File Name: debating european security and defense policy understanding the complexity .zip
Cookies are used to provide, analyse and improve our services; provide chat tools; and show you relevant content on advertising.
- Debating European Security and Defense Policy
- Debating European Security and Defense Policy : Understanding the Complexity
- European Defence – Debates in and about Poland and France
Larive questions whether there is such a thing as a European defense and security policy. This book analyzes the integration process by clearly illustrating to the reader the two sides of the argument in order to understand the complexity of the problems in the different stages of the creation and implementation of the European defense policy. In doing so, this study asks the question of why has the process been so halting and of such limited scope?
Debating European Security and Defense Policy
We must return to the front line. The CFSP is directly related to human rights, the rule of law, international law, and effective multilateralism. The common foreign and security policy CFSP is directly related to European values: human rights, the rule of law, international law, and effective multilateralism. However, the CFSP is also important at the internal level, as it facilitates cooperation among member states and creates more opportunities for inter-member consensus and compromise.
The EU, like all institutions, is defined by its actions. European foreign policy cannot continue to be a mere declaration of intent, a matter of secondary importance for which its member states are unwilling to relinquish one iota of their sovereignty.
We must decide where we want to go, what role we want to play in international affairs, and how to achieve those goals. But we also need to address something even more basic: we must agree on a definition of our common interests as a European Union.
When analysing European foreign policy from both the institutional and operational perspectives, we have to consider the characteristics of the present moment and the forecast for the future. The scenario has changed substantially since the early days of the European Union.
Many countries that have emerged in recent years already surpass the EU states in population, size, and economic growth. All of them want to participate in global decision-making processes and influence the course of world events. In this new context, European countries have to understand that, in order to be an international actor, the EU must act in unison and speak with one voice. If each member state acts individually, Europe will find itself relegated to the role of mere spectator in the arena of major world events, with neither the capacity nor the power to influence their outcome.
If each member state acts individually, Europe will find itself relegated to the role of mere spectator in the arena of major world events. Unfortunately, the task of materializing European foreign policy has proved to be quite complicated. The EU member states have very different historical backgrounds, and consequently their understanding of foreign policy varies widely. Geographical location is undoubtedly a key factor in defining the interests and agenda of each country, as are cultural and linguistic ties.
Some European states are permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, while others are more interested in handling their border problems. Getting so many different voices to sing the same tune is a task that requires a great deal of finesse as well as a strong commitment from each member. The channels and structures for developing European foreign policy have evolved since the ratification of the Maastricht Treaty, and the process is still underway.
We have already made great strides, especially since the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon, which expanded the mandate of the High Representative and the European Exterior Action Service, charged with representing the EU abroad. Nevertheless, we must continue working to achieve greater integration and a clearer sense of direction. At this point in time, international issues largely dominate the European political scene.
The EU has maintained relations with Ukraine since it became an independent state in Later, in , the EU and Ukraine began negotiations on the Association Agreement, a free trade treaty with a few political ramifications. However, ratification of the agreement was postponed after the case of former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko led to a diplomatic dispute. In , when everything was finally ready for the agreement to be signed at the Eastern Partnership Summit in Vilnius, President Yanukovych refused to ratify the treaty.
From that moment on, protests by citizens and the pro-European opposition against the Yanukovych government and its alignment with Moscow grew more frequent and intense. The diplomatic and economic crisis led to an escalation of violence and tension between pro-Russian and pro-European factions, with notorious consequences in Crimea and the eastern regions of Ukraine.
A few months later, the provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk proclaimed themselves independent republics, a decision which, according to the Kremlin, had to be respected. In this agreement, which planted the seed of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe OSCE , the participating states committed to respect the inviolability of frontiers, the territorial integrity of states, and non-intervention in internal affairs, among other principles.
Furthermore, in the Budapest Memorandum , the United States, the United Kingdom, and Russia specifically agreed to respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine, and in exchange Kiev gave up its nuclear weapons. For its part, the European Union has always desired to maintain good relations with Ukraine, though ideally without straining EU-Russian relations or being forced to choose between Russia and Ukraine as a trade, security, or other type of partner.
Russia has proved, as it already did in Georgia in , that it is prepared to use force and ignore its contractual obligations. From a military standpoint, the agreement basically entails a ceasefire and the withdrawal of heavy weapons.
Politically, it calls for a constitutional reform to give the provinces of eastern Ukraine greater autonomy. At the end of the process, the central government in Kiev will once again have full control over the Ukrainian-Russian border, currently in the hands of the rebels. For months, a ceasefire has been in effect in the conflict zone, albeit with frequent accusations of truce violations on both sides. Although it seems that Moscow, currently plagued by serious economic troubles, has no intention of resuming military action, it is not yet clear whether it is willing to negotiate.
We will have to wait and see how events unfold in the coming months, once the local elections in Ukraine have been held. These are scheduled to take place across the country except in the eastern territories controlled by pro-Russian separatists, who have called their own independent elections in violation of the Minsk II terms.
Given the tremendous magnitude of the dispute with Russia, resolving the situation needs to be a priority on the European agenda. It is worrying that countries which are neighbours of both the EU and Russia believe they must choose between strengthening ties with Europe and being loyal to Moscow. Europe is affected, to a large extent, by political instability in North Africa and the Middle East given their geographical proximity.
The number of people seeking asylum in other countries is growing exponentially, surpassing the figures recorded during World War II. The spread of war and violence across the region is creating a major humanitarian crisis. At present, there are more than four million refugees from Syria alone, according to data supplied by the UN Refugee Agency. Although the majority seek asylum in neighbouring countries and remain in the region, every day many of them risk their lives to reach Europe.
This situation represents a major challenge for European nations. We must be quick in our humanitarian response and honour our legal obligation to give asylum to those fleeing from persecution. This dire emergency should also spur us to step up our involvement in the search for solutions to the conflicts that have forced so many to seek refuge in Europe. The rise of the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda factions have made the situation even more dramatic for Syrian civilians.
The growing division of the country, which culminated in the creation of two governments and allowed Islamic State militias to gain footholds in parts of eastern Libya such as the city of Derna , makes it even harder to maintain security as the country is assailed by myriad internal and external challenges.
In addition to terrorism, the repercussions of the Libyan conflict for migratory pressure and the possibility that it may spread to the rest of this already debilitated region pose real threats to Europe.
In the early days after the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak, in , it looked like Egypt was on the verge of a transition to democracy.
In the presidential elections the Muslim Brotherhood, led by Mohamed Morsi, was voted into power, albeit with a very slim majority and a highly polarized electorate.
Since then, although violence has diminished, the country has been governed by a military dictatorship. This clash has once again evidenced the rift between Shiite and Sunni Muslims, a determining factor of many other conflicts in the region, and the role of Iran and Saudi Arabia as the respective leaders of these factions. There are several causes underlying the dynamics of confrontation in the region, but one is fundamental for understanding the current situation: the antagonism between Sunni and Shiite Muslims.
The division between these branches of Islam is, of course, religious, but it also has strong geopolitical implications: Iran, with a Shiite majority, and Saudi Arabia, where the majority are Sunni Muslims, have been vying for supremacy in the region for years. This tension is at the root of many ongoing conflicts. In Syria, the civil war still raging between the regime of Bashar al-Assad and rebel forces has already caused more than , deaths and the forcible displacement of over twelve million people both within Syria and to other countries.
This means that, of the total Syrian population at the start of the conflict, over half has been displaced. The radicalization of the rebels opposed to Al-Assad, the involvement of so many foreign powers in the conflict in one way or another, and the terrifying rise of extremist terrorism all represent enormous obstacles on the road to peace.
Meanwhile, the rest of the international community has been hesitant and reluctant to get involved, influenced by the memory of past experiences in Afghanistan and Iran. Since the chemical weapons disarmament deal between the United States and Russia, there have been several attempts to open a new dialogue, though none have prospered. In the interim, the Syrian opposition has splintered and the more radical factions have gained considerable ground. The rise of terrorist groups, namely the Islamic State and al-Qaeda factions, have made the situation even more dramatic for civilians and significantly complicated the task of designing a solution to the conflict, a solution that would also be critical for resolving many other regional conflicts.
Today there is only one bastion of hope in the region, though even there it is increasingly tenuous: Tunisia, where a successful political transition was carried out after deposing the dictator Ben Ali, and today the country is a democracy. However, the situation is fragile and the threat of terrorism is also present, as confirmed by the tragic events that took place several months ago.
The intensity of civil conflicts is exacerbated by another highly destabilizing element with disastrous consequences: fundamentalist terrorism, with the main concern today being the terrorist group that calls itself the Islamic State, also known as ISIS. Although this organization was established in Iraq in and played an important role in the Iraq War during the early years of its existence, the Syrian civil war was where it grew and flourished.
In the group severed its ties to Al-Qaeda and is steadily gaining ground in Syria and Iraq, where it already controls a significant part of the territory. Despite being a local organization, ISIS has global ambitions whose scope has already been made apparent to us.
These statistics also suggest that the roots of fundamentalism are not limited to the region where this and other like-minded terrorist groups were spawned, for there are numerous individuals in many other parts of the world who seem to share their intentions. In addition to the risks posed to Europe by conflicts and disputes along its borders, we must consider other challenges of a global nature.
As stated earlier, today we live in a global world where borders are increasingly permeable, and many of the security threats we now face are global as well. Security issues such as the proliferation of nuclear weapons, organized crime, arms and human trafficking, inequality, and pandemics affect us all.
Cyber risks are one of the most obvious global threats today. These technologies have enormous benefits, but they also entail substantial risks, as the information they contain or convey can be accessed and used for criminal purposes. The number, magnitude, and impact of cyberattacks are on the rise, and so is the level of concern about the high vulnerability of the internet, a tool on which practically every economic activity relies in this day and age.
The internet was designed as an essentially open platform, because its creators did not anticipate that it would be used to offer a wide range of critical services requiring tighter security.
The difficulty with cyberattacks is that they take place in a setting—cyberspace—characterized by its broad accessibility, which by definition makes it less secure. Moreover, cyberattacks can be perpetrated with total anonymity. The difficulty of tracing attacks and the fast pace of technological change makes it very hard to come up with a response capable of dissuading hackers. IT security mechanisms cannot be designed for just one jurisdiction, because there are no political borders in cyberspace.
The only effective path is multilateral action. The same is true of climate change, which threatens to destroy our environment and means of subsistence, especially for future generations. Even though scientists have been studying the phenomenon of climate change since , and despite the fact that states agreed to prevent dangerous climate changes by joining the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change UNFCCC in , diplomatic progress in this area has been very slow.
The European Union is responsible for a significant part of past and current CO2 emissions, and must therefore play a leading role in the efforts to mitigate climate change and help other countries, especially developing nations, to do the same. This has been the most important summit of recent years, and it is imperative that all participating countries reach a consensus and set ambitious goals for the future.
In this respect, European states have a duty to take the lead, set a good example, show strong political will especially with regard to climate finance , and use their diplomatic experience and power to facilitate an effective agreement in Paris. Europe ceased to be the centre of the modern world long ago. Other countries have now come to the fore, propelled by strong economic growth, and are claiming their rightful place in the international political arena. European countries should draw two important conclusions from this new scenario.
Firstly, we need to focus our attention on the evolution of emerging powers like China, India, and Brazil. We must make it an urgent priority to study and thoroughly comprehend their reality, the track record of their growth, their values, histories, and interests, because the balance of world power is shifting towards them, forcing us to alter our perspective.
It is vital that the European Union revise its strategic interests and the framework of its relations with China and other Asian countries.
Debating European Security and Defense Policy : Understanding the Complexity
Europe is increasingly required to assume greater responsibility for its own well-being and security. But rarely are these terms defined, or their political and practical implications explained. In this publication strategic autonomy is defined as the ability to set priorities and make decisions in matters of foreign policy and security, together with the institutional, political and material wherewithal to carry these through — in cooperation with third parties, or if need be alone. Autonomy is always relative. Politically it means growing readiness, a process rather than a condition. Autonomy means neither autarchy nor isolation, nor rejection of alliances. It is not an end in itself, but a means to protect and promote values and interests.
European Defence – Debates in and about Poland and France
This rising generation of scholars offers a variety of penetrating insights from neo-realism to post-structuralism, with a heavy emphasis on constructivism. The book breaks significant new theoretical ground and will prove invaluable to all serious scholars of European security and defence. This book marks an important step on the path towards mainstreaming scholarly investigation of these policies.
Debating European Security and Defense Policy. Larive questions whether there is such a thing as a European defense and security policy. This book analyzes the integration process by clearly illustrating to the reader the two sides of the argument in order to understand the complexity of the problems in the different stages of the creation and implementation of the European defense policy. In doing so, this study asks the question of why has the process been so halting and of such limited scope? Structured in three parts: Theories, analyzing the theoretical debates raised by the positivist paradigms of neorealism, liberalism and constructivism on European security; History, reflecting on the impacts of the Cold War, American foreign policy, the economic crisis, and the evolution of European strategy; and, Actors, by looking at the role of European institutions, Member States, and the CSDP on the transformation of the European defense policy since
France , Poland. This is especially true for Poland and France. In Poland, European defence policy is primarily understood as a form of collective defence against Russia which needs to be integrated into the NATO framework. This is why Paris attaches particular importance to the development of military intervention capabilities.
France: Reform Ambitions inside and outside the EU Framework
Конечно, - чуть слышно сказала. - Танкадо подумал, что раз мы приостановили действие его страхового полиса, то можем приостановить и его. Постепенно она начала понимать. Время сердечного приступа настолько устраивало АНБ, что Танкадо сразу понял, чьих это рук дело, и в последние мгновения своей жизни инстинктивно подумал о мести. Энсей Танкадо отдал кольцо, надеясь обнародовать ключ. И теперь - во что просто не верится - какой-то ни о чем не подозревающий канадский турист держит в своих руках ключ к самому мощному шифровальному алгоритму в истории.
Ну давай же, вызови службу безопасности, коммандер. Отключи ТРАНСТЕКСТ. Давай выбираться отсюда. Внезапно Стратмор сбросил оцепенение. - Иди за мной! - сказал. И направился в сторону люка.
Компьютер только что отдал ее Следопыту команду самоуничтожиться раньше времени, так что ей не удастся найти то, что она ищет. Помня, что не должен оставлять следов, Хейл вошел в систему регистрации действий и удалил все свои команды, после чего вновь ввел личный пароль Сьюзан. Монитор погас. Когда Сьюзан вернулась в Третий узел, Грег Хейл как ни в чем не бывало тихо сидел за своим терминалом. ГЛАВА 30 Альфонсо XIII оказался небольшим четырехзвездочным отелем, расположенным в некотором отдалении от Пуэрта-де-Хереса и окруженным кованой чугунной оградой и кустами сирени.