scholarly journals WESTERN BALKANS U. S. POLICY IN THE CONTEXT OF THE PRESIDENT TRUMP’S GRAND STRATEGY

2019 ◽  
Vol 65 (3/2019) ◽  
pp. 13-42
Author(s):  
Dragan Simić ◽  
Dragan Živojinović
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Grand Strategy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Western Balkans ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
National Security Strategy ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Set Up

Many critics of Donald Trump argue that Donald Trump’s Grand Strategy is an absence of Grand Strategy or that his foreign and security policy is driven by impulses and tactical approach. However, such policy leaves us with practical consequences which mean that we have to follow this sort of a Donald Trump approach to foreign affairs and politics in general. The best guide in that sense would be the 2017 U. S. National Security Strategy idea of principled realism which is the most important written strategic statement of the Trump administration up to this date. If Trump’s approach “is guided by outcomes not ideology” and if “prosperity depend on strong, sovereign nations that respect their citizens at home and cooperate to advance peace abroad”, then the U. S. policy to Western Balkans has to be considered in that context. The Prespa agreement between Greece and North Macedonia is one form of that approach put in practice. Having in mind Belgrade–Pristina negotiations and Bosnia and Herzegovina’s future as well, the main thesis of this paper is that we may expect some kind of unusual approach from the United States to this region, different from the framework that was set up in the 1990s. That will have consequences both for the region and for the outside great powers, especially the European Union.

Parlamentarische Kontrolle durch Vernetzung? Eine kritische Analyse der Rolle der Interparlamentarischen Konferenz für die GASP/GSVP

IG ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 118-133
Author(s):  
Daniel Schade
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Value Added ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Parliaments ◽  
Defence Policy ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Common ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Eu

The Interparliamentary Conference for the Common Foreign and Security Policy and the Common Security and Defence Policy (IPC) is a new parliamentary body set up after the Treaty of Lisbon which allows to create interlinkages between parliaments in the European Union (EU). It is part of an ongoing process which aims to challenge the executive dominance in EU policy-making in general and in the EU’s foreign and security policy in particular. Considering its sessions and the experiences of members of parliaments partaking in the Interparliamentary Conference to date, this article analyses its value-added to this overarching goal. The experiences so far suggest that the IPC faces significant practical challenges in contributing to the parliamentary scrutiny of the policy areas concerned despite the fact that the format of interparliamentary gatherings is a significant innovation in its own right. These challenges arise primarily out of a conflict between the European Parliament and national parliaments in the EU, the diversity of national parliamentarism, as well as the differing moti⁠v­a⁠tions and skills of the participating members of parliaments.

Article 38 TEU

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Ramopoulos
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Common ◽  
Definition Of

Article 25 TEU Without prejudice to Article 240 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, a Political and Security Committee shall monitor the international situation in the areas covered by the common foreign and security policy and contribute to the definition of policies by delivering opinions to the Council at the request of the Council or of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy or on its own initiative. It shall also monitor the implementation of agreed policies, without prejudice to the powers of the High Representative.

scholarly journals Innovations in the foreign and security policy of the European Union after the Lisbon treaty

2010 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 397-417
Author(s):  
Zaklina Novicic
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
External Action ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Policy Success ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Pillar Structure ◽  
New Procedures

The article deals with institutional innovations introduced with Lisbon Treaty in the EU common foreign and security policy. The pillar structure of EU was abolished, but main features of intergovernmental decision-making procedures and unanimity would de facto remain. That is the main structural constrain of a single and bolder European outbreak an international scene. An novelty is the some kind of presidentialization (personalization) of the field in the new posts of President of European Council and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. New procedures and structures are introduced also in a realm of Common Security and Defense Policy. A special hope of Eurocrats are put on the ongoing process of setting up new European External Action Serves as de facto new diplomatic service of the Union. However, there is the main paradox of the Lisbon arrangement in that it is supposed to confirm integration through foreign policy success at a same time when Europe is divided over a number of domestic as well as foreign policy issues, and all that at a time of the manifold global financial and economic crises.

scholarly journals The main trends in the formation of the Great Britain’s foreign policy after Brexit

2021 ◽  
pp. 38-50
Author(s):  
Viktoriia Orlyk
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Consequences ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

The article deals with the peculiarities of forming the new trends in the British foreign policy, due to the results of the referendum on Brexit and the country’s withdrawal from the European Union. Formation of the strategic priorities for the UK foreign policy course is becoming one of the most important tasks for the political, diplomatic and expert circles. The refusal to develop a common foreign policy of the EU as a result of Brexit, sets the essential challenge for Britain: to maintain existing influence and allied relations with continental European states (primarily, due to the strengthening of bilateral relations and the preservation of the Euro-Atlantic alliance), and at the same time to establish itself as an independent center of influence, not limited to the collective will of the EU. The main provisions of the “Global Britain” concept, presented in 2016 as the doctrinal basis of the foreign policy dimension of Brexit, are analyzed. The most significant of them are the next: the promotion of the UK`s economic and security interests around the world as the basis of foreign and security policy; alliance with the United States as a major foreign policy and security priority; rethinking the partnership with the EU and giving it a new depth in the name of protecting the international order and common values; the development of cooperation within the Commonwealth to strengthen Britain’s international presence and global influence. The author identifies the key foreign policy positions of London, which are not reflected in the concept presently, but will be of key importance for the European and global securities in the short and medium terms. The positions of leading regional and world players are analyzed, the risks of aggravation of relations with Russia and China are assessed. It is summarized that because of the new global threats and risks (first of all COVID-19 pandemic and its global impact and economic consequences) the “Global Britain” concept is still in its forming.

8. External Powers

2021 ◽  
pp. 269-312
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
The European Union ◽  
External Relations ◽  
Legislative Branch ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
General Competence ◽  
Split Personality ◽  
External Powers ◽  
Constitutional Regime

This chapter explores the external competences and procedures of the European Union. Sadly, the Union here suffers from a ‘split personality’ because it has a split constitutional regime for foreign affairs. It has a general competence for its ‘Common Foreign and Security Policy’ (CFSP) within the TEU; and it enjoys various specific external powers within the TFEU. The chapter analyses each of these competences and their respective nature. It then looks at the procedural dimension of the external relations of the Union. How will the Union act, and which institutions need to cooperate for it to act? This depends on which of the two constitutional regimes applies. While the CFSP is still characterized by an ‘executive’ dominance, the procedures within the Union’s special external powers are closer to the ‘legislative’ branch. Finally, the chapter considers two constitutional safeguards regulating the exercise of shared external competences: mixed agreements and the duty of loyal cooperation.

8. External Powers

2021 ◽  
pp. 269-312
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
The European Union ◽  
External Relations ◽  
Legislative Branch ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
General Competence ◽  
Split Personality ◽  
External Powers ◽  
Constitutional Regime

This chapter explores the external competences and procedures of the European Union. Sadly, the Union here suffers from a ‘split personality’ because it has a split constitutional regime for foreign affairs. It has a general competence for its ‘Common Foreign and Security Policy’ (CFSP) within the TEU; and it enjoys various specific external powers within the TFEU. The chapter analyses each of these competences and their respective nature. It then looks at the procedural dimension of the external relations of the Union. How will the Union act, and which institutions need to cooperate for it to act? This depends on which of the two constitutional regimes applies. While the CFSP is still characterized by an ‘executive’ dominance, the procedures within the Union's special external powers are closer to the ‘legislative’ branch. Finally, the chapter considers two constitutional safeguards regulating the exercise of shared external competences: mixed agreements and the duty of loyal cooperation.

The United States on the Three Seas Initiative

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 79-92
Author(s):  
Adrian Chojan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Energy Policy ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Central And Eastern Europe ◽  
The United States ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The U.S

In this paper, the U.S. stance under the administration of President Donald Trump with regard to the Three Seas Initiative (TSI) is analysed. It shows the importance of Central and Eastern Europe in U.S. foreign and security policy, concluding that the Americans treat the TSI as an instrument for achieving their own goals, especially those in energy policy.

scholarly journals Allocating political attention in the EU’s foreign and security policy: The effect of supranational agenda-setters

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 634-656
Author(s):  
Frank M Häge
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Working Party ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Policy Agenda ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Policy Issues ◽  
Fine Grained ◽  
Collective Action Problems ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy

Supranational bureaucracies are often promoted as a solution to collective action problems. In the European Union context, investing the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy with new agenda-setting powers was expected to improve the coherence, continuity and efficiency of foreign policy-making. Relying on novel fine-grained and comprehensive data about the content and duration of working party meetings, the study maps and analyses the allocation of political attention to different foreign policy issues between 2001 and 2014. The results show that the empowerment of the High Representative by the Lisbon Treaty had little immediate effect on the Council’s foreign policy agenda. However, the study also indicates that this result might be due to a lack of capability and ambition rather than weak institutional prerogatives.

scholarly journals Is America safer today? The first changes to U.S. foreign and security policy during the presidency of Donald Trump

2017 ◽  
pp. 161-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ewelina Waśko-Owsiejczuk
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Political System ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Political ◽  
Current Policy ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
The World ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Impact

This article describes the first months of Donald Trump’s presidency. It presents his most important decisions on U.S. foreign and security policy, the voices of those critical and supportive of him, and possible implications for U.S. security. Even during his election campaign, some of Trump’s proposals raised concerns among the international community and many questions about past alliances. He has announced the introduction of laws for the immediate removal of illegal immigrants from the United States, and the reintroduction of torture as a tool for fighting terrorism. He has criticized the current policy of cooperation with allies, and the provision of security to other countries at the expense of the United States. The decisions made during Donald Trump’s first 100 days affect the internal situation of the United States, both in the context of national security and the political system, due to the emerging constitutional crisis and the friction between the executive and the judiciary branches. His decisions also affect relations between the United States and its allies, transforming America’s role in the world and the impact of the superpower on the collective system of security.

scholarly journals Earth Observation for Security and Defence: The European Union Satellite Centre Experience and Future Views

2020 ◽  
Vol 01 (02) ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
External Action ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Related Services ◽  
Satellite Centre ◽  
Defence Policy ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Common

The European Union Satellite Centre (SatCen) was founded in 1992 under the framework of the Western European Union. Today it is a Council agency of the European Union. It supports decision-making and actions under the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), in particular the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). It thus provides the European External Action Service, as well as European Union crisis management missions and operations, products and services based on the exploitation of relevant space assets and collateral data, including satellite and aerial imagery, and related services. The Centre, under the operational direction of the High Representative for the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Mrs Frederica Mogherini, is located in Torrejón de Ardoz, Spain. It has approximately 130 members of staff and a global budget of EUR 26 million.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document