Evolution of the EU-NATO relations

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
EU MILITARY STAFF.
Advertisements

Lisbon Treaty EUROPEAN UNION External Action Eva Horelová European Commission, External Relations DG Brussels, 29 April 2010.
Power and Weakness By: Robert Kagan. Introduction Europe claims that the United States resorts to force more quickly and that it sees the world as divided.
Problems and Prospects
Impact of the Lisbon Treaty on the Common Security and Defence Policy of the European Union 24 February 2013 Joël Schuyer.
The EU as a global actor by 2030 Context –Multipolar world with China, India and U.S. as the most important players. –Globalization –More regionally organized.
Estonian viewpoints and challenges in EU Raul Toomas 2008.
To What Extent Should We Embrace Internationalism?
The Founding of the European Union
The EU as an international actor INS The European Union and The World Joaquín Roy February 2005.
From Rome, 1957 to Nice, 2000 The Treaties of the European Union - is it time for a single constitution?
EU Foreign Policy and the European External Action Service Graham Avery.
The European Security and Defence Policy Background -The Maastricht Treaty -The Amsterdam Treaty -The US position Conceptual definition of the European.
Is the EU and will it ever be a Defence Alliance? Alyson JK Bailes Faculty of Political Science.
MGIMO 13 December 2007 ESDP EU – NATO Relations Gaston STRONCK Ambassador of Luxembourg.
European Union Common and Security Defense Policy I. General introduction. Basic issues and concepts
The countries from Central and Eastern Europe. The cold war experiences and experiences in the immediate aftermath of the cold war Cold war experiences:
External policies I: CFSP and Common Commercial Policy. Prof. Andreas Bieler.
Forum Reichenau 2012 Towards a Common European Security and Defence Culture HANS-BERNHARD WEISSERTH Head of the ESDC.
Political Science and International Relations
1 EU’s External Action Cristian Ghinea Romanian Centre for European Policies (CRPE)
EU as a Security Actor Zdeněk Kříž.
TO BE OR NOT TO BE EUROPEAN.
NATO- organization and policies NATO’s character as a self-defence Alliance -A collective defence alliance; -A forum for political consultation; -The American.
Chapter The United States + The World. Goals of Foreign Policy.
Students Names : 1.Georgia Zalti 2. Elizabeth Stavrou 3.Elena Nikolaou.
NATO- organization and policies
The ESDP-NATO arrangements. The context of EU/NATO arrangements in the sphere of security and defence The Transatlantic relation/ MSs members of both.
The ESDP: challenges and opportunities. The EU is developing something like a ‘strategic culture’? Definition of ‘strategic culture’: institutional confidence.
European Security: an enigmatic journey Muhammad Yusra International Relations Dept. Universitas Andalas-2011.
 The Treaty of Friendship, Co-operation, and Mutual Assistance, more commonly referred to as the Warsaw Pact, was a mutual defense treaty between 8 Communist.
COLLEGE - LIMASSOL BUSINESS STUDIES European History Lecture 12.
MGIMO 12 December 2007 CFSP Setting up the structures Gaston STRONCK Ambassador of Luxembourg.
Global Conflicts and their Consequences By Chris and Yimaj.
Acquis communautaire Community Acquis DEFINITION.
1 Etat-major des Armées - Division Programmes Interarmées European Plans for Security Space Capabilities 1 Collective security in space - 15&16 May 2006.
France’s security culture. Cold war experiences Historical experiences: the war in Indochina ( ) and the war in Algeria ( ) Philosophical.
Section Outline 1 of 12 American Foreign Policy Section 3: Foreign Policy in Action I.Foreign Policy Through World War II II.The Cold War III.Today’s Challenges.
The ESDP institutional framework. The Helsinki institutional structure- the HR for CFSP/ Secretary General of the Council The High Representative for.
The Evolving Role of NATO Marko Savković Research Associate Centre for Civil-Military Relations, Belgrade.
A New Role of Europe in the New World Order Student: Popova Victoria, TSU, 101.
The President stands as the single strong leader of the executive branch Americans have looked to the President for leadership on complex issues As commander.
The ESDP debate- the Convention on the Future of Europe.
EU military crisis management capabilities
The Common Foreign and Security Policy. The developments leading up to the formulation of a CFSP The European Political Cooperation (EPC)- 1970; institutional.
Europe and Asia Paul BACON Fall 2013 Sherzod ARAPOV 4012R302-1.
The making of the ESDP: strategic context and actors.
History of European Cooperation and Integration The Empty-chair Crisis and First Enlargement.
High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy Vicente Melguizo.
NATO’s Quest For A New Strategic Concept Ambassador Jon Ramberg at Conference on NATO’s Role in ensuring stability and security, organized by Azerbaijan.
LG532: Europe’s Common Foreign and Security Policy Ken McDonagh School of Law & Government.
M O N T E N E G R O Negotiating Team for the Accession of Montenegro to the European Union Working Group for Chapter 31 – Common Foreign and Security Policy.
Unclassified MG. L. HOXHA Skopje, 21 st of June 2005 REPUBLIC OF ALBANIA MINISTRY OF DEFENCE GENERAL STAFF OF THE ARMED FORCES.
European Girls are beautiful. Herman Van Rompuy.
NATO “The leaders of NATO are creating a transatlantic monstrosity worthy of Mary Shelley. The Atlantic alliance is being buried. In its place, NATO, led.
M O N T E N E G R O Negotiating Team for the Accession of Montenegro to the European Union Working Group for Chapter 31: Foreign, security and defence.
European foreign, security and defence policy Dr
1- Introduction ii-. Part ONE : foreign and security policy.
External Security: Foreign and Defense Policy
Tomáš Weiss Department of West European Studies
Ch 7 – section 3 (g2) US Foreign Policy
External Relations Slides to support Chapter 21 of The Government and Politics of the European Union, 7th ed., by Neill Nugent.
European Integration, Young & Kent: International Relations since 1945 European Integration,
NATO.
State Failure and the EU as an International Actor
THE EU AS A GLOBAL ACTOR.
Final exam Friday, April 17th 3-5:00 p.m. Location SN3042.
From European Communities to European Union What Changed in 1993?
Chapter Six, Section Three “Making Foreign Policy”
THE EU AS A GLOBAL ACTOR.
Presentation transcript:

Evolution of the EU-NATO relations Fruska gora, July 25th 2009. Adel Abusara

Outline of the presentation Preliminary remarks History of the EU-NATO relations: Pre-ESDP period Proto-ESDP period Move from aspiration to operations NATO developments Atrophy in transatlantic relations Future or what is to be done

History Pre-ESDP period Cold War – NATO vs. Warsaw Pact (+neutrality or non-alignment) WEU – weak security attempt to contain Germany (Brussels Treaty 1948.) Failure of different attempts to create supranational defence arrangement (most notably EDC 1954.)

History Proto-ESDP period (1) 1989 – end of the bifurcation of military alliance structures – demise of the Warsaw Pact NATO side – period of self-examination, finding new raison d’être EC/EU side – Maastricht Treaty (1992): Creation of the CFSP(“...common defence policy which might in time lead to common defence” TEU); rebirth of the WEU as a European defence organization providing a ready-made mechanism for the MS to exploit

History Proto-ESDP period (2) WEU as a model for understanding the EU – “variable geometry” (intergovernmental, complement, not alternative to NATO, kept defense provision away from the EU) The EU-WEU relationship: European pillar of NATO – ESDI (first mentioned in 1991 NATO Strategic concept)+ defense component of the EU! “Petersberg tasks” 1992. WEU – expanding its operations to encompass “humanitarian and rescue tasks, peace- keeping tasks, and tasks of combat forces in crisis management” + institutionalization of WEU 1994. NATO decides to make available assets and capabilities for WEU operations

History Proto-ESDP period (3) Amsterdam Treaty: Strengthening of the commitment on military security Closer institutional relations with the WEU with a possibility of its integration into the Union Inclusion of the Petersberg tasks in the text (Finland, Sweden) High Representative for CFSP (+ Secretary General of the WEU) symbolically J. Solana!

History From Aspirations to Operations Turning point – St. Malo agreement (change of attitude of T. Blair, reason - Kosovo) – start of the ESDP The EU should have “the capacity for autonomous action, backed up by credible military forces, the means to decide to use them and a readiness to do so” Two means of implementing EU-led operations: with NATO assets and capabilities, or without them Cologne meeting of the European Council 1999: EU and NATO activities should be “complementary” and not “competitive” Helsinki meeting of the European Council 1999: formal launching of the ESDP Autonomous capacity of the EU to react when NATO as a whole is not engaged! The force: 60.000 troops operational at 2003, capable of staying in the field at least 1 year. Also, creation of institutions to support the decision (Political and Security Committee, Military Committee, Military Stuff , etc.)

History From Aspirations to Operations WEU going to history (although it still exists, but without a major role) European Defense Agency, European Institute for Security Studies, EU Satellite Centre, European Security and Defense College May 2003 – “existing operational capacity across the full range of Petersberg tasks, limited and constrained by recognized shortfalls” June 2004 new plan “Headline Goal 2010” Operational centre of the EU First non-NATO military structure to emerge in post-Cold War Europe

NATO Developments Evolutionary development of NATO in contrast to revolutionary development of ESDP 4 NATO summits as staging posts: Rome 1991(new strategic concept), Brussels 1994 (PfP), Madrid 1997 (start of the enlargement), Washington 1999 (NATO position on ESDI-accepting the autonomy of Europe) Prague 2002 Declaration on ESDP – NATO giving EU access to NATO assets and capabilities for operations in which NATO itself is not engaged military

NATO Developments (2) 2003 “Berlin plus”- very important, provides for EU access to NATO operational planning, NATO capabilities and common assets, NATO European command operations and the NATO defense planning system adapted to the needs of Europeans Berlin-plus missions of he EU: Concordia (Macedonia), Althea (BiH-symbolic replacement of NATO’s SFOR mission)

Political cooperation and consultations of the EU and NATO Formally they started in 2001. with exchange of letters between NATO Gensec and Sweden, who presided the EU at the time May 2001. first official meeting of ministers of foreign affairs Regular consultations on ambassadors level, level of military committees + Gensec of NATO and HR of the EU

Atrophy in Transatlantic Relations Quality of US – Europeans relations as significant (the most important) factor in “division of labor” between the EU and the NATO Relative military weakness of the Europeans vis-à-vis US at the end of the century, and therefore incapability of sustainable Balkan diplomacy Incomparable military budgets after September 11

Atrophy in Transatlantic Relations (2) US “making the dinner” and Europeans “doing the dishes” (Kagan) Despite expectations on both sides of the Atlantic (e.g. Huntington), EU didn’t (try to) become superpower. Why? Europe has developed over the past half-century genuinely different perspective on the role of power in IR, based on unique historical experience Modern European culture is constant rejection of the past Europe is trying to “multilateralise” US So, what Europe wants? US umbrella, dealing with itself only? “EU foreign policy is the most anemic all the products of EU integration”.

Atrophy in Transatlantic Relations (3) US “making the dinner” and Europeans “doing the dishes” (Kagan) US “hyperpower” (Vedrin) EU as American project The great paradox is that the passage to post-modern Europe was made possible by US, and by their decision not to take the same passage Madeleine Albright 1998 concerns about 3 Ds: “decoupling” transatlantic link, “duplicating” defence reources and “discrimination” against the non-EU European NATO members “US must sometimes play by the rules of the Hobbesian world, even though in doing so it violates European norms” The importance of French return in NATO

Future or what is to be done? Uncertainty about the future of EU – NATO relations: what if they want to act in different ways in certain situation? Overlapping capacities How long will EU use Berlin-plus arrangements? Have the EU and NATO shaped themselves completely? Is their own future certain?

Thank you. adel.abusara@ccmr-bg.org