EUROPEANIZING SECURITY? NATO and an Integrating Europe
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
t t American Institute for Contemporary German Studies The Johns Hopkins University AICGS Research Report No. 9 EUROPEANIZING SECURITY? NATO and an Research Repor Research Repor Integrating Europe Edited by Carl Lankowski Simon Serfaty American Institute for Contemporary German Studies The Johns Hopkins University AICGS Research Report No. 9 EUROPEANIZING SECURITY? NATO and an Integrating Europe Edited by Carl Lankowski Simon Serfaty i The American Institute for Contemporary German Studies (AICGS) is a center for advanced research, study, and discussion on the politics, culture, and society of the Federal Republic of Germany. Established in 1983 and affiliated with The Johns Hopkins University but governed by its own Board of Trustees, AICGS is a privately incorporated institute dedicated to independent, critical, and comprehensive analysis and assessment of current German issues. Its goals are to help develop a new generation of American scholars with a thorough understanding of contemporary Germany, deepen American knowledge and understanding of current German developments, contribute to American policy analysis of problems relating to Germany, and promote interdisciplinary and comparative research on Germany. Executive Director: Jackson Janes Research Director: Carl Lankowski Board of Trustees, Cochair: Steven Muller Board of Trustees, Cochair: Harry J. Gray The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) alone. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies. ©1999 by the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies ISBN 0-941441-41-5 This AICGS Research Report is made possible through a generous grant from NATO Academic Affairs, the U.S. Mission to NATO and the German Marshall Fund of the U.S. Additional copies are available at $5.00 each to cover postage and processing from the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, Suite 420, 1400 16th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036-2217. Telephone 202/332-9312, Fax 202/265-9531, E-mail: [email protected], Web: http://www.aicgs.org ii C O N T E N T S FOREWORD............................................................................................v ABOUT THE AUTHORS.......................................................................xi THE UNITED STATES AND THE WESTERN EUROPEAN UNION Michael Brenner....................................................................................1 WHITHER CORE EUROPE? FRANCE AND THE EUROPEAN CONSTRUCTION: ISSUES AND CHOICES Yves Boyer.........................................................................................19 GERMANY AND THE WESTERN EUROPEAN UNION Matthias Jopp....................................................................................35 BRITAIN, THE WEU AND NATO Paul Cornish.......................................................................................53 ITALY AND THE WESTERN EUROPEAN UNION Gianni Bonvicini..................................................................................86 SPAIN AND THE “EUROPEANIZATION” OF SECURITY Antonio Marquina.............................................................................100 EUROPEANIZING SECURITY Guido Lenzi......................................................................................118 DUAL ENLARGEMENT: A FAMILY REUNION Simon Serfaty.....................................................................................133 iii F O R E W O R D This AICGS Research Report is about the implications of European integration for European security arrangements. It is animated by a simple premise: the process of remaking Europe after the tragedy of two major wars and the long, armed truce that was the Cold War, was well underway by the time the Soviet Union flew apart in 1991. If that is the case, then Europe’s radically altered security environment cannot be the only important factor prompting efforts to define a European Security and Defense Identity (ESDI) in the post-Cold War period. The other important factor is the process of European integration. In reconstructing the perceptions and motivations that preceded the recent discourse on ESDI and governs the strategies that have flowed from them in the 1990s, the authors’ contributions reveal much about whether, in what sense, and how much “identity” has been achieved in European security and defense matters. Since national policy communities continue to be the primary sites for formulating and articulating perceptions and attitudes relevant to security and defense issues, the accounts that follow are country-based and highlight country-specific connotations and associations. The mandate given to the authors included an invitation to pay special atten- tion to the Western European Union (WEU) in describing and evaluating what- ever tendencies existed toward the europeanization of security arrangements. This is neither because we are devoted to this institution, nor that we expect the WEU to play a central role in these arrangements in the future. Rather, the WEU’s centrality to our topic has been long established in the diplomacy of European integration as a marker for a perceived absence. It is not so much what the WEU is, as the gap it represents, that deserves attention. The WEU is a simulacrum of aspirations as yet unrealized, though heavily documented in official and informal discussions for a decade and a half. In the chapters that follow, the job of examining national policy communities is accomplished by focusing on five European countriesCall members of both the EU and the WEUCwhose experience exemplifies the major forces at work in producing the ESDI phenomenon and in delimiting the range of choice for its functioning and formal expression. The chapters are written by seasoned coun- try experts. The most central fact of West Europe’s security architecture since World War II is the transatlantic link. For that reason, we open with a chapter by Michael Brenner (Matthew Ridgway Center for International Strategic Studies, University of Pittsburgh) on American views of ESDI. From there we examine the French and German cases. If ESDI is a pearl of integration, then France and Germany together are the oyster out of which it is produced and the U.S. provides the necessary grit to catalyze the production of that gem of European politics. Yves Boyer (Foundation for Strategic Research, Paris) and Matthias Jopp (Institute for European Policy, Bonn) provide the chapters on France and Germany, respectively. By virtue of its “special relationship” with the United States, one would have to expect that Great Britain would feel especially in- v tense cross-pressures with respect to ESDI in the 1990s, and so an essay on that country, written by Paul Cornish (Centre of International Studies, Univer- sity of Cambridge), is also included. The Mediterranean countries confront an additional set of issues. Spain, a relatively new EU member, is evaluated by Antonio Marquina (Institute for International Security and Cooperation Studies, University of Madrid), and Italy as one of the founders, presented by Gianni Bonvicini (Institute for International Affairs, Rome). We offer an analysis from the perspective of the WEU itself, by Guido Lenzi, director of that institution’s Security Studies Institute. Europe’s security situation has never been static, but it has become intensely dynamic since 1991. By way of concluding these es- says, Simon Serfaty explores security Europeanization from the point of view of the mainspring of that dynamism, the parallel enlargements of NATO and the EU. The following comments are designed to provide less a unified narrative than some basic context for the essays. To a considerable degree, ESDI is an exercise in individuation from a prior unity. Beginning with its Marshall Plan diplomacy, the U.S. has played a key role in establishing both Europe’s unity and its subsequent individuation. The Franco-German diplomatic revolution that gave rise to the dynamic project of regional integration came from America’s support for German rearmament in the months leading up to NATO’s launch. In a bold move whose purpose was to turn adversity to advantage, French statesmen quickly moved from Foreign Minister Schuman’s scheme of economic integra- tion (the European Coal and Steel Community, ECSC) to advance a plan for West European military integration in the form of Minister Rene Pleven’s Euro- pean Defense Community (EDC). When that project failed in the French Na- tional Assembly, a European fallback arrangement was cobbled together on short notice to facilitate Germany’s absorption into NATO. With this in mind, in 1954 the moribund Brussels Treaty Organization was transformed into the West- ern European Union. But once the WEU performed its function of placing limits on German armament and in that way reassured that country’s nervous neigh- bors, the organization was anesthetized in favor of the crucial American con- nection expressed by NATO. Of course, that unity was never perfect, either organizationally or politically. Nor would one expect it to be. The discourse on ESDI that eventually emerged in the mid-1990s is a vector of forces mobilized on several different tracks. There is first a geopolitical track in which Europeans seek to define and defend European interests in contrast to those of the Americans. Decrying the “exorbi- tant privileges” that took the U.S. beyond leadership into the role of a hegemon in both economic and political-military affairs, President Charles DeGaulle with- drew France from NATO’s