EU Strategic Autonomy: a Reality Check for Europe's Global Agenda
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FIIA OCTOBER 2020 WORKING PAPER 119 EU STRATEGIC AUTONOMY A REALITY CHECK FOR EUROPE’S GLOBAL AGENDA Niklas Helwig FINNISH ◄ INSTITUTE - OF INTERNATIONAL -II. AFFAIRS FIIA WORKING PAPER OCTOBER 2020 I 119 EU STRATEGIC AUTONOMY A REALITY CHECK FOR EUROPE’S GLOBAL AGENDA Tis Working Paper analyzes the current debate on EU strategic autonomy among Euro- pean policymakers and think-tankers and evaluates it against the backdrop of the EU’s progress as a global actor in recent years. To bring more clarity to the debate, the paper distinguishes between a conventional and a global perspective on strategic autonomy. While conventional strategic autonomy focuses narrowly on the EU’s dependencies on the US as a security provider, global stra- tegic autonomy highlights the EU’s ability to advance a range of international policies based on its distinct values and interests. Te paper proposes three dimensions within which the capacity for EU strategic autonomy should be evaluated: institutional, material, and political. Te EU has made progress in the development of its institutional framework and has also started to invest in its material resources. However, without advances in political autonomy – particu- larly concerning the convergence of European strategic cultures – the sovereign EU in global afairs project will be difcult to achieve. NIKLAS HELWIG Leading Researcher Te European Union Programme Finnish Institute of International Afairs ISBN 978-951-769-662-3 Tis publication is part of a research project conducted by the Finnish Institute of International ISSN 2242-0444 Afairs entitled ‘European Strategic Autonomy in a Geo-economic World’. Niklas Helwig leads Language editing: Lynn Nikkanen the project, which runs until summer 2021 and includes researchers from several European countries and the US. Arkadiankatu 23 b The Finnish Institute of International Affairs is an independent research institute that produces POB 425 / 00101 Helsinki high-level research to support political decision-making as well as scientific and public debate C Telephone +358 [0)9 432 7000 FINNISH both nationally and internationally. INSTITUTE Fax +358 10)9 432 7799 All manuscripts are reviewed by at least two other experts in the field to ensure the high - OF INTERNATIONAL quality of the publications. In addition, publications undergo professional language checking -II. AFFAIRS www.fiia.fi and editing. The responsibility for the views expressed ultimately rests with the authors. CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 4 EUROPE’S NEW GLOBAL AMBITIONS FOR STRATEGIC AUTONOMY 5 Te conventional perspective of strategic autonomy 5 Te global perspective of strategic autonomy 6 THREE DIMENSIONS FOR EVALUATING STRATEGIC AUTONOMY 8 Institutional autonomy 8 Material autonomy 10 Political autonomy 11 CONCLUSIONS 12 BIBLIOGRAPHY 13 EU STRATEGIC AUTONOMY A REALITY CHECK FOR EUROPE’S GLOBAL AGENDA INTRODUCTION rest of the world, but rather describes the ability to be self-determined in pursuing and managing alliances Te European Union (EU) is currently facing the most and partnerships. It has been accurately described as challenging international environment since the end of “a journey rather than a destination” as the EU is in a the Cold War. Cracks have appeared in the foundations constant process of assessing and reacting to its exter- on which the EU’s security and its global influence nal dependencies.2 Increasingly, strategic autonomy is rest. Te rule-based European order has been called not seen as limited to a certain sphere, such as defence into question by Russia’s aggressive actions against policy, but instead encompasses the whole of the EU’s Ukraine. Te transatlantic alliance is in the midst of a economic and political external engagements. structural transformation as US security interests move Te term has largely remained a buzzword in the away from the European continent. Te economic suc- policy debate due to its ambiguity. It is often used in- cess story of trade and investment relations between terchangeably with the French interpretation of “Eu- China and the EU has been replaced by a negative as- ropean Sovereignty”, even though sovereignty implies sessment of Beijing’s global intentions. In general, the more than just autonomy.3 Te concept provided fertile multilateral system within which the EU built its global ground for the creation of new terms that put a spin infuence is increasingly being put under pressure, as on the meaning and intentions of the original concept, great powers, particularly China, the US and Russia, including “strategic responsibility”,4 “open strategic seek a comparative advantage through competition autonomy”,5 and “strategic sovereignty”.6 More often using political, economic and military means. than not, the term has been used as a vehicle to steer Te developments have triggered a debate on the the policy debate or as a justifcation device to argue need for EU strategic autonomy. First described in the for an increase in EU capacities. 2016 EU global strategy, an “appropriate level of ambi- Consequently, it is high time that additional clarity tion and strategic autonomy” was seen as the basis for was brought to the debate, to further defne what the EU “Europe’s ability to promote peace and security with- means when it talks about strategic autonomy, and to in and beyond its borders”.1 Te concept might have develop categories against which the EU’s performance had a short shelf life were it not for two international in reaching its ambitions can be evaluated. Tis Working developments later that year which underlined the Paper starts from the premise that the current debate on predicament of Europe’s position – the Brexit referen- EU strategic autonomy ofers valuable insights into the dum in the UK and the election of Donald Trump as EU’s self-conception as a global actor in an environment US President. When the Covid-19 pandemic hit global of growing international competition. In particular, the production chains and medical supplies in 2020, Eu- paper fnds that the conventional perspective in the EU rope’s vulnerabilities in an independent world were on strategic autonomy – focused on security and defence again on full display. – has made way for a new global narrative that under- While there is no common defnition of strategic lines the need to shape international politics based on a autonomy, there is a convergence in the literature with distinct set of European values and interests. regard to its meaning. Strategic autonomy is defned here as the political, institutional and material ability 2 Järvenpää, Pauli, Major, Claudia and Sakkov, Sven (2019), European Strategic Autonomy: Operationalising a Buzzword, International Centre for Defence and of the EU and its member states to manage their inter- Security, p. 12, https://icds.ee/. dependence with third parties, with the aim of ensur- 3 Such as domestic authority, Westphalian principles of non-interference from external actors, or international legal recognition. See Krasner, Stephen (1999), ing the well-being of their citizens and implementing Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy. Princeton University Press. 4 Brattberg, Erik and Valášek Tomáš (2019), EU Defense Cooperation: Progress self-determined policy decisions. Strategic autonomy Amid Transatlantic Concerns, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, p.17, https://carnegieendowment.org/. does not imply a decoupling from alliances and the 5 Speech by Commissioner Phil Hogan at Launch of Public Consultation for EU Trade Policy Review – Hosted by EUI Florence, June 16, 2020, Florence, https:// ec.europa.eu/. 1 European External Actions Service (2016). Shared Vision, Common Action: A 6 Leonard, Mark and Shapiro, Jeremy (2019), Strategic sovereignty: How Europe Stronger Europe. A Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign And Secu- can regain the capacity to act, European Council on Foreign Relations, https:// rity Policy, p. 9, https://eeas.europa.eu. www.ecfr.eu/. FIIA WORK ING PAP ER OCTOBER 2020 I 4 Te EU’s new self-conception as an autonomous green and digital transformations and emphasized that actor in global afairs has to be pitted against its ac- EU eforts in advancing these policies are fuelled by a tual development. In this respect, the paper suggests “unique set of European values”.8 Tis could be inter- analyzing the institutional, material and political di- preted as a form of ‘EU exceptionalism’ based on the mensions of the EU’s strategic autonomy separately. premise that Europeans have fundamentally differ- It fnds that the EU’s new ambitions are constrained ent views on issues such as the regulation of carbon by a lack of capacity to generate joint evaluations and emissions or data privacy, and must charter their own policy convergence, which would be needed to make course accordingly. Tis “Sinatra Doctrine”, as EU High progress on the EU’s agenda to become strategically Representative Josep Borrell recently rebranded a fa- autonomous. In particular, convergence of the mem- miliar mantra,9 claims that rather than being crushed ber states’ strategic cultures – a common set of norms, between the competing visions of China and the US, strategic evaluations and behavioural patterns that Europe has to fnd its own path as a global actor. facilitate joint action – amidst the new international realities would help in this endeavour. Te conventional perspective of strategic autonomy Table 1 summarizes the two perspectives of EU strate- EUROPE’S NEW GLOBAL AMBITIONS FOR gic autonomy. Te conventional perspective is focused