy is compared to the European Security Strategy of 2003 in order to detect new trends in European security policy. The strategies act as guidelines for the European security policy and thus represent the main actors and themes related to European security. Therefore, strategies provide interesting research material. The study was conducted through the method of political reading. Political reading (Palonen, 1988) aims to study how the political aspect appears in texts and what kinds of interpretations can be made from the political parlances. Buzan, Waever, and de Wilde's (1998) categorization of the areas of security was a useful tool when analyzing the security threats presented in the Global Strategy. When studying the European Union as a power, Toje's (2011) concept of small power was used alongside McCormick's (2007) work on superpower. Based on the results, the field of European security is quite versatile. Strongest emphasis in the Global Strategy is on European military and economic security. Political and societal security is in most cases overlapping other areas; the strong institutions and European values are in the core of European security policy. Despite the EU's role as a trendsetter for environmental awareness, environmental security is underrepresented in the Global Strategy of 2016. The study shows that the European Union has behavioral elements of both a small power and a superpower. It can thus be argued that the EU relies heavily on international institutions, such as the UN, in its global actions, but at the same time tries to achieve a position as an independent actor. Operational independency was especially a current theme in the material. According to the Global Strategy of 2016, the European Union is a small power that aims towards recognition as a great power.
The EU Strategic Compass: A Blueprint for a European Defensive and Securitisation Policy
Rome, IAI, May 2022, 6 p. (JOINT Briefs ; 16), 2022
In the EU’s conceptual elaboration of its crisis and conflict management approach, the relationship with external partners has evolved significantly. In the Strategic Compass, security depends on being protected from external threats, while resilience only refers to the resilience of member states, which needs to be bolstered to respond to diverse crises and threats. It seems as if the EU is retreating from shared responsibilities and collective action with external players, while giving priority to European security interests. In the Strategic Compass, security basically boils down to the protection from external threats rather than the advancement of a global agenda for cooperation.
The European Union’s global strategy: Complementarity and specialization
Portuguese Journal of Social Science
As a grand strategy, European Union Global Strategy (EUGS) is a roadmap to convert the European Union (EU) in a key strategic actor. The evidence of some conceptual vulnerabilities, particularly the EU lack of classical means and strategic autonomy, limits its implementation. Thus, this article aims to find some relevant actions that the EU needs to put in place to enhance her global image as a credible and specialized actor where the power of her strategic partners, as NATO and United Sates, need to be complemented. To that effect, first, the EU must demonstrate leadership and mobilize the support of member states to carry out its strategy. Second, it must leverage its strategic autonomy by intervening in crises and conflicts where the military means are not the most important. Third, it must focus on preventing or solving the problems in the EU’s neighbourhood as it will suffer direct repercussions if it fails to do so. Implementing the EUGS will require a generic but encompassing...
Walking the Strategic Talk. A Progressive EU Foreign Policy Agenda for the Future
Brussels/Rome, Foundation for European Progressive Studies (FEPS) / Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI), May 2019, 47 p., ISBN 978-2-930769-26-4, 2019
For years, the pace and extensity of external change outstripped the steps that were taken towards enhancing and strengthening the EU’s capacity to respond effectively to the (f)actors affecting its principles and interests. The EU’s external action all too often proved despondent, fragmented and out-of-sync with the realities that Europe was facing. The unveiling of the EU Global Strategy (EUGS) in 2016 by Federica Mogherini, the Union’s High Representative, constituted a tremendously significant effort to rectify this. Now, following three years of the Strategy’s implementation, and ahead of the 2019 institutional renewal of the EU, the areas of both substantial progress and considerable disappointment when assessing the performance of the EU’s external action under the influence of the EUGS are becoming clearer. As we look towards the next qualitative leap the Union needs to make to respond to a world that has become more tumultuous, a new FEPS-IAI report draws from and expands on the findings of a year-long research project to offer some insights in three key areas: (1) outlining some of the critical insecurity trends that have negatively impacted the EU’s capacity to navigate through the emerging realities of diversified threats and multiplying conflicts, both within and beyond European borders; (2) briefly taking stock of some of the EU Global Strategy’s greatest achievements and limitations in promoting a Europe that stands, speaks and acts together in its foreign policy; and (3) providing concrete recommendations in 10 critical areas where the Union needs to walk the strategic talk embodied in the Global Strategy – more boldly, with more unity and towards a more progressive direction.
Nowadays European Union is facing challenges of immigration, the threat of radicalization, downturns in the fiscal and monetary policies, as well as the discussions on how to build bridges with the UK after Brexit. Such concerns are crucial for understanding the EU's political and economic landscape, shaping global security issues as well. The article attempts to analyze the circumstances favoring the implementation of the EU's Global Strategy that served to be strategic reality-checks upon how to bring stability and security to Europe. It shapes the period from the origins of the European security strategies till the new era of the EU presented by EU Global Strategy in 2016. The article questions weather the political will is deeply essential for the EU to remain solid tackling economic and political challenges. Therefore, the article is divided in two parts, namely: 1) the evolution of the EU security strategies; 2) the hybrid challenges for Europe shaped by EU Global Strategy. It is concluded that the EU should perceive the concept of the adaptability as pivotal in order to find credible and fit-for-purpose solutions and create the full-fledged EU Global Strategy. The latter still needs to be adapted to the civilian and integrated capabilities in order to become a real global strategy.
The European Union Global Strategy: What kind of foreign policy identity?
The International Spectator, 2017
Some dismiss the recent EU Global Strategy as a “triumph of hope over experience”, an impracticable and therefore ultimately irrelevant statement; others are enthusiastic about what they see as perseverance and renewed ambition in the face of the present crisis. Although the 2016 Strategy appears more modest than its 2003 predecessor in operational terms, the range of deliberations that fed into it and the quality of the document itself demonstrate a greater maturity of reflection on foreign policy. A critical reading of the document shows that concepts such as normative power and differentiated inclusion of neighbours in the EU’s system of governance have all but disappeared. The emerging EU identity appears to be debilitated by the centrifugal processes of internal contestation and a drastically downsized claim for external power projection. An alternative plan for action will have to deal with the Union’s vulnerabilities and carve out a role that is distinct, yet in line with this new self-understanding.