Shaping the EU Global Strategy

Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Nathalie Tocci
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Revecca Pedi

The European Global Strategy (EUGS) is a significant document that came out at a critical time. Decision makers and scholars need to identify and assess the challenges the EU is facing in its effort to pursue its new Strategy. This paper addresses the lack of a tool for identifying those challenges and assessing the EU's ability to respond to them by introducing a new analytical framework based on the conceptualization of the EU as a small power in the international system, and the literature about the international relations of small states. The framework combines the factors that impact upon a small state's behaviour and performance in the international system and consists of the following elements: a) the EU's relations with the great powers in the system, b) developments in the EU's neighbourhood, c) the EU's politics, and d) the EU's reputation. After discussing each one of them, the paper contributes a comprehensive assessment of the EU's ability to implement its Strategy. It concludes that in order to implement its Strategy, the EU should respond to specific challenges. Therefore, the framework this paper introduces can improve our understanding of both the EUGS and the Union's strengths and weaknesses, shed some light on what measures should be taken for the Union to respond to challenges that lie ahead and be used as a yardstick to assess the Union's progress. Moreover, the framework can be applied to other areas of the EU's external action and contribute to both drafting better informed strategic documents and supporting their implementation.


2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 402-413 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mai’a K. Davis Cross
Keyword(s):  

In this issue of the Contemporary Military Challenges, we focus on the relations between the European Union and NATO in the field of security. On 1 June 2021, NATO Foreign Ministers met in Brussels to discuss the details of the NATO Summit to be held on 14 June 2021 in Brussels, Belgium; the period, which coincides with the publication of this thematic issue. Twenty foreign ministers represented NATO member states, which are also EU members, making an event such as the NATO summit all the more important for the future of European security. Many topics were mentioned at the ministerial, such as Afghanistan, Belarus, Russia and China. In general, however, the emphasis was put on the fact that NATO should adapt to new challenges, security settings in a highly competitive environment. As mentioned by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, we are presented with a number of challenges to our security that we need to tackle together, because no country and no continent can deal with them alone. This includes strengthening the existing partnerships and building new ones, including in the Asia-Pacific, Africa, and Latin America. The participants also discussed the stepping up of training and capability building for partners, as well as work to address the security impact of climate change. In the conclusion, the ministers broadly agreed that it was important to start work on NATO's next Strategic Concept, because our strategic environment has significantly changed since 2010. Secretary General underlined that NATO’s future adaptation would require Allies to continue investing in defence, and to invest more together, as a force multiplier and a strong message of unity and resolve. During Donald Trump’s mandate as President of the United States, the fact that the European Union or its Member States pay too little attention and thus resources for their own defence has often been a hot topic of political debate. In 2016, a year before the US President Trump took office, the European Union adopted a Global Strategy which envisaged several options to strengthen the Common Security and Defence Policy, which we will discuss in further detail in the next issue of the Contemporary Security Challenges. The Global Strategy provided that the European Defence Fund, the Permanent Structured Cooperation, the Coordinated Annual Review on Defence, and other existing and new mechanisms would operate in such a way that activities, resources and capabilities would not duplicate with NATO’s, but would complement each other. True enough that, within the Common Security and Defence Policy, the European Union has already foreseen many activities at its meetings and in the adopted documents in terms of strengthening this policy, but later implemented little. Has anything changed in this area in the past four years, or will perhaps something change at the time of the conference on the European future? Just as the Alliance is planning a new strategic concept, the European Union is announcing a Strategic Compass, which will set new directions for future cooperation, also in the field of security. In this issue, the authors present how the cooperation between the European Union and NATO is taking place in 2021 in some areas of security. The article titled EU-NATO cooperation and the Slovenian presidency of the Council of the European Union by Marko Mahnič presents an interesting thesis on whether obstacles to the coherent functioning of the European Union and North Atlantic Treaty Organization in the field of common security and defence are of a purely technical nature, or are there maybe differences in the policies, bilateral relations and national ambitions of certain countries. Damjan Štrucl writes about the EU-NATO partnership and ensuring information security and cybersecurity: theory and practice. According to him, the development of information and communication technology and new challenges of the modern security environment have led to the signing of the Joint Declaration on deepening the strategic partnership between both organizations in 2016. The author provides an analysis of the EU-NATO strategic partnership in ensuring security and defence in the modern security environment. Defence initiatives to strengthen the security of the European Union motivated Gregor Garb to write an article presenting what the 2016 European Union Global Strategy contributed to the EU’s strategic defence autonomy. Initially, in a theoretical sense, and after five years in a practical sense. All of course, given the fact that the European Union will continue to maintain strong relations and cooperation with the North Atlantic Alliance. David Humar and Nina Raduha present the process of creating the Military Strategy of the Republic of Slovenia in the Slovenian Armed Forces. Changes in the international environment have initiated security-related strategic considerations of NATO and the European Union. Slovenia as a member of both organizations also needs a strategic consideration in both military and security fields. Their article provides more details about the The process of devising the Military Strategy of the Republic of Slovenia. Tackling irregular migration in Europe is a topic addressed by Miklós Böröcz. Ever since 2015, the then mass illegal migration has posed a major problem for Europe and the European Union. The mass refugee crisis has gradually transformed into illegal migrations of individuals and small groups, who have maintained and strengthened contact with everybody along the way, who take part in this and ensure that the migration flow with of illegal character does not subside. The author provides some solutions to this problem.


2019 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-49
Author(s):  
Maja Kovacevic

The European Union (EU) is a unique player in the Western Balkans, where it has employed a wide array of foreign policy instruments since the 1990s such as diplomacy, trade, financial assistance, civilian missions, military missions, and enlargement, which is the EU?s most successful foreign policy tool. The region is an inspiring case for studying the EU?s transformative power. The undeniable success of the EU?s Enlargement Policy in influencing transitions of Central and Eastern Europe countries has inspired research of the Europeanization, or the EU?s transformative power in relation to candidate countries, and its impact on their political and economic reforms during the accession process. Since then, the EU?s global transformative power has been in crisis. The European Neighbourhood Policy was reviewed in 2015, aiming not any more towards the transformation of neighbouring states, but rather at fostering their resilience. Similarly, the 2016 Global Strategy for the European Union?s Foreign and Security Policy set the principled pragmatism as a guideline. Moreover, the EU?s transformative power towards member states is questioned after two initiatives to trigger Article 7 TEU procedures against Poland and Hungary. What about the Europeanization of the Western Balkans? Despite the fact that the EU has been the main driver of change, the Europeanization of this post-conflict region has been slow. According to Freedom House, after substantial progress from 2004 to 2010, the Western Balkans has declined six years in a row, and its average Democracy Score in 2016 is the same as it was in 2004. With the exception of Albania, the scores of all countries are declining, not improving. The EU?s security-democratisation dilemma strongly affects its transformative power in the Western Balkans. By prioritising effective government rather than democratic governance, the EU has helped stabilise non-democratic and corrupt regimes rather than transforming them, legitimising Balkan "stabilitocrats".


2021 ◽  
pp. 261-286
Author(s):  
Yuliya Miadzvetskaya

According to the 2016 EU Global Strategy (EUGS), today's world is characterized by an increased strategic competition and rising threats to multilateralism and a rules-based order. In this fast-evolving environment, the EU has shifted from its traditional Þ-U+201C-Þvalues-basedÞ-U+201D-Þ approach in foreign policy to a Þ-U+201C-Þprincipled pragmatismÞ-U+201D-Þ. This holds that the EU should solidify relations with countries with shared values, while also engaging strategically with rivals. The EU's goal is to protect its strategic interests in the world marked by the US-China rivalry, a confrontational relationship with the Trump administration, and Russia's growing ambitions in their shared neighborhood. The present chapter examines some aspects of the EU's efforts to secure its autonomy in an emergent terrain for international competition: cyberspace. The analysis will begin with an explanation of the broader context for the EU's approach to cybersecurity, which should be understood as part of the Union's longstanding pursuit of Þ-U+201C-Þstrategic autonomyÞ-U+201D-Þ in an increasingly competitive geopolitical environment. It then offers a description of deterrence theory and its application to cyberspace, before turning to the development of the EU Cyber Diplomacy toolbox and targeted restrictive measures in response to cyberattacks. It will then seek to assess the deterrence potential of restrictive measures on the basis of some generic attributes of the concept of deterrence identified in rich theoretic contributions on deterrence theory and cyberspace. It concludes that while sanctions might appear to be ineffective and non-aligned with the operational characteristics of the cyber domain, their potential for establishing good practices should not be discarded. They should instead be used as a vehicle for promoting and informing the international discourse on the norms of responsible state behavior in cyberspace.


Author(s):  
Edoardo Baldaro ◽  
Irene Costantini

Abstract The article takes fragility and resilience as distinct policy paradigms, and proposes a structured, focused comparison of how they informed and changed the EU approach to conflict and crisis management in time. The first section provides a cumulative synthesis of the debate on fragility and resilience in the international and European security discourse and practice on the background of which their comparison is built. By analysing the founding documents respectively endorsing fragility and resilience in the European context, namely the 2003 European Security Strategy and the 2016 European Union Global Strategy in addition to the existing literature on these topics, the two paradigms are examined in terms of (1) what understanding of the international system they advance; (2) where they identify the locus of the threat; (3) which role they attribute to the international community (4) and the type of solutions they proposed. In accordance with our results, we conclude that the two paradigms are not in competition, since they emerged from and reflected a contingent shift in global and local environments. Moreover, rather than providing a novel lens to better look at conflict and crisis situation, resilience is found to offer more insights into the EU's perception of its role in these contexts.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document