DOCSLIB.ORG

Sample Chapter

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sample Chapter Copyright material – 9780230362352 Contents List of Illustrative Material ix Preface to the Second Edition x List of Abbreviations xv 1 Introduction: CSDP – A ‘Work in Progress’ 1 Security and Defence Policy: A Special Work in Progress 2 The Saint-Malo Revolution 7 Controversial Origins 14 Misleading Allegations 15 The Fundamental Drivers behind CSDP 21 Public Policy and Public Opinion 25 The Basic Structure of the Book 26 2 Decision-Making: The Political and Institutional Framework 33 The Pre-Saint-Malo Framework 35 The Post-Saint-Malo Institutions 40 The Post-Lisbon Institutions 49 Conclusion 67 3 The Instruments of Intervention: Generating Military and Civilian Capacity 70 Transforming EU Military Capabilities 73 From Headline Goal 2010 to Pooling, Sharing and Specialization? 83 The European Defence Agency 91 The Contentious Issue of Operational Headquarters 96 Civilian Crisis Management: The Continuation of Politics by Other Means? 97 Conclusion 107 4 Selling it to Uncle Sam: CSDP and Transatlantic Relations 109 US Reactions to CSDP 110 European Approaches to the NATO–CSDP Realtionship 117 The CSDP–NATO Relationship: Zero or Positive Sum? 129 CSDP and NATO after Libya and Afghanistan 137 Conclusion 141 vii Copyright material – 9780230362352 viii Contents 5 The EU as an Overseas Crisis Management Actor 144 CSDP Military Operations 154 Non-Military Missions 168 Monitoring and Assistance Missions 174 Rule of Law Missions 177 Border Assistance Missions 180 Scholarly Analyses 182 Conclusion 187 6 Empirical Reality and Academic Theory 190 Applying Theory to CSDP 192 Substantive Theories 193 Methodological Approaches 205 Alternative Theoretical/Methodological Approaches 211 Conclusion 214 7 Conclusion: The Major Challenges Ahead 216 A Grand Strategy for CSDP 217 Forging an EU Strategic Culture 233 Concluding Thoughts: The Challenges Ahead 242 Bibliography 247 Index 291 Copyright material – 9780230362352 Chapter 1 Introduction: CSDP – A ‘Work in Progress’ The notion of a ‘work in progress’ is particularly appropriate for Europe’s efforts to emerge as a security actor. The phrase was used by James Joyce as the working title of his novel, serialized over 20 years and eventually published in 1939 as Finnegan’s Wake. In it, he insisted on the interplay between the conscious and the unconscious in his unprecedented attempt to break with literary tradition and to create an entirely new literary para- digm, appropriate for the twentieth century. Unconsciously, or semi- consciously, Europeans are moving towards a new security paradigm. They have not yet achieved full consciousness of where they are trying to go or what they are seeking to achieve. They have been conscious since the immediate aftermath of the Second World War that the guarantee of their collective security hangs in an uncomfortable balance between depen- dence and autonomy, between the hand of fate and freedom of manoeu- vre. Between 1949 and 1989, dependence and fate held Europe’s security hostage to the imponderables of the American nuclear umbrella in a standoff with the Soviet Union based on ‘mutual assured destruction’. ‘Defence’ was an existential zero-sum game. There was little space for autonomy or freedom of manoeuvre. At the same time, unconsciously, Europeans have sought, in a variety of ways, to create a new practice in international relations, to break with a murderous past which dictated the course of war and peace in depressingly stark realist terms ever since Thucydides first noted that ‘the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must’. Europeans have long sought, often only semi- consciously or experimentally, to transcend the zero-sum logic of ‘defence’ and to embrace ‘security’ as a positive-sum game (I cannot feel secure so long as my neighbour feels insecure). Charles de Gaulle, the very incarnation of France’s resistance against the German occupation, embraced Franco-German reconciliation as the surest way of breaking the vicious circle of war and revenge. This was an unparalleled act of states- manship. The entire story of European integration is one of inchoate and experimental efforts to transcend the Westphalian iron-law of sovereignty (see Box 1.1). For the first time in human history, a number of sovereign states elected to gamble on the semi-conscious proposition that the whole would prove to be preferable to the sum of the parts. The EU is still fully engaged in that original ‘work in progress’. 1 Copyright material – 9780230362352 2 Security and Defence Policy in the European Union Box 1.1 The Westphalian System The Treaty of Westphalia (1648) ended the Thirty Years War, and posits four basic principles: 1. the principle of the sovereignty of nation-states and the associated fundamental right of political self-determination; 2. the principle of (legal) equality between nation-states; 3. the principle of internationally binding treaties between states; 4. the principle of non-intervention of one state in the internal affairs of other states. For these reasons, the Treaty of Westphalia (1648) is crucial in the history of international relations. It formed the basis for the modern international system of sovereign nation-states. It marked the beginning of an interna- tional community of law between states of equal legal standing, guaran- teeing each other their independence and the right of their peoples to political self-determination. For over 40 years (1957–99), the European Union remained an essen- tially ‘civilian’ actor. By this expression, scholars have indicated the Union’s focus on the core policy areas of trade and economics, its exis- tence as an institutions-driven project rooted in international law, and its total absence from the arena of military ambition or coercive diplomacy (Whitman 1998; Manners 2005; Telo 2007). These features lay at the heart of the original EU work in progress. To the extent to which the member states attempted, from the 1970s onwards, to coordinate their foreign policy preferences and maximize their coherence, this was essen- tially done through the relatively informal channels of European Political Cooperation (EPC – Nuttall 1992) in which consensus-seeking and lowest common denominator decision-making were the order of the day. EPC, it should be stressed, took place entirely outside the formal institutions of the EU and never ventured into the world of security and defence. The latter, throughout the Cold War, was considered to be the exclusive domain of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). On this, there was simply no discussion. Security and Defence Policy: A Special Work in Progress The security and defence dimension of European integration has recently emerged alongside and within the broader EU story as a somewhat sepa- rate work in progress, once again mixing the conscious and the uncon- scious. Its main chapters have been written since the fall of the Berlin Copyright material – 9780230362352 Introduction: CSDP – A ‘Work in Progress’ 3 Wall, but its earliest manifestations predate 1989. In one of the first published studies of what eventually became CSDP, I noted that: ‘the story of European integration began with defence’ (Howorth 2000: 1). This story chronicles the European Union’s constantly frustrated attempts to forge a coordinated defence capacity, beginning with the negotiation of the Franco-British Treaty of Dunkirk (1947), via tentative plans for a Western Union (1947–8), through the Brussels Treaty (1948), the European Defence Community (EDC 1950–4), the Fouchet Plan (1962), the relaunch of the Western European Union (WEU 1973). All these early efforts were couched within the stark context of the Cold War and constituted largely hypothetical – and ultimately unworkable – alter- natives to outright dependence on the USA (Howorth and Menon 1997; Duke 2000; Andréani et al. 2001; Cogan 2001; Quinlan 2001; Duke 2002; Hunter 2002; Salmon and Shepherd 2003; Bonnén 2003; Dumoulin et al. 2003; Mérand 2008). That Europe should have sought to maximize its own inherent secu- rity and defence capabilities seems logical enough. Why then did all the above attempts fail? At this point, suffice it to say that the most signifi- cant factor which stymied these early efforts was the contradiction between the respective positions of France and the UK. For 50 years (1947–97), Britain and France effectively stalemated any prospect of seri- ous European cooperation on security issues by their contradictory inter- pretations of the likely impact in Washington of the advent of serious European military muscle. Elsewhere, I have called this the Euro-Atlantic Security Dilemma (Howorth 2005b). London tended to fear that if Europe demonstrated genuine ability to take care of itself militarily, the US would revert to isolationism. The British fears were exacerbated by a belief in London that the Europeans on their own would never be able to forge a credible autonomous defence (Croft et al. 2001). Paris, on the other hand, expressed confidence that the US would take even more seri- ously allies who took themselves seriously. Both approaches were based on speculation and on normative aspirations rather than on hard strate- gic analysis. Yet as long as France and Britain, Europe’s only two serious military powers, remained at loggerheads over the resolution of the Euro-Atlantic Security Dilemma, impasse reigned. At the height of the Cold War, the security and defence dimension of the work in progress failed even to get off the ground. However, the 1980s began to see the emergence of a trans-European
Load more

Recommended publications
  • EU Defence: the White Book Implementation Process
    STUDY Requested by the SEDE Subcommittee EU Defence: The White Book implementation process Policy Department for External Relations Directorate General for External Policies of the Union PE 603.871 - December 2018 EN DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR EXTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT STUDY EU Defence: The White Book implementation process ABSTRACT The question of a defence White Book at European level has been under discussion for some time. Many voices, particularly in the European Parliament, are pushing for such an initiative, while others consider that it is not only unnecessary, but could even dangerously divide Europeans. Concretely, the question cannot be tackled separately from that of defence planning and processes which underpin the development of military capabilities, as White Books are often the starting point for these. Within the European Union, however, there is not just one, but three types defence planning: the national planning of each of the Member States; planning within the framework of NATO (the NATO Defence Planning Process) and, finally, the European Union’s planning, which has developed in stages since the Helsinki summit of 1999 and comprises many elements. Its best-known component - but by no means not the only one - is the capability development plan established by the European Defence Agency. How do all these different planning systems coexist? What are their strengths and weaknesses? Answering these preliminary questions is essential in mapping the path to a White Book. This is what this study sets out to do. EP/EXPO/B/SEDE/FWC/2013-08/Lot6/23 EN December 2018 - PE 603.871 © European Union, 2018 Policy Department, Directorate-General for External Policies This document was requested by the European Parliament’s Subcommittee on Security and Defence (SEDE) on 7 July 2018 Manuscript was completed on 12 December 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Union: Where Is It Now?
    Duquesne Law Review Volume 34 Number 4 Conference Proceedings: The Duquesne University School of Law Instititue for Judicial Education's and the Supreme Court of Article 9 Pennsylvania Conference on Science and the Law 1996 The European Union: Where Is It Now? John P. Flaherty Maureen E. Lally-Green Follow this and additional works at: https://dsc.duq.edu/dlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation John P. Flaherty & Maureen E. Lally-Green, The European Union: Where Is It Now?, 34 Duq. L. Rev. 923 (1996). Available at: https://dsc.duq.edu/dlr/vol34/iss4/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Duquesne Scholarship Collection. It has been accepted for inclusion in Duquesne Law Review by an authorized editor of Duquesne Scholarship Collection. The European Union: Where is it Now? Hon. John P. Flaherty* Maureen E. Lally-Green** TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .............................. 926 Part One: A Brief History Lesson .............. 927 A. The Late 1940's through 1958 ............. 928 1. General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GAAT) (1947) ..................... 928 2. Benelux Customs Convention (1948) ...... 928 3. Council of Europe (1948) ............... 929 4. Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC) (1948) ............ 930 * BA Duquesne University; J.D. University of Pittsburgh; Justice, the Su- preme Court of Pennsylvania (to be elevated to the position of Chief Justice of Penn- sylvania, July 1996). ** B.S. Duquesne University; J.D. Duquesne University; Professor of Law, Duquesne University School of Law. Both authors have been instrumental in the development of an academic pro- gram between the Duquesne University School of Law and the Law School of Uni- versity College Dublin in Dublin, Ireland on the topic of the law of the European Union.
    [Show full text]
  • Training and Simulation
    Food for thought 05-2021 Training and Simulation Written by AN EXPERTISE FORUM CONTRIBUTING TO EUROPEAN CONTRIBUTING TO FORUM AN EXPERTISE SINCE 1953 ARMIES INTEROPERABILITY the Research team of Finabel European Army Interoperability Center This study was written under the guidance of the Swedish presidency, headed by MG Engelbrektson, Commander of the Swedish Army. Special thanks go out to all ex- perts providing their insights on the topic, including but not limited too: MAJ Ulrik Hansson-Mild, Mr Henrik Reimer, SSG Joel Gustafsson, Mr Per Hagman, Robert Wilsson, MAJ Björn Lahger and SGM Anders Jakobsson.This study was drawn up by the Research team of Finabel over the course of a few months, including: Cholpon Abdyraeva, Paolo d'Alesio, Florinda Artese, Yasmine Benchekroun, Antoine Decq, Luca Dilda, Enzo Falsanisi, Vlad Melnic, Oliver Noyan, Milan Storms, Nadine Azi- hane, Dermot Nolan under the guidance of Mr Mario Blokken, Director of the Per- manent Secretariat. This Food for Thought paper is a document that gives an initial reflection on the theme. The content is not reflecting the positions of the member states but consists of elements that can initiate and feed the discussions and analyses in the domain of the theme. All our studies are available on www.finabel.org TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 3 Data Utilisation, the Need for Standardisation and Obstacles 33 Cultural Interoperability 4 Introduction 33 Introduction 4 9. What is Data? 34 1. Exercises as Means to 10. Political Aspects: National Deter Opposition 5 Interests vs. Interoperability 34 2. Current Trends in SBT 13 11. Data Interoperability 3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Historical Development of European Integration
    FACT SHEETS ON THE EUROPEAN UNION The historical development of European integration PE 618.969 1. The First Treaties.....................................................................................................3 2. Developments up to the Single European Act.........................................................6 3. The Maastricht and Amsterdam Treaties...............................................................10 4. The Treaty of Nice and the Convention on the Future of Europe..........................14 5. The Treaty of Lisbon..............................................................................................18 EN - 18/06/2018 ABOUT THE PUBLICATION This leaflet contains a compilation of Fact Sheets provided by Parliament’s Policy Departments and Economic Governance Support Unit on the relevant policy area. The Fact Sheets are updated regularly and published on the website of the European Parliament: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets ABOUT THE PUBLISHER Author of the publication: European Parliament Department responsible: Unit for Coordination of Editorial and Communication Activities E-mail: [email protected] Manuscript completed in June, 2018 © European Union, 2018 DISCLAIMER The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice
    [Show full text]
  • Death of an Institution: the End for Western European Union, a Future
    DEATH OF AN INSTITUTION The end for Western European Union, a future for European defence? EGMONT PAPER 46 DEATH OF AN INSTITUTION The end for Western European Union, a future for European defence? ALYSON JK BAILES AND GRAHAM MESSERVY-WHITING May 2011 The Egmont Papers are published by Academia Press for Egmont – The Royal Institute for International Relations. Founded in 1947 by eminent Belgian political leaders, Egmont is an independent think-tank based in Brussels. Its interdisciplinary research is conducted in a spirit of total academic freedom. A platform of quality information, a forum for debate and analysis, a melting pot of ideas in the field of international politics, Egmont’s ambition – through its publications, seminars and recommendations – is to make a useful contribution to the decision- making process. *** President: Viscount Etienne DAVIGNON Director-General: Marc TRENTESEAU Series Editor: Prof. Dr. Sven BISCOP *** Egmont – The Royal Institute for International Relations Address Naamsestraat / Rue de Namur 69, 1000 Brussels, Belgium Phone 00-32-(0)2.223.41.14 Fax 00-32-(0)2.223.41.16 E-mail [email protected] Website: www.egmontinstitute.be © Academia Press Eekhout 2 9000 Gent Tel. 09/233 80 88 Fax 09/233 14 09 [email protected] www.academiapress.be J. Story-Scientia NV Wetenschappelijke Boekhandel Sint-Kwintensberg 87 B-9000 Gent Tel. 09/225 57 57 Fax 09/233 14 09 [email protected] www.story.be All authors write in a personal capacity. Lay-out: proxess.be ISBN 978 90 382 1785 7 D/2011/4804/136 U 1612 NUR1 754 All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • The EU-NATO Syndrome: Spotlight on Transatlantic Realities
    ▌JCER Volume 3 • Issue 2 99 The EU-NATO Syndrome: Spotlight on Transatlantic Realities Hajnalka Vincze Abstract This article examines the relations between the European Union (EU) and NATO in light of both of the current, deeply unhealthy, state of the transatlantic relationship, and of its ongoing evolution. The first part is devoted to a retrospective outline of the links between European defence and the Atlantic system, which highlights the major constant features of these last sixty years, as well as the rupture points. Then, various issues, from the problem of the division of labour and the definition of the chain of command to coordination on the ground and arms procurement, are evoked as concrete examples where the same fundamental question marks emerge, again and again; all of them revolving around the concept of sovereignty – that of the Europeans vis-à-vis America. It is suggested in the article that current European dependence does not allow but superficial and/or temporary ‘progress’ in EU-NATO relations, just as is the case in the broader Euro-American relationship. As long as Europeans will not assume fully the objective of autonomy (i.e. freedom of decision and action, with all the commitments it would imply), their subjection will continue to generate increasing tensions, since this inherent imbalance is not only detrimental to Europe’s own interests, but it also excludes any reciprocity and prohibits any genuine partnership with the United States. CONTRARY TO THE TWO DOMINANT, ALBEIT DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED, TYPES of forecasts that were both highly fashionable a few years ago, it appears more and more clearly that the headaches related to the EU-NATO conundrum are here to stay.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2016 ''Winter Package'' on European Security and Defence: Constiturional, Legal and Institutional Implicatio
    DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT C: CITIZENS' RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS The 2016 “Winter Package” on European Security and Defence: Constitutional, Legal and Institutional Implications IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS Abstract This study was commissioned by the European Parliament's Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs of the European Parliament. It examines a series of constitutional, legal and institutional implications of the proposals endorsed by the December 2016 European Council for the further development of the Common Security and Defence Policy in the framework of the current Treaties. PE 571.405 EN ABOUT THE PUBLICATION This research paper was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Constitutional Affairs and was commissioned, overseen and published by the Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs. Policy departments provide independent expertise, both in-house and externally, to support European Parliament committees and other parliamentary bodies in shaping legislation and exercising democratic scrutiny over EU external and internal policies. To contact the Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs or to subscribe to its newsletter please write to: [email protected] Research Administrator Responsible Eeva ERIKSSON Policy Department C: Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs European Parliament B-1047 Brussels E-mail:
    [Show full text]
  • FOREWORD It Is an Honour for Me to Present This Compendium Which
    FOREWORD FOREWORD It is an honour for me to present this compendium which includes papers, practical information and proposals for combating fraud and corruption based on experience of the Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) in Central, Eastern Europe and Asia. The book was prepared upon the results of the EUROSAI International Conference “The Role of Supreme Audit Institutions in Fighting Against Fraud and Corruption” hosted by the Accounting Chamber of Ukraine on September 1921, 2006 in Kyiv. The EUROSAI event was attended by 61 participants from 24 SAIs among which were present Presidents of 16 SAIs. The participants discussed the following subthemes: • Subtheme I: The Role of SAIs in the National System Development of Fighting Against Fraud and Corruption; • Subtheme II: Peculiarities of SAIs Cooperation with the Law Enforcement Bodies during Exposure and Prevention of Fraud and Corruption; • Subtheme III: The Practice of SAIs in Implementation Transparency and Publicity in the Field of Fighting Against Fraud and Corruption. The Conference was supported by the Parliament of Ukraine, the Cabinet of Ministries of Ukraine and by the number of Ukrainian government authorities which participated in this event. I would like to pass special thanks to all of my colleagues, Heads of the SAIs for their interest in the Conference and willingness to share experience and modern techniques in fighting against fraud and corruption. I am very pleased that the initiative of the Accounting Chamber of Ukraine received great feedback among the EUROSAI community. I am deeply convinced that this event stimulated and consolidated efficient collaboration between SAIs and that approved Recommendations will further facilitate applying common actions towards combating such negative phenomena as fraud and corruption.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 May Veliko Tarnovo 4Th CSDP Olympiad Booklet.Pdf
    4th COMMON SECURITY AND DEFENCE POLICY OLYMPIAD Residential phase, 21 - 25 May 2018 at Vasil Levski NMU, Veliko Tarnovo, under the auspices of the Bulgarian Presidency of the Council of the European Union and the European Security and Defence College, Brussels, Belgium Publication of the Vasil Levski National Military University Editor: Colonel Prof. Dr. Veselin MADANSKI, Colonel Assoc. Prof. Nevena ATANASOVA - KRASTEVA, PhD Language Editor: Senior Instructor Marina RAYKOVA Disclaimer: Any views or opinions presented in this booklet are solely those of the authors. © Vasil Levski National Military University, Veliko Tarnovo, BULGARIA, 2018 ISBN 978-954-753-278-6 2 CONTENTS Table of Contents .......................................................................................................... 3 History of the CSDP Olympiad ................................................................................ 5 History of the Vasil Levski NMU, Veliko Tarnovo ........................................... 8 OPENING CEREMONY SPEECHES ....................................................................... 10 Speech of the Deputy-Minister of the Bulgarian Presidency of the EU Council ................................................................................................................ 10 CSDP Olympiad 2018 – Speech of the Chairman of the IG .......................... 13 Speech of the Head of the ESDC ............................................................................. 15 Speech of the Minister of Defence ........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The-Origins-Of-Finabel-03.12-1-1.Pdf
    This paper was drawn up by Georges Clementz under the supervision and guidance of Mr Mario Blokken, Director of the Permanent Secretariat. This Food for Thought paper is a document that gives an initial reflection on the theme. The content is not reflecting the positions of the member states but consists of elements that can initiate and feed the discussions and analyses in the domain of the theme. All our studies are available on www.finabel.org THE ORIGINS OF FINABEL (1953–1957) In the wake of the Second World War, Euro- peans quickly became aware of the dilemma they faced concerning their collective secu- rity, namely the balance between autonomy and dependence - fate and freedom of ac- tion1. The debate over European cooperation and subordination of European defence to the Atlantic defence structure is thus old. It dates back to the first years of the Cold War with the creation of NATO in 1949. Even though the idea of a European defence took shape with the Treaty of Brussels (1948), the European Defence Community (1950) and then the Western European Union (1954), European security would remain, through- du Finabel” -“Blason Wikipedia out the Cold War, under the umbrella of the United States, in a confrontation with Rus- sia based on “mutually assured destruction”. better interoperability, non-duplication, and These various defence cooperation initiatives better efficiency in defence, balanced between were essential for countering the Soviet threat the Atlantic and the European logics and, in and are at the very core of the debate previ- fine, of major importance regarding strategic ously mentioned.
    [Show full text]
  • The Slow Death of Slavery in Nineteenth Century Senegal and the Gold Coast
    That Most Perfidious Institution: The slow death of slavery in nineteenth century Senegal and the Gold Coast Trevor Russell Getz Submitted for the degree of PhD University of London, School or Oriental and African Studies ProQuest Number: 10673252 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest ProQuest 10673252 Published by ProQuest LLC(2017). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 Abstract That Most Perfidious Institution is a study of Africans - slaves and slave owners - and their central roles in both the expansion of slavery in the early nineteenth century and attempts to reform servile relationships in the late nineteenth century. The pivotal place of Africans can be seen in the interaction between indigenous slave-owning elites (aristocrats and urban Euro-African merchants), local European administrators, and slaves themselves. My approach to this problematic is both chronologically and geographically comparative. The central comparison between Senegal and the Gold Coast contrasts the varying impact of colonial policies, integration into the trans-Atlantic economy; and, more importantly, the continuity of indigenous institutions and the transformative agency of indigenous actors.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Security and Defence Policy
    TTHEHE FEDERALFEDERAL TRUSTTRUST foreducation&research enlightening the debate on good governance EuropeanPolicyBrief Apr 2006 • Issue 26 • The Federal Trust, 7 Graphite Square, Vauxhall Walk, London SE11 5EE • www.fedtrust.co.uk The European Security and Defence Policy Introduction Established at the Cologne European Council in June 1999, the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) has, in the 7 years since its inception, given rise to countless debates and discussions. Whereas some commentators regard the ESDP as an overall success story, others voice doubts. The current discussion about whether the EU should send peacekeeping troops to the Democratic Republic of Congo during elections this June seems to crystallise these doubts. Only three EU member states would be capable of leading such a mission, and two of them, France and the United Kingdom, are currently unwilling and unable to mount an international deployment because of their respective involvement in Iraq and the Ivory Coast. After months of discussion, Germany eventually agreed at the EU External Affairs Council on 20 March 2006 to lead the military operation to the Congo from headquarters in Potsdam. Nevertheless, opposition to a Congo mission is still strong in Berlin, with considerable scepticism even within the governing parties. It is still unclear whether the German government will be able muster enough votes in the Bundestag (which has a right of veto on the mission) to send soldiers to Congo. Such uncertainty is not calculated to increase Europe’s standing and military credibility in the world. On the other hand, the European Security and Defence Policy has undoubted successes to its credit.
    [Show full text]