Suchergebnisse

Das Ansehen der amerikanischen Regierung in der europäischen Öffentlichkeit ist so schlecht wie nie zuvor. Zu einem guten Teil sind die Ressentiments gegenüber den USA in Wahrheit Anti-Bush-Ressentiments. Tatsächlich bestehen zwischen Europa und Amerika jedoch politische Meinungsverschiedenheit in einer ganzen Reihe politischer Fragen, die auch unter anderen Präsidenten zu Tage getreten sind oder zu Tage treten würden. Für die EU besteht die Lehre, die aus den weltpolitischen Entwicklungen der vergangenen Jahre zu ziehen ist, darin, in der Gemeinsamen Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik endlich mit einer Stimme zu sprechen. (ICE2)

The European Union (EU) faces a new geopolitical situation. The Iraq war and its aftermath plus the failure of the Cancun WTO meeting have triggered a new debate on global governance and international law. Kofi Annnan has warned of the dangers of weakening the authority of the UN and other multilateral institutions. Romano Prodi has openly questioned whether the current multilateral system is up to the challenges facing the world. At the same time, the current US administration has openly scorned the multilateral system in pursuit of its one-dimensional security policy – the war on terrorism – although there are some indications that this approach may be changing as a result of the problems it faces in Iraq. In contrast, the European security strategy paper, presented by Javier Solana to the European Council in December 2003, highlighted the importance of the EU working to strengthen the institutions of global governance. It implicitly called for a more active and effective EU role on the world stage. This paper will assess the prospects for the EU in meetings its ambitious goals in regard to global governance.

Europeans want the EU to play a bigger international role but while the expectations of citizens remain high the Union's capabilities have only gradually improved. Nearly a decade after the CFSP was established at Maastricht, and despite playing a more assertive global and regional role, the EU continues to move forward at a slow pace in foreign and security policy. In other areas such as trad (WTO/Doha), environment (Kyoto) and development policy (Cotonou) the record is more positive. Although the EU's involvement in Yugoslavia was a difficult learning experience, its obvious weakness in the Kosovo military campaign accelerated moves towards an EU military capability (ESDP). More recently, the EU has become the principal stabilising actor in the Balkans, a role it has played for some time in central and eastern Europe. The events of 11 September 2001 posed a major challenge for the Union. The EU was swift to express its solidarity with the US and rush through a range of measures largely in the sphere of justice and home affairs designed to combat terrorism. Although, the military campaign against terrorism exposed tensions between the larger and smaller member states and the institutions, the EU readily agreed to provide the lion's share of the peacekeeping forces for Afghanistan and the funds for its reconstruction. The Amsterdam treaty led to modest improvements in the CFSP machinery but there is renewed pressure for further reforms to ensure that CFSP remains effective in an enlarged Union of 25 member states and to strengthen the EU's voice in the international arena. Reforms are under discussion in the Convention and proposals for change will be forwarded to the IGC. It is unlikely, however, that there will be major changes either in the treaties or in the modus operandi.Gradualism will remain the main characteristic of the CFSP. In the past decade, the capability-expectations gap has been narrowed but not closed.

The 11 September terrorist attacks have led the United States to reassess its foreign policy. The overwhelming priority is the defeat of terrorism and to further this end the United States is prepared to engage with states, regardless of their democratic credentials, willing and able to help the United States on the terrorist front. There is little sign, however, that the new-found interest in promoting multilateral co-operation to deal with terrorism is spilling over into other policy areas. The United States shows no sign of modifying its opposition to a number of international treaties and agreements – such as Kyoto, CTBT or the ICC – all of which its closest allies support. The US approach may be described as 'utilitarian multilateralism'.

The 11 Sept terrorist attacks have led the US to reassess its foreign policy. The overwhelming priority is the defeat of terrorism &, to further this end, the US is prepared to engage with states, regardless of their democratic credentials, willing & able to help the US on the terrorist front. There is little sign, however, that the newfound interest in promoting multilateral cooperation to deal with terrorism is spilling over into other policy areas. The US shows no sign of modifying its opposition to a number of international treaties & agreements -- eg, Kyoto, CTBT, or the ICC -- all of which its closest allies support. The US approach may be described as "utilitarian multilateralism.". Adapted from the source document.