FRANCE, GERMANY AND THE UNITED KINGDOM COOPERATION IN TIMES OF TURBULENCE ABSTRACT This thesis deals with cooperation between France, Germany and the United Kingdom within the area of foreign and security policy. Two case studies are presented, one of them concerning cooperation between the three states within and outside institutions in 1980 following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the other dealing with cooperation concerning the crisis in Macedonia in 2001. In accordance with the approach of neoliberal institutionalism the primary hypothesis is that cooperation is primarily determined by the interests of states but it is also limited by norms and affected by the institutions of which the three states are members. The study describes the large variety of forms of cooperation that exist between France, Germany and the United Kingdom, in which the United States also plays an important part, and which also includes their cooperation within a number of international institutions. The study concludes that cooperation between France, Germany and the United Kingdom in 1980 and 2001 was highly similar. In both periods the relationship to the US formed a vital part of their foreign and security policy. In accordance with the primary hypothesis, perceived interests turned out to be the predominant factor for cooperation, but norms and institutions also played certain roles. A second hypothesis, serving as a precision of the first one, suggests that institutional cooperation is determined by (1) an institution’s capability to initiate work quickly, (2) an institution’s competence within the relevant areas, and (3) country support. The study finds that even if the factors related to institutional capability often coincide with the involvement of institutions, the factor of country support is decisive to determine their involvement. The study also points to the new forms of interaction between states and institutions that have come about since the Cold War ended, and which give a stronger role to institutions and the cooperation between them. Still, however, states retain a decisive role in cooperation within the field of foreign and security policy. Key words: France, Germany, United Kingdom, United States, United Nations, OSCE, WEU, NATO, European Union (EU), Afghanistan, Macedonia, cooperation, foreign and security policy, CFSP, ESDP. Stockholm Studies in Politics 100 FRANCE, GERMANY AND THE UNITED KINGDOM COOPERATION IN TIMES OF TURBULENCE Gunilla Herolf Stockholm University Department of Political Science Cover design by Mats Herolf Photos Soviet forces patrolling the streets of Kabul 31 January 1980. Copyright Pressens Bild Fighting near Tetovo, FYROM, 15 March 2001. Published with the kind permission of the OSCE © Gunilla Herolf 2004 ISBN 91-7265-797-9 Intellecta DocuSys, Sollentuna, Stockholm 2004 Contents Acknowledgements Acronyms and Abbreviations Part I. Design and Theory Chapter 1. A Study of France, Germany and the United 3 Kingdom 1.1. Why This Study? 3 1.2. Brief Description of the Study 4 1.2.1. Theory and Hypotheses 5 1.2.1.1. The Dependent Variables 6 1.3. The Choice of France, Germany and the United Kingdom 6 1.4. The Area of Study 11 1.5. The Institutions 12 1.5.1. The Formal Structure of Cooperation Arrangements 12 1.5.2. The Institutions Under Study 14 1.6. Other Forms of Cooperation Under Study 16 1.7. The Comparative Method and the Selection of the Two Cases 17 1.8. The Sources 20 1.9. Outline of the Study 21 Chapter 2. Theory: Neoliberal Institutionalism as Applied 22 in This Study 2.1. Theory and Hypothesis 22 2.2. Neoliberal Institutionalism 24 2.2.1. The Crucial Elements 24 2.2.2. Neoliberal Institutionalism and Other Varieties of 27 Institutionalism 2.3. Cooperation 29 2.3.1. The Definition of Cooperation 29 2.3.2. The Basis for Cooperation 31 2.3.3. Forms of Cooperation 32 2.3.3.1. The Variety of Forms of Cooperation 32 2.3.3.2. Uni-, Bi-, Tri- and Multilateral Activities 32 2.3.4. Dependent Variables: Pattern, Content and Impact of 33 Cooperation 2.4. States 34 2.4.1. The Variety of Approaches 34 2.4.2. The Unitary Actor 34 2.4.3. The Domestic Level 35 2.4.4. The Approach of This Study 37 2.5. Interests 39 2.5.1. Some Underlying Factors 39 2.5.2. Capabilities of States 40 2.5.2.1. Capabilities and Interests 40 2.5.2.2. United States–Europe 41 2.5.2.3. The European States 43 2.5.3. Perceived Interests 44 2.5.4. Interests and Cooperation 45 2.6. Norms Associated with Institutions 47 2.6.1. Characteristics of Norms 47 2.6.2. Perceived Norms 49 2.6.3. Establishing the Existing Norms 51 2.7. Institutions 52 2.7.1. Institutions in General 52 2.7.2. Individual Institutions 55 Part II. The Afghanistan Crisis, 1980 Map of Afghanistan and South-West Asia 58 Chapter 3. The Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan: The Issue 59 of Sanctions 3.1. Introduction 59 3.1.1. The Analysis 60 3.1.1.1. Time Periods and Method of Analysis 61 3.2. Background 62 3.2.1. Security Relations between the United States and 62 Western Europe 3.2.2. The US and the Three European States: Trade Relations 65 with the USSR 3.2.3. Afghanistan Before the Invasion 70 3.2.3.1. France, Germany and the UK 71 3.2.3.2. The United States 72 3.2.4. The Events Leading up to the Invasion 73 3.3. The Reactions up to and including 28 December: Messages 73 to the Soviet Union and the General Public 3.4. The Period up to 15 January 75 3.4.1. The United States 75 3.4.1.1. The American Evaluation of the Invasion 75 3.4.1.2. The American Initiatives 76 3.4.2. Western Contacts and Cooperation: 15 January 1980 78 3.4.2.1. The London Meeting 78 3.4.2.2. NATO Meetings 80 3.4.2.3. The United Nations 84 3.4.2.4. The EC 86 3.4.2.5. The EPC 88 3.4.2.6. The WEU 89 3.4.3. Conclusion: The Outcome as Explained by Institutional 89 Capability 3.4.4. The French, German and British Evaluations of the 94 Invasion 3.4.4.1. The French Evaluation of the Invasion 94 3.4.4.2. The German Evaluation of the Invasion 95 3.4.4.3. The British Evaluation of the Invasion 97 3.4.5. French, German and British Reactions to the Invasion 97 3.4.5.1. The French Reactions 97 3.4.5.2. The French Cooperation Pattern 99 3.4.5.3. The German Reactions 99 3.4.5.4. The German Cooperation Pattern 102 3.4.5.5. The British Reactions 103 3.4.5.6. The British Cooperation Pattern 104 3.4.6. Conclusion 105 3.4.6.1. The United States as Initiator 105 3.4.6.2. European Evaluations and Reactions 106 3.4.6.3. Choice of Policies towards the Soviet Union 107 and the United States 3.4.6.4. Cooperation of States 108 3.4.6.5. States and Institutions: The Impact of Country 109 Support and Overall Conclusion 3.5. Analysis of the Whole Period 110 3.5.1. The Issue of Sanctions and the Institutions 111 3.5.1.1. The Agricultural Embargo and the EC 111 3.5.1.2. Export Credits and the EC 113 3.5.1.3. Embargo on High-Technology and Strategic 114 Items: the EC and CoCom 3.5.1.4. The Olympic Games and the EPC 117 3.5.1.5. Conclusion: The Outcome as Explained by 120 Institutional Capability 3.5.1.6. The Pattern and Content of Cooperation 120 3.5.1.7. The Impact of Institutional Cooperation 121 3.6. France, Germany and the UK: Interests, Norms and 122 Cooperation 3.6.1. France and the Sanctions 122 3.6.1.1. The Economic Area 122 3.6.1.2. France and the Olympic Games 123 3.6.1.3. Cooperation Patterns 124 3.6.1.4. The French Perception of Norms in Relation 128 to Institutions 3.6.2. Germany and the Sanctions 132 3.6.2.1. The Economic Area 133 3.6.2.2. Germany and the Olympic Games 135 3.6.2.3. Cooperation Patterns 137 3.6.2.4. The German Perception of Norms in Relation 139 to Institutions 3.6.3. The United Kingdom and the Sanctions 142 3.6.3.1. The Economic Area 143 3.6.3.2. The UK and the Olympic Games 144 3.6.3.3. Cooperation Patterns 146 3.6.3.4. The British Perception of Norms in Relation 147 to Institutions 3.7. Concluding Remarks: The Outcome of Cooperation 150 3.7.1. The End of the Issue of Sanctions 150 Table 3.1. Regional Distribution of East–West Trade, 1979–80 66 Table 3.2. Capability to Initiate Work Quickly: a Comparison 90 of the Institutions Table 3.3. Competence in the Relevant Areas: a Comparison 92 of the Institutions Chapter 4. The British Proposal for a Neutral 153 Afghanistan 4.1. Introduction 153 4.2. The Background 153 4.3. The Soviet Attitude 154 4.4. The American Attitude 155 4.5. The Institutions 156 4.5.1. The EPC 156 4.5.2. Other Institutions 157 4.6. Institutional Capability: the Pattern and Content 158 of Cooperation 4.7. The Three European Countries and the Proposal 158 4.7.1. The British Activities 158 4.7.2.