Europe's Common Foreign and Security Policy: Facing Crises in Ukraine and Syria

Eric Engle, Tetiana Danyliuk
{"title":"Europe's Common Foreign and Security Policy: Facing Crises in Ukraine and Syria","authors":"Eric Engle, Tetiana Danyliuk","doi":"10.18060/7909.0020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper outlines the institutions which form and implement the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union (EU CFSP) and examines the history of the EU CFSP. Descriptively, it explains the increasing cohesion of the CFSP as a reaction to past failures. Prescriptively, it recommends ways in which the CFSP can focus European will to attain desirable objectives of peace, prosperity, and protection of human rights. It compares the current conflict in Syria to the past failure of the EU to manage a similar conflict in Yugoslavia. It argues that the EU is contributing to the resolution of conflicts in Ukraine but it is unlikely that the EU can contribute to the peaceful transition of power in Syria as mediator between the U.S. and Russia or Assad and Rebels. Unlike Ukraine, paralysis, incapacity, and disintegration of the failing state are likely outcomes in Syria. EU CFSP institutions and instruments are well considered and consensusoriented but are slow and even indecisive in consequence. The crisis in Ukraine will likely focus the political will of European elites to attain decisive, coherent foreign policies adapted to the challenges presented in Ukraine and Syria. The death of Syria and the agony of Ukraine are bad for business and even worse for peace and human rights. The EU has suasive and dissuasive soft-power mechanisms (education, sanctions), and NATO has hard power instruments (soldiers, aircraft). In concert with EU trading partners a resolution of these crises will be found but the cost in blood and lost business is yet to be accounted for. http://dx.doi.org/10.18060/7909.002","PeriodicalId":230320,"journal":{"name":"Indiana international and comparative law review","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indiana international and comparative law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18060/7909.0020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper outlines the institutions which form and implement the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union (EU CFSP) and examines the history of the EU CFSP. Descriptively, it explains the increasing cohesion of the CFSP as a reaction to past failures. Prescriptively, it recommends ways in which the CFSP can focus European will to attain desirable objectives of peace, prosperity, and protection of human rights. It compares the current conflict in Syria to the past failure of the EU to manage a similar conflict in Yugoslavia. It argues that the EU is contributing to the resolution of conflicts in Ukraine but it is unlikely that the EU can contribute to the peaceful transition of power in Syria as mediator between the U.S. and Russia or Assad and Rebels. Unlike Ukraine, paralysis, incapacity, and disintegration of the failing state are likely outcomes in Syria. EU CFSP institutions and instruments are well considered and consensusoriented but are slow and even indecisive in consequence. The crisis in Ukraine will likely focus the political will of European elites to attain decisive, coherent foreign policies adapted to the challenges presented in Ukraine and Syria. The death of Syria and the agony of Ukraine are bad for business and even worse for peace and human rights. The EU has suasive and dissuasive soft-power mechanisms (education, sanctions), and NATO has hard power instruments (soldiers, aircraft). In concert with EU trading partners a resolution of these crises will be found but the cost in blood and lost business is yet to be accounted for. http://dx.doi.org/10.18060/7909.002
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧洲共同外交与安全政策:面对乌克兰和叙利亚危机
本文概述了欧盟共同外交与安全政策的形成和实施机制,并考察了欧盟共同外交与安全政策的历史。描述性地说,它解释了CFSP凝聚力的增强是对过去失败的反应。从规定上讲,它建议欧洲战略与合作伙伴关系可以集中欧洲的意愿,以实现和平、繁荣和保护人权的理想目标。报告将叙利亚目前的冲突与欧盟过去未能处理好南斯拉夫类似冲突进行了比较。它认为,欧盟正在为解决乌克兰的冲突做出贡献,但欧盟不太可能作为美俄或阿萨德与反对派之间的调解人,为叙利亚的和平权力过渡做出贡献。与乌克兰不同,这个失败国家的瘫痪、无能和解体很可能是叙利亚的结果。欧盟CFSP机构和工具经过深思熟虑并以共识为导向,但其后果是缓慢甚至优柔寡断。乌克兰危机很可能会使欧洲精英的政治意愿集中起来,以达成果断、一致的外交政策,以适应乌克兰和叙利亚所面临的挑战。叙利亚的死亡和乌克兰的痛苦不利于商业,更不利于和平与人权。欧盟有说服和劝阻的软实力机制(教育、制裁),北约有硬实力工具(士兵、飞机)。与欧盟贸易伙伴合作,将找到解决这些危机的办法,但流血和业务损失的代价尚未计算在内。http://dx.doi.org/10.18060/7909.002
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Sanctimonious Barbarity: The Forced Pregnancy Alito Dobbs Opinion Self-Determination: What Lessons from Kashmir? Striking a Balance: Extending Minimum Rights to U.S. Gig Economy Workers Based on E.U. Directive 2019/1153 on Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions Issue Preclusion Out of the U.S. (?) The Evolution of the Italian Doctrine of Res Judicata in Comparative Context Animal Welfare, Who Cares? Why the United Nations Needs to Tackle Horse-Soring
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1