scholarly journals Conflict-Generating Potential of Brexit: National, Regional, and Global Dimensions

2020 ◽  
pp. 803-821
Author(s):  
Andrii Hrubinko

The article presents the research findings on a set of challenges and threats to the national and international order that have arisen as a result of Brexit. As far as the author is concerned, Brexit has not only a significant conflict-generating impact on British realities but also causes tremendous challenges and threats to international security. The means of preventing and addressing these challenges are far from obvious and are yet to be fully developed. Most of the challenges, just like the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, have a negative impact on Ukraine’s international status and prospects in the global arena, particularly with regard to European integration and counter the Russian aggression. The regional, or all-European, implications of Brexit are manifested in rising Euroskepticism, pervasive disintegration (nationalist) sentiments in EU member states, heavy image losses of European integration in general and the EU in particular as its principal outcome, weakened abilities of the EU in the strategically important sphere of foreign and security policy, the slowdown in the fundamental process of EU enlargement, and a significant realignment of political forces in the union. The global implications of Brexit consist in the EU’s weakened international standing, the enhanced process of reviewing EU-US relations, a new, almost unprecedented, technological level of information propaganda, and a rapprochement of the EU and Russia. The historical and modern trends analysed permit a preliminary conclusion on who will ultimately benefit most from the completion of Brexit and the UK’s permanent withdrawal from the EU, which has become a part of the regional and global struggle for influence in international relations. Keywords: Brexit, Great Britain, European Union, European integration, conflict-generating potential, international relations.

2018 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-27
Author(s):  
Goran Nikolic

The most important part of the economic cooperation between Serbia and the EU, in addition to the inflow of foreign direct investments, loans, remittances (and donations), which predominantly come from the EU countries, is the exchange of goods and services. From 2000 there has been significant growth of trade between Serbia and the EU; merchandise exports and imports increased at double-digit rates over the past 16 and half years. In the same period, the share of EU in Serbian trade has not significantly changed, except for the effects of the three EU enlargement (2004, 2007, 2013), and is almost two-thirds. Having in mind that the countries of CEFTA, excluding Moldova, is likely to join the EU in the next decade, it is clear that the importance of trade with the EU would increase, at least nominally. In the last European Commission staff working document (2016) for Serbia is emphasized that the new government programme included Serbia's EU accession as a priority goal. Besides that, Serbia is only moderately prepared in the area of public administration reform. According to this report, Serbia will need to align its foreign and security policy progressively with the European Union's common foreign and security policy in the period up to accession. The EU is a key strategic partner of Serbia because of its huge global economic, technological and political significance. The EU is not just a very important partner, it is, in a way, a reference point for Serbia, as the modernization of the country, which is a natural priority for Serbian elites, is virtually inseparable from European integration and full membership in the EU.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-82
Author(s):  
Hayman A. Hma Salah

This article explores major theoretical approaches to the study of European integration, European Union (EU) as a global power, and the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy. The argument presented here is that only a combination of both International Relations and European integration approaches will allow us to understand the very premises of the European integration project in terms of both internal and external – international-aspects. This approach will be complementary to the attempts by researchers those who call to mainstream European studies and an appeal in favor of abounding the project of conceptualizing the EU as a single case or as being Sui generis. This article argues that, despite serious attempts by scholars of the field of European studies, it seems difficult to theorize European integration. The established literature to the existing political entities seems less relevant to study EU due to the union’s unique identity. Theories of EU integration are unable to explain or predict the process of integration, but they are normally outpaced by events.


Author(s):  
Christopher Hill ◽  
Michael Smith ◽  
Sophie Vanhoonacker

This edition examines the contexts in which the European Union has reflected and affected major forces and changes in international relations (IR) by drawing on concepts such as balance of power, multipolarity, multilateralism, interdependence, and globalization. It explores the nature of policymaking in the EU's international relations and the ways in which EU policies are pursued within the international arena. Topics include the EU's role in the global political economy, how the EU has developed an environmental policy, and how it has attempted to graft a common defence policy onto its generalized foreign and security policy. This chapter discusses the volume's methodological assumptions and considers three perspectives on IR and the EU: the EU as a subsystem of IR, the EU and the processes of IR, and the EU as a power in IR. It also provides an overview of the chapters that follow.


Author(s):  
Richard Maher

Abstract What are the prospects and likely future direction of European integration? Will it be marked by resilience and perhaps even deepening integration among European Union (EU) member states, or will it encounter further instability that could lead to fragmentation and disintegration? The answers to these questions are currently unknown but are important not just for the citizens and countries of the EU but for world politics more broadly. Scholars and other observers have advanced a range of arguments to answer these questions, many of which are derived from the three mainstream theoretical paradigms of contemporary International Relations (IR): realism, liberalism, and constructivism. These arguments reveal disagreement both within and across paradigms over the question of the EU's future. While it is commonly thought that realists are generally pessimistic and liberals and constructivists broadly optimistic regarding the EU's future prospects, it is possible to identify arguments derived from liberal IR theory that the EU faces possibly fatal challenges and realists who see powerful reasons for the EU to stick together, while there are constructivists who think it can go either way. There are thus six basic positions on the future of the EU derived from IR theory. This paper identifies and evaluates a broad range of causal forces that will affect the future of European integration. The paper concludes by discussing the enduring role and value of theory in the study of international relations.


2016 ◽  
pp. 122-131
Author(s):  
A. Martynov

The article considers the two vectors of the European integration process: closer integration among the EU member states and regionalization of the EU countries according to the criteria of close neighbourhood or deep cooperation. The author traces  development trends of regional cooperation of the EU member states at different stages of development of international relations i.e. the impact of the EU enlargement on regionalization process, competition and confrontation with Russia, the  complications in the field of European integration due to the negative outcome of the Dutch referendum on  ratification of the Association Agreement between the EU and Ukraine, as well as the British referendum on withdrawal from the EU. It is stressed that  the interregional cooperation  is particularly important at this critical stage  of European integration.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (2/2021) ◽  
pp. 29-44
Author(s):  
Milan Igrutinovic

Over the last decade the EU has faced challenges on numerous fronts: economic crisis and slow recovery, refugee crisis, terrorism, Brexit, lack of effectiveness of its foreign and security policy. In recent years, the EU has put new effort to define its purpose and standing in international relations, and it seeks to become strategically autonomous actor. That means an actor with the ability to set priorities and make decisions. As the role of the United States is still pre-eminent in the security of Europe, the EU-US relations have a special bearing on that EU’s ambition. In this paper we provide an overview of the relations between these two actors with the focus on the first year of Joseph Biden presidency, and we argue that through a complex interaction the EU will seek to define its policies independently of the United States, wishing to expand its space for maneuver and action.


Author(s):  
Simon Bulmer ◽  
Owen Parker ◽  
Ian Bache ◽  
Stephen George ◽  
Charlotte Burns

This chapter examines the European Union’s (EU’s) Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). It tells the story of increasing co-operation between member states on foreign policy matters, first with European Political Co-operation (EPC) and, since the 1990s, with CFSP and a Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). The chapter highlights the internal dynamics and external events that drove the member states towards such co-operation and considers the most recent example of such efforts: the 2017 attempt to create a system of permanent structured co-operation (PESCO). However, it is noted that the EU remains far from having a truly supranational foreign policy and there remains a reluctance from member states to push much further integration, given states’ keen desire to remain sovereign in this area. Finally, the chapter considers the EU’s status as a ‘power’ in international relations, noting that it has diminished in important respects since 2003, but remains an important economic power.


Author(s):  
LILIANA BROŽIČ

The end of this year, more precisely 13 December, will mark the first anniversary of the initiation of PESCO. The acronym PESCO is derived from the English name Permanent Security Cooperation. The objective of PESCO is to deepen defence cooperation of EU Member States (EU) in the development of common defence capabilities, joint projects and operational readiness as well as military contribution. In its early beginnings, the EU devoted most of its attention to the economic progress of its member states, which was a very logical goal in the decade following the end of World War II. Later on, the rudiments of security and defence appeared in the form of the Western European Union, Common Foreign and Security Policy and the like. Until the start of war in the former Yugoslavia, the EU did not have a serious need or reason to particularly focus on security. Security policy was just one of the policies that had mainly been present on paper and in various debates. This became particularly obvious in the case of the intensive developments in the Balkans. This case very well tested the functioning of the EU and revealed the need for fundamental changes. One of the results was also an increased engagement in the field of international operations and missions: an observation mission in Georgia, a police and the rule of law mission in Kosovo, mission to assist in the aftermath of a tsunami in Indonesia, a counter-piracy mission in Somalia, and a mission protecting refugees in Mali. The second key milestone in the EU's security and defence engagement was the European migration crisis in 2015. Here, the lack of appropriate policies at the EU level became most evident. More precisely, it revealed the contradictory application of the policies within the EU to member states and their citizens, and to those other countries and their inhabitants who do not benefit from the high values, ethical standards and social advantages when they arrive in unimaginably large numbers. Before the important EU bodies met, consulted, decided and acted, many problems in different areas had been identified. One of the key issues was the security problem. However, there were still many other influences that gave rise to the creation of PESCO. They are discussed by the authors in this issue. Nevertheless, let me just mention that the EU has in some way found itself at a turning point due to the increasingly present Euroscepticism, which was also discussed at this year’s Strategic Forum at Bled.


Author(s):  
Liudmyla Adashys ◽  
Polina Trostianska

The article analyzes the stages of formation of the common foreign and security policy of the Eu-ropean Union. The main events and decisions of world leaders that influenced the formation of the general idea of the world community about the common foreign and security policy are considered. The paper focuses on the constant desire of the European community to agree on the creation of a single effective mechanism for a common foreign and security policy of the EU. Although, in the initial stages of integration, the countries of the «European six» failed to initiate integration in the defense and political spheres. Integration continued to develop in other areas, and European countries and their leaders took new steps to converge in the regulation of the common security policy. The positive and negative consequences of each step of the evolution and formation of the common foreign and security policy of the European Union, as well as the reaction of EU member states and other leading countries to them are highlighted. The current global events that have a significant impact on the mechanism of implementation of EU security policy are analyzed. The opinions of scientists and practitioners, European and world leaders on the implementation of common foreign and security policy are studied. It has been proved that Ukraine, as the leader of the Eastern Partnership, needs to improve its status, use security issues to work out joint decisions on a closer military partnership between it and the EU countries.


1997 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martine Fouwels

The dispute between the European Union (EU) Member States which broke out over the EU resolution on human rights abuses in China during the 1997 session of the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) in Geneva focused attention on the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). The present article offers a comprehensive review of the functioning of this institution in the field of the promotion and protection of human rights since the coming into force of the Treaty on European Union in November 1993. 1


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document