"The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" - Three visions for European Defence beyond Austerity
In: Studia diplomatica: Brussels journal of international relations, Band 66, Heft 2, S. 13-30
ISSN: 0770-2965
5 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Studia diplomatica: Brussels journal of international relations, Band 66, Heft 2, S. 13-30
ISSN: 0770-2965
The transatlantic security relationship is built on strong and enduring shared values. Americans and Europeans share, on the whole, similar perceptions about the nature of power, the norms that should guide relations among states, as well as a desire to promote democracy and basic human rights. The US and Europe also share most of their security objectives, this being particularly true when speaking of non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and tackling state weakness around the world. Not surprisingly, therefore, our elite survey revealed that elites across the Atlantic are supportive of each other's role in maintaining international security, and wish to remain partners through NATO. However, the partnership is exposed to a serious risk of fragmentation driven by changes in the international landscape, mainly the rise of multipolarity and the emergence of China as a major security player in East Asia, and by events with significant internal implications such as the financial crisis that started in 2007 and the subsequent Eurozone crisis and the emergence or multiplication of crises from Libya and Mali to the Middle East and Ukraine. These developments could easily pull the transatlantic partners in different directions, perhaps more so than any other change of the past half-century, creating tensions between the two, and bringing into question the usefulness of their alliance.
BASE
The transatlantic security relationship is built on strong and enduring shared values. Americans and Europeans share, on the whole, similar perceptions about the nature of power, the norms that should guide relations among states, as well as a desire to promote democracy and basic human rights. The US and Europe also share most of their security objectives, this being particularly true when speaking of non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and tackling state weakness around the world. Not surprisingly, therefore, our elite survey revealed that elites across the Atlantic are supportive of each other's role in maintaining international security, and wish to remain partners through NATO. However, the partnership is exposed to a serious risk of fragmentation driven by changes in the international landscape, mainly the rise of multipolarity and the emergence of China as a major security player in East Asia, and by events with significant internal implications such as the financial crisis that started in 2007 and the subsequent Eurozone crisis and the emergence or multiplication of crises from Libya and Mali to the Middle East and Ukraine. These developments could easily pull the transatlantic partners in different directions, perhaps more so than any other change of the past half-century, creating tensions between the two, and bringing into question the usefulness of their alliance.
BASE
In: Studia diplomatica: Brussels journal of international relations, Band 66, Heft 2, S. 3-116
ISSN: 0770-2965
Biscop, S.: Introduction : a strategic anniversary. - S. 3-12
World Affairs Online
National Visions of EU Defence Policy - Common Denominators and Misunderstandings is a collaborative study between CEPS and GRIP (Group for Research and Information on Peace and Security), funded by COST, an intergovernmental framework for European Cooperation in Science and Technology supported by the EU's RTD Framework Programme ; The premise of this study is simple: before discussing what defence strategy the EU should adopt at Brussels-level, member states should clarify what they expect individually from the EU Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). Inspired by the confusion about EU defence policy in most European capitals, this authoritative study inverts the usual analytical approach applied to the debate on European strategy. Rather than initiating the enquiry from the perspective of common interests guiding CSDP, it analyses how seven prominent member states see CSDP as a tool to pursue their strictly national interests. Five researchers immersed themselves in the foreign policy worlds of Paris, London, Berlin, Rome, Warsaw, Stockholm and Madrid, looking at CSDP through national lenses and away from the potentially distorting influence of 'Brussels' rhetoric. This book does not set out to analyse European defence policy as an end in itself or as a collective project, but rather as a vector of individual – indeed self-interested – visions for the member states studied. By adopting this rather more pragmatic approach, the study aims to identify the common denominators, misunderstandings and deadlocks in the strategic debate around CSDP, with a view to enriching it. ; COST Action IS0805 "New Challenges of Peacekeeping and the European Union's Role in Multilateral Crisis Management" ; Joanna Dobrowolska-Polak
BASE