The New Europe

The Europeanization of European Security

 

Can the Europeans go it alone?  Protect themselves  (from what?  whom?)

 

Police themselves (settle ÒinternalÓ conflicts)

 

Foreign and Security Policy in the European Union

 

Probably the least successful area of EU activity

 

Why?

 

The nature of the beast

 

Acting collectively involves coordinating the foreign policies of 27 countries

 

Even in 1991, during first Yugoslav crisis (Bosnian War), EU 15 languished in inaction

 

CFSP (Common Foreign and Security Policy)

Pillar Two in the Maastricht Treaty (Treaty of the European Union, 1992)

 

Decision-making:  inter-governmental (not supra-national)

 

Sovereignty/decision-making still resides at the nation-state level

 

Decisions made by the Foreign Ministers of each country meeting as the Council of the European Union (General Affairs and External Relations, see Ginsberg, 177; and Cottey, 82)

 

A Plethora of other EU institutions also involved (discourse, investigation, persuasion, policy formulation):

 

     1.  European Council (i.e. heads of government; meet every 6 mos.)

 

     2.  The General Affairs and External Relations Council (i.e., the foreign ministers; meet regularly);

 

     3.  Council of Permanent Representatives (COREPER) (i.e., national ambassadors to the EU in Brussels);

 

4.        The Political and Security Committee (PSC or COPS in French; estÕd in Nice Treaty; composed of ambassadorial level reps responsible for security and defense);

 

5.        High Representative for the CFSP (estÕd in the AmsterdamTreaty; would have become Foreign Minister for the EU under the proposed 2007 constitution;)

 

6.      Policy Planning and Early Warning Unit

 

COMPLEX!!!

 

 

Two Models of Foreign Policy (vis a vis the US)

 

Euro-Atlanticism

 

 

Euro-Gaullism

 

 

What countries are associated with each view?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Euro-Atlanticism

The UK

Portugal

Denmark

Central Eastern Europe

thus, enlargement complicated an already complicated picture

2 Examples 

2003 Iraq invasion

Chirac says that CE Òmissed a good opportunity to shut upÓ

2008 Poland agrees to missile defense system

 

Euro-Gaullism

France

Belgium

Luxembourg

 

In between (emphasizing both close relationship with US and developing the capacity of Europe to act independently)

Germany

Netherlands

Italy

Spain

Greece

 

 

**Agreement among the ÒBig ThreeÓ

(the UK, France and Germany) essential to CFSP

 

EuropeÕs Center of Gravity

 

 

Divisions within Countries

Which political parties tend to be more Euro-Atlanticist? (87)

 

Why?

 

Which tend to be more Euro-Gaullist? (87)

 

Why?

 

 

Other Factors:

How does the foreign policy approach of US presidential administrations affect EuropeÕs leanings in either the Euro-Atlanticist or Euro-Gaullist directions (87)?

 

US ÒWar on TerrorÓ

Pushed Europe in a more Euro-Gaullist direction

Why?

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

 

Neighborhood Politics (Cottey, 88-92)

Formula to influence neighbors

     Political dialogue

     Economic aid

     Technical assistance

    

With ÒconditionalityÓ

     i.e., if you do these things, you can become a member

 

 

It worked in CE Europe

     The Copenhagen Criteria (1993)

     Develop stable democracies

     Functioning market economies

     Be able to cope with competition of EU Internal market

     Adapt to/adopt the EUÕs rules/laws, i.e., the acquis communautaire

 

 

Where else is it likely to work?

 

Where wonÕt it work?

    

A Global Role for the EU (Cottey, 92-94)

      2003 European Security Strategy

In a world of global threats, global markets and global media, our security and prosperity increasingly depend on an effective multilateral system.  The development of a stronger international society, well functioning international institutions and a rule-based international order is our objective (as cited in Cottey, 92)

 

Comments

      What strikes you about this quote, its language, aims?

      How is it different from US foreign policy statements?

      Note the timing, 2003

 

Tools:

      Bi-lateral relations

      Inter-regional cooperation

      Global institution building, support, participation in

      Conflict prevention and crisis management

 

 

What is the biggest obstacle to the EU playing a stronger role in global security?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its size – hard to get consensus, action

Its ethos – waging peace harder than waging war?

The EU as the worldÕs morality/human rights police

The Myanmar example

 

 

 

A European Military? (Cottey, 94-96)

1999 agreed to develop a Common European Security and Defense Policy (CESDP)

the union must have the capacity for autonomous action backed up by credible military forces, the means to decide to use them, and a readiness to do so (in Cottey, 95)

Helsinki Headline Goal

     By 2003

     Have ability to deploy 50,000-60,000 troops

     Within 60 days (some faster)

     Sustainable for a year

     Self-sustaining (in terms of command and control – i.e., outside of NATO); estÕd the PSC/COPS for this purpose plus EU Military Committee (EUMC) composed of member states Chiefs of Defense

 

Forces made up of national armed forces, so not a European army

 

First mission

     2003

     400 peacekeepers to Macedonia

 

     2004

     7000 troops took over peacekeeping in Bosnia from NATO

    

 

**softer types of operations EuropeÕs forte

 

     humanitarian aid, peacekeeping, nation-building

 

complementary to US?

 

Peacekeeping has its risks

 

Internal Security:  The EUÕs Area of Freedom, Justice and Security (Cottey, 97-99)

Schengen area (1985)

Hard external border, Òring fenceÓ

 

No internal borders

Originally 5 members (Fr, Ger, BeNeLux)

Now majority of EU are members

Not UK, Ireland

Plus non-EU members

     Iceland and Norway (Why?)

CE countries preparing to join

Unique challenges of Eastern border

 

Areas of cooperation:

     Asylum policy

     Border control

     Immigration policy

     Drug trafficking

     International fraud

     Judicial cooperation

     Customs cooperation

     Police operations in

Counter-terrorism

International crime

 

Some areas more successful than others

 

Which?

 

Why the foot dragging in other areas?

 

 

 

Ends chapter with this statement:

[T]he real foreign and security challenge for the EU is not so much that of co-ordinating policy per se, but whether it can mobilize the political will and material resources to develop effective responses to the security challenges of the 21st Century (Cottey, 101).

    

What would it take for Europe to do this?

 

Why would it?

 

On what basis?