On 7 December 2020, the EU Foreign Affairs Council adopted an ‘EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime’ (EU HRSR). The objective of the EU HRSR is to give the EU to a flexible tool to address serious human rights violations and abuses worldwide. This article starts from the position that setting up an EU HRSR serves a noble objective. The EU HRSR could be desirable tool to flexibly confront those with consequences that commit serious human rights violations. Yet, it would crucially need to comply with human rights itself. This is not a small feat to accomplish. Much hinges on the listing and delisting criteria, the required evidentiary standard, and the information on which the listing decisions are based. Based on a detailed analysis of the Court of Justice’s sanctions case law, the article sets out the requirements with which the EU HRSR would have to comply. Finally, the horizontal EU HRSR is an attempt to decouple the protection of human rights from specific (political) conflicts. This decoupling directly charges the protection of human rights, which is traditionally portrayed as ‘neutral’, with sovereign politics. Human rights, sanctions, restrictive measures, listing criteria, evidentiary standard, delisting
{"title":"EU Human Rights Sanctions Regime: Striving for Utopia Backed by Sovereign Power?","authors":"C. Eckes","doi":"10.54648/eerr2021017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2021017","url":null,"abstract":"On 7 December 2020, the EU Foreign Affairs Council adopted an ‘EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime’ (EU HRSR). The objective of the EU HRSR is to give the EU to a flexible tool to address serious human rights violations and abuses worldwide. This article starts from the position that setting up an EU HRSR serves a noble objective. The EU HRSR could be desirable tool to flexibly confront those with consequences that commit serious human rights violations. Yet, it would crucially need to comply with human rights itself. This is not a small feat to accomplish. Much hinges on the listing and delisting criteria, the required evidentiary standard, and the information on which the listing decisions are based. Based on a detailed analysis of the Court of Justice’s sanctions case law, the article sets out the requirements with which the EU HRSR would have to comply. Finally, the horizontal EU HRSR is an attempt to decouple the protection of human rights from specific (political) conflicts. This decoupling directly charges the protection of human rights, which is traditionally portrayed as ‘neutral’, with sovereign politics.\u0000Human rights, sanctions, restrictive measures, listing criteria, evidentiary standard, delisting","PeriodicalId":84710,"journal":{"name":"European foreign affairs review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42788526","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In most policy areas the EU is either the main forum in which Danish foreign policy is conducted or the most important forum together with bilateral action. However, the Kingdom of Denmark’s Artic policy is an exception in this respect. The article suggests an answer to why the role of the EU is much less prominent in the Kingdom’s policy towards the Arctic than in most other areas of Danish foreign policy: the combination of a very strongly articulated Danish agency with regard to the Arctic and an EU policy which is not intensive but still resourceful. This makes for a Danish foreign policy which includes the EU in certain areas but also aims to limit the EU’s geopolitical influence and control its influence on the daily life of the people of the Arctic. In addition, the fragile character of the Kingdom of Denmark construction reinforces the sensitivity vis-à-vis of involvement of the EU. Kingdom of Denmark, Arctic, EU, foreign policy, Greenland, Arctic Council, Artic Five, Ilulissat Declaration
{"title":"The Arctic Exception: The Role of the EU in the Kingdom of Denmark’s Arctic Policy","authors":"Henrik Larsen","doi":"10.54648/eerr2021020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2021020","url":null,"abstract":"In most policy areas the EU is either the main forum in which Danish foreign policy is conducted or the most important forum together with bilateral action. However, the Kingdom of Denmark’s Artic policy is an exception in this respect. The article suggests an answer to why the role of the EU is much less prominent in the Kingdom’s policy towards the Arctic than in most other areas of Danish foreign policy: the combination of a very strongly articulated Danish agency with regard to the Arctic and an EU policy which is not intensive but still resourceful. This makes for a Danish foreign policy which includes the EU in certain areas but also aims to limit the EU’s geopolitical influence and control its influence on the daily life of the people of the Arctic. In addition, the fragile character of the Kingdom of Denmark construction reinforces the sensitivity vis-à-vis of involvement of the EU.\u0000Kingdom of Denmark, Arctic, EU, foreign policy, Greenland, Arctic Council, Artic Five, Ilulissat Declaration","PeriodicalId":84710,"journal":{"name":"European foreign affairs review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45670974","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
On 18 February 2021 the Commission issued its trade policy review. The new trade strategy marks a radical shift from the previously insulated, technocratic and mostly free trade-oriented position of the Commission’s Directorate General for Trade. After decades of following a headstrong course, EU trade officials seem to finally join the European foreign policy family. Since COVID-19 struck the European continent, EU trade talk has adopted the ‘resilience’ and ‘strategic autonomy’ concepts that were already central to the EU Global Strategy. By introducing ‘assertiveness’ as a key concept into the title – next to the more familiar ‘open’ and ‘sustainable’ – the new trade strategy clearly aligns itself with the geopolitical ambitions of the Von der Leyen Commission. Already before COVID-19, scholars noticed a ‘geopoliticization’ of EU trade policy claiming to be ‘less naïve’ and more ‘muscular’, for instance towards China. Indicative of this trend is the new ‘enforceability’ agenda. In December
{"title":"EU Trade Policy Meets Geopolitics: What About Trade Justice?","authors":"J. Orbie","doi":"10.54648/eerr2021015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2021015","url":null,"abstract":"On 18 February 2021 the Commission issued its trade policy review. The new trade strategy marks a radical shift from the previously insulated, technocratic and mostly free trade-oriented position of the Commission’s Directorate General for Trade. After decades of following a headstrong course, EU trade officials seem to finally join the European foreign policy family. Since COVID-19 struck the European continent, EU trade talk has adopted the ‘resilience’ and ‘strategic autonomy’ concepts that were already central to the EU Global Strategy. By introducing ‘assertiveness’ as a key concept into the title – next to the more familiar ‘open’ and ‘sustainable’ – the new trade strategy clearly aligns itself with the geopolitical ambitions of the Von der Leyen Commission. Already before COVID-19, scholars noticed a ‘geopoliticization’ of EU trade policy claiming to be ‘less naïve’ and more ‘muscular’, for instance towards China. Indicative of this trend is the new ‘enforceability’ agenda. In December","PeriodicalId":84710,"journal":{"name":"European foreign affairs review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49073912","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article examines the rationales of the European Union (EU) and the Organisation of African, Caribbean and Pacific States (OACPS) in the preparations and negotiations of the successor to the Cotonou Agreement, paying particular attention to contested issues. It argues that the EU-OACPS Agreement constitutes a fundamental break from past practices, at least apparently: with regards to form, it introduces an unprecedented framework for cooperation, articulated in a common base with three distinct regional pillars; in terms of substance, it proposes a list of equally important strategic priorities, thus going beyond the previous focus on development. Furthermore, unlike its predecessor but like many other agreements signed by the EU with third states, it sets out a comprehensive political partnership for mutually beneficial outcomes. This article, importantly, unravels sources of tensions between and within the two sides. It also shows that negotiations were more symmetrical than in previous instances, not least because contentious issues such as aid volumes and trade cooperation fall outside the remit of the EUOACPS Agreement, and less participatory, as they were largely conducted by a small number of official representatives, with limited involvement of other stakeholders. EU-OACPS Agreement, Cotonou Agreement, post-Cotonou, ACP Group, African Union, EU development policy
{"title":"The Rationales Behind the EU-OACPS Agreement: Process, Outcome, Contestations","authors":"M. Carbone","doi":"10.54648/eerr2021018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2021018","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the rationales of the European Union (EU) and the Organisation of African, Caribbean and Pacific States (OACPS) in the preparations and negotiations of the successor to the Cotonou Agreement, paying particular attention to contested issues. It argues that the EU-OACPS Agreement constitutes a fundamental break from past practices, at least apparently: with regards to form, it introduces an unprecedented framework for cooperation, articulated in a common base with three distinct regional pillars; in terms of substance, it proposes a list of equally important strategic priorities, thus going beyond the previous focus on development. Furthermore, unlike its predecessor but like many other agreements signed by the EU with third states, it sets out a comprehensive political partnership for mutually beneficial outcomes. This article, importantly, unravels sources of tensions between and within the two sides. It also shows that negotiations were more symmetrical than in previous instances, not least because contentious issues such as aid volumes and trade cooperation fall outside the remit of the EUOACPS Agreement, and less participatory, as they were largely conducted by a small number of official representatives, with limited involvement of other stakeholders.\u0000EU-OACPS Agreement, Cotonou Agreement, post-Cotonou, ACP Group, African Union, EU development policy","PeriodicalId":84710,"journal":{"name":"European foreign affairs review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43252281","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The COVID-19 pandemic has once again seen the use of the military in support of civilian authorities. Since pandemics and other non-military challenges are likely to grow in scope and frequency, the use of the military in such contingencies will also become the ‘new normal’. However, to make the employment of the military more effective, a number of additional steps need to be taken. These range from closer cooperation of key international institutions such as the EU and North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) to specific improvements in national pandemic preparedness. Moreover, these steps must also include the establishment of a broader political framework that centres on resilience as a central paradigm and helps insulating military contributions from political antagonisms and deliberate disinformation. COVID-19, pandemic, resilience, total defence, European Union, NATO, cyber, disinformation, emerging technologies, hybrid
{"title":"The Pandemic and the Military: EU and NATO Between Resilience and Total Defence","authors":"A. Missiroli, M. Rühle","doi":"10.54648/eerr2021016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2021016","url":null,"abstract":"The COVID-19 pandemic has once again seen the use of the military in support of civilian authorities. Since pandemics and other non-military challenges are likely to grow in scope and frequency, the use of the military in such contingencies will also become the ‘new normal’. However, to make the employment of the military more effective, a number of additional steps need to be taken. These range from closer cooperation of key international institutions such as the EU and North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) to specific improvements in national pandemic preparedness. Moreover, these steps must also include the establishment of a broader political framework that centres on resilience as a central paradigm and helps insulating military contributions from political antagonisms and deliberate disinformation.\u0000COVID-19, pandemic, resilience, total defence, European Union, NATO, cyber, disinformation, emerging technologies, hybrid","PeriodicalId":84710,"journal":{"name":"European foreign affairs review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49114125","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations triggered unprecedented contestation over the European Union’s (EU’s) domestic policy space for sustainable development. Whilst extant studies reveal the conflicts between norms and institutions of EU trade politics on sustainable development, and highlight the significance of sustainability in countering neoliberalism, they seldom analyse the incremental steps toward sustainable development achieved by the contestation of TTIP. This article addresses that gap by drawing on an analytical framework that regards political discourse as argumentation for action, which is both constrained and enabled by institutional context (I. Fairclough & N. Fairclough, Political Discourse Analysis: A Method for Advanced Students (Routledge, 2012a).). Based on a textual analysis of policy documents on ‘Trade for All’, there are two significant findings: (1) the public contestation on TTIP triggered the European Commission’s (the Commission) practical arguments on sustainable development in ‘Trade for All’ trade strategy; (2) the Commission adapted its original proposal of measures on sustainable development in light of other actors’ criticisms in the implementation of ‘Trade for All’. Taken more broadly, this innovative analytical framework, and my empirical findings, will make a contribution to a research agenda which clarifies obstacles and opportunities for alternative, counter-hegemonic trade policies. European Commission, Sustainable Development, TTIP, Trade, Political Discourse, Practical Argument
跨大西洋贸易与投资伙伴关系(TTIP)谈判引发了对欧盟(EU)国内可持续发展政策空间的前所未有的争论。虽然现有的研究揭示了欧盟贸易政治在可持续发展方面的规范和制度之间的冲突，并强调了可持续性在对抗新自由主义方面的重要性，但它们很少分析TTIP之争实现的可持续发展的渐进步骤。本文通过借鉴一个分析框架来解决这一差距，该框架将政治话语视为行动的论据，这既受到制度背景的约束，也受到制度背景的推动(I. Fairclough & N. Fairclough，政治话语分析:高级学生的方法(Routledge, 2012a))。基于对“全民贸易”政策文件的文本分析，有两个重要发现:(1)公众对TTIP的争论引发了欧盟委员会(European Commission)在“全民贸易”贸易战略中关于可持续发展的实践论证;(2)委员会根据其他行为者在实施“人人享有贸易”方面的批评，修改了其关于可持续发展措施的原始提案。从更广泛的角度来看，这一创新的分析框架以及我的实证研究结果，将为研究议程做出贡献，澄清替代性反霸权贸易政策的障碍和机遇。欧盟委员会，可持续发展，TTIP，贸易，政治话语，实践论证
{"title":"The European Commission’s Discourses on Sustainable Development in ‘Trade for All’: An Argumentative Perspective","authors":"Shuxiao Kuang","doi":"10.54648/eerr2021019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2021019","url":null,"abstract":"The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations triggered unprecedented contestation over the European Union’s (EU’s) domestic policy space for sustainable development. Whilst extant studies reveal the conflicts between norms and institutions of EU trade politics on sustainable development, and highlight the significance of sustainability in countering neoliberalism, they seldom analyse the incremental steps toward sustainable development achieved by the contestation of TTIP. This article addresses that gap by drawing on an analytical framework that regards political discourse as argumentation for action, which is both constrained and enabled by institutional context (I. Fairclough & N. Fairclough, Political Discourse Analysis: A Method for Advanced Students (Routledge, 2012a).). Based on a textual analysis of policy documents on ‘Trade for All’, there are two significant findings: (1) the public contestation on TTIP triggered the European Commission’s (the Commission) practical arguments on sustainable development in ‘Trade for All’ trade strategy; (2) the Commission adapted its original proposal of measures on sustainable development in light of other actors’ criticisms in the implementation of ‘Trade for All’. Taken more broadly, this innovative analytical framework, and my empirical findings, will make a contribution to a research agenda which clarifies obstacles and opportunities for alternative, counter-hegemonic trade policies.\u0000European Commission, Sustainable Development, TTIP, Trade, Political Discourse, Practical Argument","PeriodicalId":84710,"journal":{"name":"European foreign affairs review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43220449","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article argues that the desire to promote a ‘European way of life’ constitutes a defining feature of contemporary European integration. What might be misinterpreted as an inward turn is in fact part of the temptation for the EU to become a ‘civilizational state’, one promoting a distinct identity against rival value systems. The analysis highlights the significance of the EU’s ideological shift towards a civilizational narrative and explores the domestic and international factors pushing Brussels in this direction. The article also considers the practical consequences of the EU’s attempt to act as a civilizational state in its foreign relations. Here the argument proceeds on the understanding that a civilization is not an essence but a set of practices associated with political decision-making, notably over boundaries. The EU response to Russian and Chinese attempts to extend their influence in Europe during the COVID-19 pandemic is examined as a case study of how more assertive boundary-making, to solidify the EU’s civilizational claims, is likely to fuel geopolitical competition. Ultimately, the universal idea of Europe as a template for global governance was far less threatening for its systemic challengers. Hence the EU’s pandemic response is a sign of heightened civilizational rivalry. Civilizational state, EU foreign policy, COVID-19, Narratives, Pandemic
{"title":"The EU and the Temptation to Become a Civilizational State","authors":"Andrew Glencross","doi":"10.54648/eerr2021022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2021022","url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that the desire to promote a ‘European way of life’ constitutes a defining feature of contemporary European integration. What might be misinterpreted as an inward turn is in fact part of the temptation for the EU to become a ‘civilizational state’, one promoting a distinct identity against rival value systems. The analysis highlights the significance of the EU’s ideological shift towards a civilizational narrative and explores the domestic and international factors pushing Brussels in this direction. The article also considers the practical consequences of the EU’s attempt to act as a civilizational state in its foreign relations. Here the argument proceeds on the understanding that a civilization is not an essence but a set of practices associated with political decision-making, notably over boundaries. The EU response to Russian and Chinese attempts to extend their influence in Europe during the COVID-19 pandemic is examined as a case study of how more assertive boundary-making, to solidify the EU’s civilizational claims, is likely to fuel geopolitical competition. Ultimately, the universal idea of Europe as a template for global governance was far less threatening for its systemic challengers. Hence the EU’s pandemic response is a sign of heightened civilizational rivalry.\u0000Civilizational state, EU foreign policy, COVID-19, Narratives, Pandemic","PeriodicalId":84710,"journal":{"name":"European foreign affairs review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43864249","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The past decade has challenged the EU and its international image. The Eurozone sovereign debt crisis, the Ukraine crisis, the so-called irregular migration crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic have all put the EU under severe strain. This article explores if and how the EU’s performance in such crises has impacted upon the external image of the EU. The analysis shows that external images have closely followed the EU’s actual performance, although filtering it through the powerful lenses of local and regional concerns and sensibilities. While some traditional images have proved to be resilient in the longer run (as in the case of the EU as an economic powerhouse or a frequently divided community), others have been severely weakened by the EU’s crisis responses (such as the EU as a bastion of human rights). Our findings contribute to the discussion on the public diplomacy and information strategy of the European External Action Service (EEAS) in shaping locally-resonating positive images of the EU worldwide. external images of the EU, multiple crises of the EU, EU public diplomacy
{"title":"Reassessing External Images of the EU: Evolving Narratives in Times of Crisis","authors":"Sonia Lucarelli, N. Chaban","doi":"10.54648/eerr2021014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2021014","url":null,"abstract":"The past decade has challenged the EU and its international image. The Eurozone sovereign debt crisis, the Ukraine crisis, the so-called irregular migration crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic have all put the EU under severe strain. This article explores if and how the EU’s performance in such crises has impacted upon the external image of the EU. The analysis shows that external images have closely followed the EU’s actual performance, although filtering it through the powerful lenses of local and regional concerns and sensibilities. While some traditional images have proved to be resilient in the longer run (as in the case of the EU as an economic powerhouse or a frequently divided community), others have been severely weakened by the EU’s crisis responses (such as the EU as a bastion of human rights). Our findings contribute to the discussion on the public diplomacy and information strategy of the European External Action Service (EEAS) in shaping locally-resonating positive images of the EU worldwide.\u0000external images of the EU, multiple crises of the EU, EU public diplomacy","PeriodicalId":84710,"journal":{"name":"European foreign affairs review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45477500","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
While significant scholarly work has been dedicated to the institutionalization of the European External Action Service (EEAS) and its role in shaping the European Union’s (EU) foreign policy goals, less attention has been given to the Service’s wider competencies and agenda-setting power in the case of the Common Security and Defence Policy. This article aims to assess the growing role of the EEAS in defence and in spearheading new ways of bridging foreign policy and security in a comprehensive manner. In doing so, the research explores how the security and defence dimensions were incorporated into the EEAS, by examining the processes of institutionalization in the EEAS crisis management structures in the post-Lisbon context, and by zooming in on the intergovernmental and supranational dynamics in the European security and defence architecture. The article finds that continued organizational innovation and the reinforcement of supranational mechanisms in the EEAS and the European Commission have had a positive impact on the EU’s security and defence, representing a step further in bridging the foreign policy, security and defence divides at the EU level. European Union, European External Action Service, European Security and Defence, High Representative
{"title":"The Evolving Role of the European External Action Service in Security and Defence","authors":"Raluca Csernatoni","doi":"10.54648/eerr2021008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2021008","url":null,"abstract":"While significant scholarly work has been dedicated to the institutionalization of the European External Action Service (EEAS) and its role in shaping the European Union’s (EU) foreign policy goals, less attention has been given to the Service’s wider competencies and agenda-setting power in the case of the Common Security and Defence Policy. This article aims to assess the growing role of the EEAS in defence and in spearheading new ways of bridging foreign policy and security in a comprehensive manner. In doing so, the research explores how the security and defence dimensions were incorporated into the EEAS, by examining the processes of institutionalization in the EEAS crisis management structures in the post-Lisbon context, and by zooming in on the intergovernmental and supranational dynamics in the European security and defence architecture. The article finds that continued organizational innovation and the reinforcement of supranational mechanisms in the EEAS and the European Commission have had a positive impact on the EU’s security and defence, representing a step further in bridging the foreign policy, security and defence divides at the EU level.\u0000European Union, European External Action Service, European Security and Defence, High Representative","PeriodicalId":84710,"journal":{"name":"European foreign affairs review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44874805","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article assesses the European External Action Service’s (EEAS’s) role in the evolution of EU climate diplomacy over the past decade and considers its future agenda. We distinguish between the EEAS headquarters and the EU Delegations/Offices in third countries. The EEAS headquarters has found a role as coordinator among the Council and Commission services as well as between ‘Brussels’ and the EU Delegations. What is more, the EU Delegations have engaged in various climate diplomacy activities and coordinate among Member State embassies. Despite its reliance on only a few staff members specialized in climate issues – both at the headquarters and Delegation level – the EEAS contributes to EU climate diplomacy formulation and implementation by providing a centralized venue for coherent geographic and thematic messaging and action. European External Action Service, EEAS, climate diplomacy, EU Delegations
{"title":"The European External Action Service and EU Climate Diplomacy: Coordinator and Supporter in Brussels and Beyond","authors":"Katja Biedenkopf, Franziska Petri","doi":"10.54648/eerr2021007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2021007","url":null,"abstract":"This article assesses the European External Action Service’s (EEAS’s) role in the evolution of EU climate diplomacy over the past decade and considers its future agenda. We distinguish between the EEAS headquarters and the EU Delegations/Offices in third countries. The EEAS headquarters has found a role as coordinator among the Council and Commission services as well as between ‘Brussels’ and the EU Delegations. What is more, the EU Delegations have engaged in various climate diplomacy activities and coordinate among Member State embassies. Despite its reliance on only a few staff members specialized in climate issues – both at the headquarters and Delegation level – the EEAS contributes to EU climate diplomacy formulation and implementation by providing a centralized venue for coherent geographic and thematic messaging and action.\u0000European External Action Service, EEAS, climate diplomacy, EU Delegations","PeriodicalId":84710,"journal":{"name":"European foreign affairs review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43537490","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：