DOCSLIB.ORG

The Consequences of a British Exit from the EU and CSDP: an Analytical Timeline

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Consequences of a British Exit from the EU and CSDP: an Analytical Timeline Occasional Paper January 2013 The consequences of a British exit from the EU and CSDP: An analytical timeline Philip Worré Executive Director, ISIS Europe Key points: • Britain has always acted according to its national interest when dealing with European defence; • Britain has much to lose from leaving the EU—such a move would go against its national interest; • A British exit would have mixed consequences for the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). www.isis-europe.org www.natowatch.org ISIS Europe - NATO Watch Occasional Paper January 2013 The views expressed in this paper are the authors’ own, and do not necessarily reflect those of ISIS Europe, NATO Watch or any other institution with which the author is associated. Comments on this paper are invited and should be forwarded to: Philip Worré, Executive Director, International Security Information Service (ISIS Europe), Rue Archim de, 50, 1000 Brussels, Belgium, or via email to [email protected] Acknowledgements ________________________________________________________________ This paper is a product of an ISIS Europe-NATO Watch partnership to address particular international security and defence debates within the EU and NATO. ISIS Europe and NATO Watch gratefully acknowledge the support of the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust, without which this work would not be possible. Published in January 2013 by ISIS Europe and NATO Watch. Reproduction is permitted with proper acknowledgment to the source and author, a visible web-link back to us, and maintaining all links contained in the original (unless we have agreed otherwise). This applies to recognised not-for-profit organisations and allied groups only. (Commercial organisations and those deriving financial profit from our services are required to pay for the use of material. Please contact us for details.) We apply the 'Creative Commons' agreement to much of our material. This serves to separate out the moral rights of copyright ownership and use from its over- commercialised aspects. See copyright and legal information on our websites for further details. ISIS Europe - NATO Watch Occasional Paper January 2013 Analysis European integration initiatives, while continuing the aforementioned ad hoc initiatives. The _____________________________________ collapse of the Berlin Wall and of the Soviet The announcement by British Prime Minister Union led to a period of interrogation; questions David Cameron that a referendum on Britain’s EU were raised about the role the US should play in membership will be held by 2017, gives rise to Europe, the definition of a European defence questions about the consequences of such a identity, and the inclusion of defence matters withdrawal for the EU’s Common and Security within the mandate of the European Defence Policy (CSDP). A withdrawal would Communities/Union. Britain had to tread a undoubtedly have important repercussions, as narrow line in negotiations, a task made even the United Kingdom has very often been at the more complicated by internal political challenges core of the development of European defence such as the replacement of Margaret Thatcher by policies, initiatives and capabilities. John Major in 1990, just as negotiations were beginning on what would become the Maastricht Britain’s attitude and role in the comparatively Treaty. Since then, Britain’s leaders have been recent history of European defence has varied caught between trying to present the benefits of from enthusiastic participation—with US European integration through maximising the support—to reluctant approval or hostile returns that EU membership produces, and the opposition. A brief timeline of key stages of pressure of increasingly Europe-phobic public British and European defence development opinion. shows the degree of British involvement in not only the EU’s defence dimension, but also in The unease with which Britain has reluctantly armament and defence industry cooperation. accepted European defence integration, even opposing further military integration within the The timeline of Britain’s role in European defence EU, especially permanent operational military (see Appendix) can be divided into three main headquarters, has reached a climax with David periods. Cameron’s announcement of a referendum on EU The first period (1947-1969) occurred in the membership. Yet this decision merely follows the aftermath of World War II and during the early established pattern: in the realm of European development of the Cold War. This period defence, in particular, Britain has played a highlighted the tight bonds that linked the United singular role, virtually always motivated by Kingdom to the United States, as each main national interest. decision was adopted with the support of the Consequences for CSDP and European American ally, which led to certain tensions in defence Europe, particularly with Gaullist France. Britain has always adopted a very cautious The second period (1970-1990) occurred during attitude with regard to European defence the opening of dialogue in the Cold War, and also integration. coincided with De Gaulle’s retirement. Britain Initiatives were judged on their individual merits adopted a series of ad hoc pragmatic decisions to and potential rewards. Britain remains a global join several defence cooperation organisations military and nuclear power, a European and groups which either promoted British permanent member of the UN Security Council, interests or could lead to potential political or capable of global force projection (albeit on a financial advantages for Britain. limited scale). Britain contributes to EU The third period (1991-2013) was characterised Battlegroups (the next UK Battlegroup by either opposition or reluctant acceptance of contribution will occur in the second half of 3 ISIS Europe - NATO Watch Occasional Paper January 2013 2013), and regularly contributes military comprehensive in its approach. Purely military personnel to most CSDP missions. interventions are not and cannot be effective, except in very rare cases. The European Union, A British exit would undoubtedly cause much with its CSDP and development programmes, is turmoil, and CSDP will have lost a key contributor one of the rare regional organisations that are in and supporter. From a strictly CSDP- and a position to provide long-lasting solutions to European defence integration- perspective, conflicts compared to the position of NATO. however, Britain’s departure could create Peace and stability programmes also provide opportunities in terms of military cooperation Member States with possibilities of developing and accelerate the establishment of permanent contacts, political and commercial, in post- structured cooperation, because of a more conflict areas, benefiting all parties involved. unified approach among the remaining Member Although utilitarian, this approach provides States. Britain’s participation in non-EU European Member States with incentives to take part in initiatives such as the Movement Coordination programmes and missions promoting regional Centre Europe (MCCE) and Organisation for Joint stability. Armament Cooperation (OCCAR), the numerous links between CSDP and NATO and the existence Drafting comparable but bilateral agreements of bilateral defence agreements would also mean with relevant partners would not be cost- that Britain remained a European partner in the effective and would certainly not be efficient; nor areas of the defence industry, military would NATO provide any comparable equivalent. operational aspects, and European mutual The idea of losing all influence within CSDP, defence. within its security partnerships, and—in the same spirit—within the entire dimension of European The absence of Britain in CSDP could also foreign development aid, could be a strong contribute to a further ideological separation deterrent that would convince Britain to remain a between the “hard-power” advocate, NATO, and member of the EU, a position that the US has the “soft-power” specialist that is the EU. Britain indicated it favours. is often viewed as America’s primary ally, demonstrated by the 2003 British support for a Conclusion US intervention in Iraq; as a regional security and A British exit from the EU would have important defence actor specialising in the projection of consequences for the EU, but the subsequent “soft power”, often specialising in Security Sector shift that would occur in the reorganisation of Reform, development and nation-building, the EU CSDP, and the lack of major opposition towards and CSDP would be seen as an increasingly further permanent structured cooperation and separate entity from US-dominated NATO, the establishment of operational military particularly in regions hostile to America. At the headquarters within theEU would mean that the UN Security Council, France would thus be the EU would recover and continue to develop CSDP. only veto-holding representative of the EU, which could lead to tensions regarding mandates for Britain would have more to lose: it is unlikely that CSDP missions in Africa, an area in which France Britain’s partnership with the US and NATO still maintains a strong military presence as well membership would be sufficient for it to remain as “special relationships”. an important actor in the global security arena. From a security and defence position, by exiting Consequences for the United Kingdom the EU and CSDP, an isolated Britain would lose The nature of contemporary crises, whether considerable power and its
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Comparative Historical Study of the Development of a European Army Written by Snezhana Stadnik
    A Comparative Historical Study of the Development of a European Army Written by Snezhana Stadnik This PDF is auto-generated for reference only. As such, it may contain some conversion errors and/or missing information. For all formal use please refer to the official version on the website, as linked below. A Comparative Historical Study of the Development of a European Army https://www.e-ir.info/2016/05/12/a-comparative-historical-study-of-the-development-of-a-european-army/ SNEZHANA STADNIK, MAY 12 2016 Has the Time Come? – A Comparative Historical Study of the Obstacles Facing the Development of a European Army Almost 70 years ago, a polity was created which instituted a legacy of peace among incessantly warring states. This remarkable feat, a collection of nation-states called the European Union (EU), has been the object of much research and observation. Starting off as an economic community, then growing into a new kind of federalist suprastate, 28 countries today have come together to participate in the blurring of national borders, achieving more success in market integration than foreign and security policy. This hybrid system of supranationalism and intergovernmentalism is incrementally evolving as decision-makers create and refine institutions and mechanisms to respond to needs, ultimately moving the Union forward. One such decision-maker, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, recently re-surfaced an important issue: the need for a European army.[1] This has not been the first time that an influential European official has called for such a development. Every decade, the issue is revisited, with German Chancellor Angel Merkel recently wishing for a European army on her birthday.[2] Despite many developments in defense and security policy in the last several decades, one thing remains certain: the same underlying reasons that historically precluded the development of a supranational European army remain relevant today.
    [Show full text]
  • EN Council Conclusions on EU Relations with EFTA Countries
    COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION EN Council conclusions on EU relations with EFTA countries 3060th GENERAL AFFAIRS Council meeting Brussels, 14 December 2010 The Council adopted the following conclusions: "1. The Council has assessed the development of relations between the EU and the four Member States of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) since the adoption of its last conclusions on the subject in December 2008. Generally, EU relations with the EFTA countries, which were already considered to be very good and close in 2008, have further intensified in the past two years (details on developments are set out below in country- specific paragraphs). The Council is looking forward to continue the positive relationship with the EFTA countries and to deepen it in the future. It will reassess the state of relations between the EU and the EFTA countries in two years. 2. The Council appreciates the financial contributions of the EFTA countries to the economic and social cohesion in the European Economic Area (EEA). Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland (the "EEA EFTA States") recently committed themselves to a substantial increase of their continued contributions. The EU is looking forward to a constructive dialogue with Switzerland on the review of the current mechanism, expiring in June 2012. The Council hopes that a mutually acceptable solution will be found with the aim of reducing economic and social disparities in the EU. 3. Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway are integrated in the internal market through the EEA Agreement of 1994. This Agreement functions properly so long as all Contracting Parties incorporate the full body of the relevant EU acquis relating to the internal market into their national law.
    [Show full text]
  • JAPCC Annual Report 2019
    2019 annual REPORT Joint Air Power Competence Centre Joint Air Power www.japcc.org Competence Centre Cover picture: Satellite: © ESA /AOES Medialab; Earth: © 2012 EUMETSAT; Background: © StarLine /shutterstock © This work is copyrighted. All Inquiries should be made to: The Editor, Joint Air Power Competence Centre (JAPCC), [email protected] Disclaimer This publication is a product of the JAPCC. It does not represent the opinions or policies of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and is designed to provide an independent overview, analysis, food for thought and recommendations regarding a possible way ahead on the subject. Release This document is releasable to the Public. Portions of the document may be quoted without permission, provided a standard source credit is included. Published and distributed by The Joint Air Power Competence Centre von­Seydlitz­Kaserne Römerstraße 140 47546 Kalkar Germany Telephone: +49 (0) 2824 90 2201 Facsimile: +49 (0) 2824 90 2208 E­Mail: [email protected] Website: www.japcc.org Denotes images digitally manipulated Follow us on Social Media JAPCC | annual REPORT 2019 1 foreword Today, NATO Air Forces stand on the verge of the at the peer­to­peer level. We must use the lessons most meaningful transformation of technology and learned from this and other exercises to evolve our capability in our history, a transformation which con­ Alliance into a connected, Joint All Domain fighting tinues to be enabled in part by the independent force that is agile and capable of acting at speed that thought and analysis from the recognized air and future conflicts will require. I have great confidence space power experts in the Joint Air Power Compe­ that our Nations and our people will work closely with tence Centre.
    [Show full text]
  • CODE of CONDUCT “ Our Reputation, Our Brand, and the Trust of Our Stakeholders Are Irreplaceable Assets We All Must Protect.”
    CODE OF CONDUCT “ Our reputation, our brand, and the trust of our stakeholders are irreplaceable assets we all must protect.” Dear Colleagues, An important part of our job is to read and understand the Code and be familiar with Thank you for taking the time to review our Code resources for our questions or concerns. While our of Conduct. Code may not answer every question, it contains guidance and information about how to learn I am proud to lead this Company, knowing that we more. Speaking up is the Western Union way. I better the lives of our customers around the world encourage anyone with questions or concerns to every day. We operate in more than 200 countries speak up. and territories and our customers rely on us to help them succeed. The key to our growth is working together with integrity and succeeding in the right way. Western Union has a rich and diverse history. We I appreciate all you do to promote our shared have thrived for more than 167 years because values and adhere to our Code. Our Code is the of our determination to meet the needs of our cornerstone of our success. customers and evolve our way of working. Sincerely, Each of us has a responsibility to act ethically and with integrity. We all have a role in making sure our business is conducted in the right way and that we comply with our policies, our Code of Conduct, and the law. Our Code is the foundation for how we work, a statement of our principles, Hikmet Ersek and a guide for navigating issues and getting help.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Nato and Eu: Towards a Constructive Relationship?
    between the two organisations on the ground. The question that has to be asked, therefore, is if it is really the case that the establishment of a constructive relationship between NATO and the COMMON SECURITY AND DEFENCE POLICY EU is in effect being held hostage to the long-standing disagreements about Cyprus. NATO and EU: Two planets in the same city Towards a Constructive Relationship? Trine Flockhart Senior Researcher, DIIS The relationship between NATO and the EU has never been a close one as the two organisa- tions have historically tended to focus on different agendas and different policy areas, roughly divided between a focus on economic and development issues and a focus on military and security issues. However, after a rather unconstructive and competitive relationship during most of the 1990s, the first decade of the 21st century has witnessed convergence between the two organisations. Through the successful establishment of the European Security and he security challenges of the 21st century are likely to be both multifaceted, highly complex Defence Policy (ESDP) in 1999, the EU has taken on a much greater role as a security actor, and of an increasingly interdependent and global nature. The international community whereas NATO’s experience in the Balkans and Afghanistan has clearly revealed that military T is therefore faced with problems that cannot easily fit into traditional boxes and which solutions alone cannot bring peace and prosperity to post-conflict societies. require a so-called comprehensive approach, with emphasis on cooperation between different international actors and between different agencies across the traditional divides that separate Convergence between the two organisations in policy areas has been accompanied by geo- civilian and military approaches.
    [Show full text]
  • EURODRONES Inc
    EURODRONES Inc. A report by Ben Hayes, Chris Jones & Eric Töpfer PUBLICATION INFO Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to the input of Mathias Monroy, Stefanie Sifft, Mathias Vermeulen and Wim Zwijnenburg for their suggestions regarding aspects of the report. Copyright and publication details This report is published by the Transnational Institute and Statewatch under ISSN 1756-851X. Personal usage as pri- vate individuals/”fair dealing” is allowed. Usage by those working for organisations is allowed provided the organi- sation holds an appropriate licence from the relevant repro- graphic rights organisation (eg. Copyright Licensing Agen- cy in the UK), with such usage being subject to the terms and conditions of that licence and to local copyright law. Authors Ben Hayes, Chris Jones & Eric Toepfer Design Hans Roor at Jubels, Amsterdam Contact Transnational Institute (TNI) PO Box 14656, 1001 LD, Amsterdam The Netherlands Tel: +31-20-6626608 Email: [email protected] www.tni.org Statewatch PO Box 1516, London, N16 0EW England Tel: +44-207 697 4202 Email: [email protected] www.statewatch.org Amsterdam, February 2014 EURODRONES Inc. A report by Ben Hayes, Chris Jones & Eric Töpfer EURODRONES Inc. Contents 1. Introduction 7 2. Drones and the European Union: a lobbyist’s paradise 10 2.1. Summary 10 2.2. Reaching for the stars 11 2.3. The road to drone-ware 12 2.4. Establishing a favourable regulatory environment 14 2.5. Towards an EU drone policy 18 2.6. Going global: EU + USA = ICAO drone standards? 21 2.7. “Drone-washing”: the battle for hearts and minds 23 3.
    [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]
  • European Air Group Un Decennio Di Interoperabilità
    Cooperazione internazionale European Air Group Un decennio di interoperabilità Sebastiano Franco varie Nazioni in tale contesto potrà permettere di porre a fattor comune, con maggiore efficacia, sia le capacità operative sia quelle logistiche e di conseguenza ridurre lo l crescente impegno delle Forze Armate in operazio- sforzo economico della singola Nazione. ni multinazionali, nella maggior parte dei casi in aree In tale quadro si inserisce l’European Air Group di High lontane dai confini nazionali, comporta una continua e Wycombe (UK) la cui missione è di “migliorare le capa- Isempre maggiore capacità di operare congiuntamente tra cità operative delle Aeronautiche dei Paesi membri per le varie componenti operative delle Nazioni im- condurre operazioni che perseguono interessi pegnate in tali operazioni. Di fatto diventa una comuni, principalmente attraverso meccanismi necessità imprescindibile in considerazione che accrescono l’interoperabilità”. anche dei notevoli tagli di bilancio nel comparto Difesa nella maggior parte degli Stati europei, Le origini nonostante i numerosi impegni operativi che, Durante la prima Guerra del Golfo (1991) l’Ae- verosimilmente, saranno mantenuti pressoché ronautica Militare francese e quella britannica si inalterati.Tale intensità, in termini di impegni ope- sono trovate ad operare congiuntamente senza rativi, potrà pertanto essere mantenuta concentrando avere però alla base un addestramento comune. Tale ogni possibile sforzo anche nella ricerca della più spinta situazione si è ripetuta in seguito durante il periodo iniziale interoperabilità, da intendersi nel suo significato più ampio delle operazioni nei Balcani. Sulla scorta di tali esperien- del termine, includendo non soltanto gli aspetti tecnici ma ze i governi dei due Paesi decisero, durante il summit di anche quelli procedurali ed umani (addestramento, lingua, Chartres nel 1994, di dare vita ad una organizzazione che, ecc.).
    [Show full text]
  • Getting There: Building Strategic Mobility Into ESDP Occasional Papers
    Occasional Papers November 2002 n°38 Katia Vlachos-Dengler Getting there: building strategic mobility into ESDP published by the European Union Institute for Security Studies 43 avenue du Président Wilson F-75775 Paris cedex 16 phone: + 33 (0) 1 56 89 19 30 fax: + 33 (0) 1 56 89 19 31 e-mail: [email protected] www.iss-eu.org In January 2002 the Institute for Security Studies (ISS) became a Paris-based autonomous agency of the European Union. Following an EU Council Joint Action of 20 July 2001, it is now an integral part of the new structures that will support the further development of the CFSP/ESDP. The Institute’s core mission is to provide analyses and recommendations that can be of use and relevance to the formulation of EU policies. In carrying out that mission, it also acts as an interface between experts and decision-makers at all levels. The EUISS is the successor to the WEU Institute for Security Studies, set up in 1990 by the WEU Council to foster and stimulate a wider discussion across Europe. Occasional Papers are essays or reports that the Institute considers should be made avail- able as a contribution to the debate on topical issues relevant to European security. They may be based on work carried out by researchers granted awards by the ISS, on contribu- tions prepared by external experts, and on collective research projects or other activities organised by (or with the support of) the Institute. They reflect the views of their authors, not those of the Institute.
    [Show full text]