Suchergebnisse

Eekelen, W. F. van: The historical record. - S. 1-8 Coelmont, J.; Howorth, J.; Osinga, F.: The capacities at Europe's disposal. - S. 9-40 Doel, T. van den; Heusgen, C.; Duke, S.: Deciding factors for successful operations. - S. 41-62 Grauls, J.: Closing. - S. 63-66

This paper challenges the well-established dichotomy to explain international power phenomena either as hard power or soft power. Reflecting the observation of an increasing decoupling between power capacities of the states and their ability to prevail in international conflicts, the author assumes the existence of a third power category whose origins and models of action are not sufficiently recognized and researched. Borrowing the idea of 'structural power' from Susan Strange, he advocates the hypothesis that it is this third power capacity that frequently makes powerful countries powerless and less powerful countries more assertive. Adapted from the source document.

The European Union and the NATO have 21 of their 27 and 26, respectively, member states in common. The friction between the two institutions is based on the fact that the EU has matured into a well established strategic actor, with its own policies and priorities, and growing ambitions and capacities. The present article discusses a stable and flexible two-pillar model to end the EU-NATO competition. The two-pillar construction that is proposed here implicates a pragmatic attitude, in which each separate case will be looked into separately, to then appoint the organization that will be the best suited for the job. Adapted from the source document.