Suchergebnisse

1. Introduction -- 2. Managing crises : between calculation and socialisation -- 3. Libya : diverging responses, interests and norms -- 4. Somalia : coherent crisis management and collective interests -- 5. The Sahel : between collective strategy and individual action -- 6. Comparing crisis responses and explaining variation -- 7. Conclusion.

This book explores European Union crisis management and draws implications for its role as an international security actor. The success of EU crisis management has varied greatly and this book aims to identify the key factors that explain the differing degrees of coherence through a comparative analysis of its multidimensional crisis responses in Africa. The empirical focus lies on three prominent EU crisis management cases, namely Libya in 2011, Somalia in 2011-2012, and the Sahel in 2012-2013. It analyses the activities and interaction of EU institutional actors and member states, with a focus on France, the United Kingdom, and Germany. The book argues that the EU represents a rather unpredictable security actor, whose multi-level coherence is contingent on the congruence of domestic economic and electoral interests, as well as national threat perceptions, and the extent to which EU-level coherence norms resonate with national norms on the use of force and modes of multilateral cooperation. In sum, this book offers systematic insight into EU crisis management and clarifies the conceptual and empirical boundaries of the comprehensive approach. Finally, the study of the micro-foundations of coherence allows for policy-relevant suggestions on the EU's future role as a security actor. This book will be of much interest to students of EU policy, European Security, Peace and Conflict Studies, African Politics and IR in general.--

The EU should appear more capable of acting, more capable of global politics and more sovereign. That is what the election manifestos of the leading German parties and future coalition partners say. But if you take a closer look, you often find vague formulations, old proposals or ones that will probably collect dust on the shelf. In this policy brief, Dr Nicole Koenig addresses the questions that the next federal government in Germany will have to face in the area of EU foreign and security policy to get a little closer to the promise of an EU capable of acting in foreign policy.

EU member states have been debating the notion of European strategic autonomy in the field of defence for decades. The election of US President Donald Trump in 2016 revived this debate and his administration's negative attitude towards EU defence cooperation initiatives rendered it highly emotive. With Joe Biden's victory, the debate is apparently ready to enter the next stage. In this policy brief, I argue that a Biden administration represents an opportunity to go beyond terminological debates onto two more substantial questions that represent two sides of the same coin: how can Europeans shape a more balanced transatlantic security and defence agenda and how can they defend their own security interests?

The defence angle of European strategic autonomy remains sensitive and contested. In this chapter of a report published by the Finnish Institute of International Relations (FIIA) Nicole Koenig reviews the EU's defence cooperation initiatives since 2016 and assesses progress along the political, institutional and material dimensions of strategic autonomy. She shows that divergent national strategic cultures and threat perceptions continue to stand in the way of political autonomy while progress on the institutional and material dimensions is gradual. The renewal of Atlanticism triggered by Biden's election and the pandemic's uncertain impact on defence spending and collaboration risk broadening the persisting gap between ambition and reality. The author calls upon the EU and its member states to strengthen all three dimensions of autonomy and provides guidance for the next steps.

The Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) is one of the EU's last bastions of unanimous decision-making. The idea of introducing qualified majority Voting (QMV) is as old as the policy area itself.

The EU decided to develop a "strategic compass" for its security and defence policy until 2022. Building on a common threat analysis, it should concretise the EU's level of ambition as a security provider. The strategic compass represents a real and timely opportunity, but there is also a risk of engaging in a lengthy and winding process that would simply produce another paper. This policy paper presents risks and opportunities and develops recommendations for both stages of the process.

Abstract: "Fostering peace and stability has been a key aim of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), but its effective impact on conflicts has been marginal. This article analyses the ENP's security dimension through the conceptual prism of coherence. As a policy cutting across functional domains and governance levels the ENP faces horizontal and vertical coherence challenges. The empirical analysis focuses on two cases lying at the intersection of the ENP and comprehensive European Union (EU) crisis management: the EU's responses to the Syrian and Libyan conflicts between 2011 and 2016. The analysis shows that the EU has gradually redirected ENP funds to short-term security- and migration-related goals. However, the EU has failed to ensure vertical coherence in the field of high politics. The externalities of the Libyan and Syrian conflicts might foster national preference convergence and thereby increase vertical coherence. While this should strengthen the ENP's security dimension, the risk is that the policy's distinct character as a tool for structural conflict prevention is diluted within an ever broadening comprehensive approach that focuses on conflict symptoms rather than root causes." (Seite 19)

Fostering peace and stability has been a key aim of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), but its effective impact on conflicts has been marginal. This article analyses the ENP's security dimension through the conceptual prism of coherence. As a policy cutting across functional domains and governance levels the ENP faces horizontal and vertical coherence challenges. The empirical analysis focuses on two cases lying at the intersection of the ENP and comprehensive European Union (EU) crisis management: the EU's responses to the Syrian and Libyan conflicts between 2011 and 2016. The analysis shows that the EU has gradually redirected ENP funds to short-term security- and migration-related goals. However, the EU has failed to ensure vertical coherence in the field of high politics. The externalities of the Libyan and Syrian conflicts might foster national preference convergence and thereby increase vertical coherence. While this should strengthen the ENP's security dimension, the risk is that the policy's distinct character as a tool for structural conflict prevention is diluted within an ever broadening comprehensive approach that focuses on conflict symptoms rather than root causes.