The politicisation of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) in the British domestic debate on Brexit: a challenge to EU-UK foreign and security cooperation
{"title":"The politicisation of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) in the British domestic debate on Brexit: a challenge to EU-UK foreign and security cooperation","authors":"Thibaud Harrois","doi":"10.1080/13619462.2023.2237316","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The aim of this paper is to study the evolution of Britain’s involvement in the EU’s foreign and security policy in order to highlight the reasons that led the issue to be left out of talks on the post-Brexit future relation. The paper argues Europeanisation or de-Europeanisation largely depends on the degree of politicisation of issues both in the EU, the EU-27 and in the UK. As long as foreign and security issues remained relatively low key, the UK was able to enjoy the magnifying effect of its participation in the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and contributed to the decision-making process in order to successfully influence EU policies. Politicisation of foreign and security issues was due both to developments in EU-led or national initiatives and to the reaction they provoked in the UK. The EU insisted the UK was to be considered as a ‘third country’ and stressed the need for future cooperation to be institutionalised. On the contrary, in the UK, public distrust against a putative European ‘super state’, led successive governments to avoid any formal commitment to new EU initiatives.","PeriodicalId":45519,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary British History","volume":"37 1","pages":"656 - 678"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary British History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13619462.2023.2237316","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ABSTRACT The aim of this paper is to study the evolution of Britain’s involvement in the EU’s foreign and security policy in order to highlight the reasons that led the issue to be left out of talks on the post-Brexit future relation. The paper argues Europeanisation or de-Europeanisation largely depends on the degree of politicisation of issues both in the EU, the EU-27 and in the UK. As long as foreign and security issues remained relatively low key, the UK was able to enjoy the magnifying effect of its participation in the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and contributed to the decision-making process in order to successfully influence EU policies. Politicisation of foreign and security issues was due both to developments in EU-led or national initiatives and to the reaction they provoked in the UK. The EU insisted the UK was to be considered as a ‘third country’ and stressed the need for future cooperation to be institutionalised. On the contrary, in the UK, public distrust against a putative European ‘super state’, led successive governments to avoid any formal commitment to new EU initiatives.
期刊介绍:
Contemporary British History offers innovative new research on any aspect of British history - foreign, Commonwealth, political, social, cultural or economic - dealing with the period since the First World War. The editors welcome work which involves cross-disciplinary insights, as the journal seeks to reflect the work of all those interested in the recent past in Britain, whatever their subject specialism. Work which places contemporary Britain within a comparative (whether historical or international) context is also encouraged. In addition to articles, the journal regularly features interviews and profiles, archive reports, and a substantial review section.