The Common Foreign and Security Policy of the EU – Fusion trends and future perspectives

2011 ◽  
pp. 396-417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elfriede Regelsberger ◽  
Mathias Jopp
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
Future Perspectives ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Eu

1. An Overview

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Wallace ◽  
Mark A. Pollack ◽  
Alasdair R. Young
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Sixth Edition ◽  
Eu Policy ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Common ◽  
Analytical Approaches ◽  
The Eu

This text examines the processes that produce policies in the European Union — that is, the decisions (or non-decisions) by EU public authorities facing choices between alternative courses of public action. It considers the broad contours of the EU policy-making process and relevant analytical approaches for understanding that process. It includes case studies dealing with the main policy domains in which the EU dimension is significant, including competition policy, the common agricultural policy (CAP), the economic and monetary union (EMU), enlargement, common foreign and security policy (CFSP), justice and home affairs (JHA), and energy and social policy. This chapter discusses the significant developments that have impacted EU policy-making since the sixth edition, summarizes the text’s collective approach to understanding policy-making in the EU, and provides an overview of the chapters that follow.

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.

The Jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in Respect of the Common Foreign and Security Policy

2006 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria-Gisella Garbagnati Ketvel
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Remedy ◽  
European Court ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Common ◽  
Limited Scope ◽  
The Eu

The purpose of this article is to consider the scope of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in the field of the Common Foreign and Security Policy, as set out in the Treaty on European Union. Pursuant to Article 46 TEU, the ECJ has virtually no competence over foreign policy and security matters—although some limited scope for judicial supervision may be derived from the combined effect of this provision with Article 47 TEU, which prevents encroachment by EU law on Community competence, with respect both to reviewing the choice of legal basis and to determining any violations of EC policy-making procedures. It is submitted that the absence of judicial control over the exercise of powers by the Union and its Member States in this area of potentially sensitive action does not guarantee the preservation of the institutional balance established by the EU Treaty. It may also prove incompatible for individuals to have a legal remedy in the event of a breach of directly effective CFSP provisions.

scholarly journals READINESS OF EUROPEAN COUNTRIES FOR THE RETURN OF FOREIGN FIGHTERS OF THE ISLAMIC STATE

2020 ◽  
pp. 87-106
Author(s):  
DENIS ČALETA ◽  
SARA PERKOVIĆ
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
European Security ◽  
Potential Threat ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
Knowing That ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Common ◽  
Foreign Fighters ◽  
The Eu

Povzetek V analizi smo želeli prikazati, ali so tuji borci resnično nevarni za evropsko varnost, saj vemo, da je morebitna grožnja vedno mogoča. Do zdaj je bilo zelo težko oceniti grožnjo vrnitve tujih borcev. V raziskavo smo vključili dve državi, v katerih so napade izvedli tuji borci, ki so se vrnili v državo. Vključeni državi sta bili Belgija in Francija. V raziskavi smo primerjali politiko posameznih držav s skupno zunanjo in varnostno politiko EU. Ugotavljali smo, kako se te države spoprijemajo z vrnitvijo tujih borcev in kateri ukrepi so bili glede tega sprejeti. Poleg tega smo poskušali oceniti, ali so bolj osredotočeni na pregon tujih borcev, ki se vračajo, ali je njihov poudarek na programih deradikalizacije in reintegracije. Ključne besede Tuji borci, terorizem, Islamska država, EU, zakonodaja. Abstract This analysis will consider whether foreign fighters pose a real danger to European security, knowing that the potential threat is always possible. Up to now, assessing the threat of returning foreign fighters has been very difficult. In this article we have attempted to analyze the attacks that have been carried out by returning foreign fighters in Belgium and France. Our research compared the politics of individual countries with the common foreign and security policy of the EU. We have investigated how these countries are dealing with the return of foreign fighters and what measures have been taken in this regard. In addition, we have tried to evaluate whether they are more focused on the prosecution of returning foreign fighters or whether their focus is connected with deradicalization and reintegration programmes. Key words Foreign fighters, terrorism, Islamic state, EU, legislation.

scholarly journals Intergovernmental Cooperation and the Idea of Community in the Institutional and Decision-making Sphere of the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 540-552
Author(s):  
Michal Piechowicz
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Institutional Structure ◽  
Evolutionary Development ◽  
Treaty Of Lisbon ◽  
Intergovernmental Cooperation ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Eu

The Treaty of Lisbon (TL) altered the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) not only in its institutional structure, but also in its function and decision making processes. These changes affected the competences of member states, other authorities, and their relationships. They also influenced the prospects for intergovernmental cooperation and the evolutionary development of communitisation phenomena within this policy.

scholarly journals The Common Foreign and Security Policy

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hylke Dijkstra ◽  
Sophie Vanhoonacker
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Foreign Policy ◽  
Area Of Interest ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Eu

The member states of the European Union (EU) coordinate, define, and implement foreign policy in the context of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). This policy area, often referred to as EU foreign policy, has a broad scope covering all areas of foreign policy and all questions relating to security and defense. The CFSP is supported by a unique institutional framework, in which member states diplomats and officials from the EU institutions jointly make policy. It is led by the High Representative, who is the “face and voice” of EU foreign policy, and supported by the substantial European External Action Service and 140 EU delegations in other countries and international organizations. Because foreign policy is normally the business of sovereign states, the exceptional nature of the CFSP has long been a subject of inquiry. The CFSP has particularly puzzled advocates of the traditional theories of European integration and international relations, who have failed to appreciate what the EU does in the field of high politics. Given the absence of formal diplomatic recognition and a strong reliance on the resources of the member states, the EU is still not a full-fledged actor, yet it has a strong international presence nonetheless. Its presence and the gradual increase in “actorness” have also raised questions about whether the EU presents a different type of actor, a civilian or normative power, which derives its influence from non-traditional sources of power. Under the assumption that the EU has some actorness, the Europeanization of foreign policy has become an area of interest. Member states can act through the EU structure to achieve more impact internationally, can adjust national foreign policy on the basis of EU positions, and are socialized into greater European coordination. The relationship between national and EU foreign policy is thus a significant topic of debate. Finally, governance perspectives increasingly provide insight into the organization of the CFSP. How the member states and the EU institutions collectively coordinate, define, and implement EU foreign policy is not only an important question in itself but also matters for policy outcomes.

scholarly journals The EU Battlegroups (EUBGs) – a successful story or a paper tiger?

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (68) ◽  
pp. 106-127
Author(s):  
Beatrica Šmaguc
Keyword(s):  
Significant Role ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Added Value ◽  
European Security ◽  
Member States ◽  
Defence Policy ◽  
The World ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Eu

Abstract After decades of reliance upon NATO in security matters, the EU ought to develop security assets of its own in order to protect its interests and citizens. The Common Foreign and Security Policy as an expression of EU readiness and willingness to play a more significant role in security matters on the international stage led to the creation of the European Security and Defence Policy, thus putting at the EU’s disposal civilian and military capabilities for dealing with the crisis spots around the world. The EUBG concept originated with the first member states’ pledges in November 2004 which gave added value to the EU in the security and defence area, at least on paper, while so far no EUBG has been deployed in the theatre of operations.

17. The European Union’s Foreign, Security, and Defence Policies

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Dover ◽  
Anna Maria Friis Kristensen
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
Maastricht Treaty ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
Political Cooperation ◽  
Defence Policy ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Common Security

This chapter examines the European Union's foreign, security, and defence policies. It begins with a discussion of the intergovernmental Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), established by virtue of the Maastricht Treaty, focusing in particular on the role of the member states and the EU institutions in the development of the policy. The forerunner to the CFSP was the European political cooperation. The chapter then considers the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP), created by the Lisbon Treaty, and the gradual militarization of the EU. It concludes with an analysis of the range of military and civilian CSDP missions that the EU has undertaken to date.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document