Die Anforderungen an deutsche Sicherheitspolitik sind mit dem Zerfall der bipolaren Weltordnung und dem Aufkommen des internationalen Terrorismus komplexer und schwieriger geworden. Die Politik der traditionellen Bündnispartner verändert sich, die internationalen Organisationen, in die Deutschland eingebettet ist, sind im Wandel begriffen und die innenpolitischen Rahmenbedingungen haben sich verschlechtert. Vor diesem Hintergrund stehen Kontinuität und Wandel der bilateralen und multilateralen Bindungen deutscher Sicherheitspolitik im Mittelpunkt dieses Sammelbandes. Die einzelnen Beiträge widmen sich den innenpolitischen Bedingungsfaktoren (öffentliche Meinung und Parteiendiskurs), den Auslandseinsätzen der Bundeswehr sowie der Bundeswehrreform, dem deutschen Beitrag in NATO und ESVP, sowie der deutschen Politik in den Feldern Nonproliferation, Krisenprävention und Antiterrorpolitik. Die empirisch fundierten Studien richten sich gleichermaßen an Studierende, Wissenschaftler und sicherheitspolitische Praktiker.
The Islamic Republic of Iran and the European Union (EU) have not yet established formal diplomatic relations, but since 1979 the Union and its member states have had various strong if often conflictual interactions. The relationship has been marked by distinct phases that reflect the emerging character of the partners, a theocratic republic on the one hand and a Union of interdependent democratic states on the other. While mutual economic interests have formed the basis for substantial interactions, relations with member states and the EU itself have been colored by a long and sometimes hurtful history of European states' role in Iranian politics, including the Russian and British imperial influence over Persia in the late 19th and early 20th century, the British (and American) involvement in the coup against democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq in 1953, and the French hosting of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, an avowed critic of the Pahlavi dynasty, prior to the anti-authoritarian revolution in 1979. Over time, the relationship has substantially shaped the character and direction of the politics of the EU's common foreign and security policy, resulting in more policy coherence between member states and the EU, more policy autonomy, particularly vis-á-vis the United States, and more proactive behavior, such as during the nuclear negotiations leading to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (in 2015). By engaging with a problematic member of the nonproliferation treaty, the EU not only specified and thus strengthened the treaty, but it also grew into an international nonproliferation actor to reckon with.
Special relationships are durable and exclusive bilateral relations between autonomous polities that are based on mutual expectations of preferential treatment by its members and outsiders as well as regular entanglement of some (external) governance functions. The concept has become more prominent over the past three decades in part because of recent changes in international relations and foreign policy analysis theory (the constructivist and relational turn) and long-term shifts in the social structure of international relations, that is, decolonization, international criminal and humanitarian law, which have posed questions of solidarity, reconciliation, and responsibility of current and past special relationships.The term special relationship has a long and diverse history. After World War II, it was used mainly to depict the Anglo-American security relationship as special. Today, well over 50 international relationships are deemed special. Despite this trend, no common theoretical framework has been developed to explain their emergence, variation, persistence and demise. Realism interprets special relationships as asymmetrical power relations, in which presupposed counterbalancing behavior does not occur because shared ideas or institutions mitigate autonomy concerns. Liberalism postulates that the special relatedness occurs when policy interdependence due to shared commercial interests or ideas allows deep cooperation and trust building. Social constructivism, in turn, assumes self-assertion but does not presuppose with or against whom the self, usually a polity, identifies itself. It follows that special relations may occur between dyads with positive identification (Germany-Israel after reconciliation) or negative identification, such as in the enduring rivalry between India and Pakistan.As a relational term, special relationships do not sit easily with the first generation of foreign policy analysis focusing on decision making processes rather than the policies themselves. As a consequence, special relationships have been primarily conceptualized either as a tool of foreign policy or as one context factor influencing foreign policy choices. In relational theories, such as social constructivism, special relations, such as solidarity relations, are not causally independent from actors, as these relations also define the actors themselves.
Providing regional and global security governance is both increasingly common and controversial in Germany. The paper addresses the sources of current controversies in three areas: First, legal limits that emanate from the delegation of competences in regional and international institutions. Secondly, financial limits which have become even more prevalent since the inception of the Euro-Crisis. And thirdly, political limits which refer to the erosion of the cross-partisan consensus in German coalition governments that the country must play a prominent, if not a leadership role in European security governance and beyond.