The emergence of the European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) in the last two-thirds of the 1990s and continuing into the new century, has been a complex process intertwining politics, economics, national cultures, and numerous institutions. This book provides an essential background for understanding how security issues as between NATO and the European Union are being posed for the early part of the 21st century, including the new circumstances following the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington on September 11, 2001. This study should be of interest to those interested in the evolution of U.S.-European relations, especially in, but not limited to, the security field; the development of institutional relationships; and key choices that lie ahead in regard to these critical arrangements.
Seminar paper from the year 2005 in the subject Politics - Topic: European Union, grade: 1,0, Free University of Berlin (Otto-Suhr-Institut), course: The Evolution of European Security Institutions, language: English, abstract: In the space of a few years, the EU has made more progress on developing its European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) than in the previous forty years of European integration. This has occurred despite the fact that four EU member states that are historically “neutral”, i.e. they are not members of NATO and are merely observers (not members) of WEU. Namely, these states are Austria, Finland, Ireland and Sweden (henceforth: EU neutrals). Many of the ESDP measures (unanimously!) adopted by the EU seem incompatible with such neutrality policies. How, then, has it been possible for ESDP to evolve so significantly since 1997 in light of the fact that the Union must accommodate the concerns of the EU neutrals? In this paper, I argue that ESDP has been able to develop so rapidly because it has been crafted so as to allow for the participation of Austria, Finland, Ireland and Sweden without jeopardizing their neutrality policies. Specifically, this means that ESDP has adopted solely functions that reflect the preferences of EU neutral states – a preference that ESDP encompass matters concerning “security and defence cooperation”, whilst excluding a “common defence”. Thus my independent variable is the preferences of neutral states for ESDP. My dependent variable are the institutional functions that ESDP adopted between 1997 and 2004, as reflected in actual policy agreed upon by the European Council. I limit my investigation to a case study of the Irish government’s preferences for ESDP functions in relation to several specific instances of ESDP evolution (European Council meetings and Intergovernmental Conferences). My paper proceeds as follows: The first section specifies my explanatory factor – the preferences of neutral states for ESDP – and draws on rationalist institutionalist theory to lay out my hypothesis that ESDP will only encompass those functions the neutral states favour. The second section discusses the operationalisation of the independent and dependent variables and presents the data sources to be used. In the third section, I engage in the case study analysis of Irish influence on ESDP. The fourth section summarises the findings, discusses the strengths and shortcomings of my study and rationalist institutionalism’s application to it.
In 1999 the EU decided to develop its own military capacities for crisis management. This book brings together a group of experts to examine the consequences of this decision on Nordic policy establishments, as well as to shed new light on the defence and security issues that matter for Europe as a whole.
In this new Brookings Marshall Paper, Michael O'Hanlon argues that now is the time for Western nations to negotiate a new security architecture for neutral countries in eastern Europe to stabilize the region and reduce the risks of war with Russia. He believes NATO expansion has gone far enough. The core concept of this new security architecture would be one of permanent neutrality. The countries in question collectively make a broken-up arc, from Europe's far north to its south: Finland and Sweden; Ukraine, Moldova, and Belarus; Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan; and finally Cyprus plus Serbia, as well as possibly several other Balkan states. Discussion on the new framework should begin within NATO, followed by deliberation with the neutral countries themselves, and then formal negotiations with Russia. The new security architecture would require that Russia, like NATO, commit to help uphold the security of Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, and other states in the region. Russia would have to withdraw its troops from those countries in a verifiable manner; after that, corresponding sanctions on Russia would be lifted. The neutral countries would retain their rights to participate in multilateral security operations on a scale comparable to what has been the case in the past, including even those operations that might be led by NATO. They could think of and describe themselves as Western states (or anything else, for that matter). If the European Union and they so wished in the future, they could join the EU. They would have complete sovereignty and self-determination in every sense of the word. But NATO would decide not to invite them into the alliance as members. Ideally, these nations would endorse and promote this concept themselves as a more practical way to ensure their security than the current situation or any other plausible alternative.
This book examines the development of cooperation between the EU and NATO, two key non-state actors in the European security architecture. The work examines the relationship between the EU and NATO by focusing on the perspective of member states. Highlighting the relevance of member states’ role in shaping EU-NATO relations, it conceptualises interorganisational cooperation and develops a typology of member states based on four types: advocates, blockers, balancers and neutrals. To apply this typology and analyse member states’ specific roles, the analysis considers their foreign and security policy orientations, bilateral relationships with other member states, and contributions to both military operations, and division of labour between the two organisations. The book also examines states’ use of political strategies -- such as forum-shopping, hostage-taking and brokering -- that influence the design, evolution and practicalities of cooperation between the EU and NATO. This book will be of much interest to students of European Security and Defence Policy, international organisations, and security studies in general.
This book examines the effects of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) of the European Union (EU) on the national foreign policies of Ireland and Austria. Small and neutral EU member states provide a fascinating case-study as the CFSP entails a dilemma for them. Their size may create assumptions that they are more likely to adopt EU policy, yet the traditional position of neutrality may act contrary to Europeanization. By concentrating on this side of the reciprocal relationship between EU and national foreign policy, the book takes a new and innovative approach to investigate prospects for a common European foreign policy, and goes beyond an examination of changes in the national foreign policies of Ireland and Austria to provide an engaging explanation and understanding of Europeanization. Based on a comprehensive conceptual framework, this text investigates three dimensions of national foreign policy; the Europeanization of foreign policy-making, the Europeanization of foreign policy substance and effects on neutrality, to create an accessible and informed insight into the evolution of European cooperation in the field of foreign policy, and the impact on national foreign policy. EU Foreign Policy and the Europeanization of Neutral States will be of interest to students and scholars of European Studies, International Relations and Foreign Policy.
The emergence of a common security and foreign policy has been one of the most contentious issues accompanying the integration of the European Union. In this book, Michael Smith examines the specific ways foreign policy cooperation has been institutionalized in the EU, the way institutional development affects cooperative outcomes in foreign policy, and how those outcomes lead to new institutional reforms. Smith explains the evolution and performance of the institutional procedures of the EU using a unique analytical framework, supported by extensive empirical evidence drawn from interviews, case studies, official documents and secondary sources. His perceptive and well-informed analysis covers the entire history of EU foreign policy cooperation, from its origins in the late 1960s up to the start of the 2003 constitutional convention. Demonstrating the importance and extent of EU foreign/security policy, the book will be of interest to scholars, researchers and policy-makers.
European countries work together in crisis management, conflict prevention and many other aspects of security and defence policy. Closer cooperation in this policy arena seems to be the only viable way forward to address contemporary security challenges. Yet, despite the repeated interaction, fundamental assumptions about security and defence remain remarkably distinct across European nations. This book offers a comparative analysis of the security and defence policies of all 27 EU member states and Turkey, drawing on the concept of ‘strategic culture’, in order to examine the chances and obstacles for closer security and defence cooperation across the continent. Along the lines of a consistent analytical framework, international experts provide case studies of the current security and defence policies in Europe as well as their historical and cultural roots.
