Suchergebnisse

Existing studies of European Union Common Security and Defence Policy (EU CSDP) missions often rely on a conceptualisation of Women, Peace and Security (WPS) implementation as a technical, linear and deterministic process. While this scholarship is part of a concerted effort to develop an accountability mechanism and push for organisational change, this paper contends that we also need a more grounded and contextual approach to capture the complex, ambivalent and often tortuous translation of WPS into CSDP relatively new security practices. This suggests that a deeper interrogation of what meaning(s) mainstreaming gender assumes in the context of EU CSDP missions and how this conceptualisation informs the practice of peacekeeping is required. Drawing on interviews with EU peacekeeping personnel, we outline an ambivalent account of how different CSDP actors interpret WPS and gender mainstreaming and compose it in use, with different effects.

In Germany, Poland and the Common Security and Defence Policy Laura Chappell offers a comprehensive comparative analysis of an old and a new EU Member State's perceptions of and contributions to EU security and defence at the beginning of the 21st Century. Utilising a distinct theoretical framework intertwining strategic culture and role theory, this book focuses on change and continuity in Poland and Germany's defence policies. It does this by connecting the political and the military through two case studies on the EU Battlegroup Concept and the European Security Strategy. By analysing these along with each country's general approach to security and defence it is possible to assess in which areas convergence has occurred, where divergences remain and the impact of this on the Common Security and Defence Policy including whether a European strategic culture is developing. This has important implications for the effectiveness and efficiency of the EU as an international security actor.

"A comparative analysis of an old and new EU Member State's perceptions of and contributions to EU security and defense. This book focuses on change and continuity in both countries' defense policies and where convergence and divergence has occurred. This has important implications for the EU's effectiveness as an international security actor"--

<i>In this article, the author analyses types of Europeanisation: top-down, bottom-up,
horizontal, circular, and looks at Latvian involvement in the EU CSDP capability project
- EU Battlegroups. Additionally, the author analyses the EU CSDP strategies in 2003 and
2016 with emphasis on key threats and key directions of action for the security of the EU. If
it is necessary, EU Battlegroups can become involved to secure the EU. In the article, the
author examines Latvian involvement in EU Battlegroups and changes in political planning
documents and legal acts regarding EU Battlegroups. The author shows that for the future,
it is necessary to involve an EU Battlegroup in real action in the area of operations, and
that it is necessary to initiate discussions on a possible review and evaluation of the format
of the EU Battlegroup.</i>

The European Union has ventured into the business of power politics with its common security and defence policy (CSDP). Realism can explain both why the EU is being pulled into this business and why it is failing to be powerful. Although realism has much to offer, it is not the dominant approach to the study of the EU and its foreign affairs because the EU is commonly perceived as capable of transcending power politics as we used to know it. The first purpose of this article is therefore to question the stereotyping of realism as a framework that only applies to great power confrontations. The second is to introduce the complexity of realist thought because realism is a house divided. The analysis first examines structural realism, then the classical realist tradition. The third and final purpose of the article is to evaluate the contributions these approaches can make to the study of the CSDP. The most powerful realist interpretation of the CSDP is found to be the classical one, according to which the CSDP is partly a response to international power trends but notably also the institutionalization of the weakness of European nation-states. The article defines this perspective in relation to contending realist and constructivist perspectives. It highlights classical realism as a dynamic framework of interpretation that does not provide an image of a CSDP end-state, but rather a framework for understanding an evolving reality and for speaking truth to power. Adapted from the source document.