scholarly journals The UK and EU Foreign, Security and Defence Policy after Brexit: Integrated, Associated or Detached?

2016 ◽  
Vol 238 ◽  
pp. R43-R50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard G. Whitman

None of the existing models for the future trade policy relationship between the UK and the EU come with a predetermined foreign and security policy relationship. This article assesses how the future EU-UK foreign and security policy relationship might be organised post-Brexit. It provides evaluation of the current EU-UK interrelationship in the fields of the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and assesses the degree to which the UK is presently integrated into EU decision-making and implementation. It highlights that the UK needs to determine the degree to which it wants autonomy or even divergence from existing EU policies. The article concludes by rehearsing the costs and benefits of three possible future relationships between the UK and EU foreign, security and defence policy: integrated, associated or detached.

Author(s):  
Christopher Hill ◽  
Michael Smith ◽  
Sophie Vanhoonacker

This edition examines the contexts in which the European Union has reflected and affected major forces and changes in international relations (IR) by drawing on concepts such as balance of power, multipolarity, multilateralism, interdependence, and globalization. It explores the nature of policymaking in the EU's international relations and the ways in which EU policies are pursued within the international arena. Topics include the EU's role in the global political economy, how the EU has developed an environmental policy, and how it has attempted to graft a common defence policy onto its generalized foreign and security policy. This chapter discusses the volume's methodological assumptions and considers three perspectives on IR and the EU: the EU as a subsystem of IR, the EU and the processes of IR, and the EU as a power in IR. It also provides an overview of the chapters that follow.


2019 ◽  

As the end of the Brexit process is still not in sight, the consequences of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU—with or without an agreement—are difficult to assess. This volume aims at an interim assessment of Brexit, from basic questions of sovereignty, which Brexiteers seem to be striving to recover, models of differentiated integration and the protection of fundamental rights, to the principle of democracy, which seems to be being challenged in different ways. How has the internal market been affected by Brexit? How have citizens’ social rights as developed by the ECJ been affected? What impact has Brexit had on the control of immigration in the UK? All this is dealt with in part II of this anthology. Its last part is devoted to monetary and financial policies, as well as to the Common Foreign and Security Policy, a policy that is only subject to supranational discipline in part and in which the UK, nevertheless, plays an important role—and may continue to do so in the future. A great deal looks different today than one may have expected prior to the 2016 referendum.


2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 453-480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Thym

European Union – Common Foreign and Security Policy – Changes with the abolition of the pillar structure by the Lisbon Treaty – Common Security and Defence Policy – Executive order of the EU – Between supranationalism and intergovernmentalism – The role of the High Representative – Joint political leadership – The European External Action Service as an administrative infrastructure – Constitutionalisation of foreign affairs


Modern Italy ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Foradori ◽  
Paolo Rosa

SummaryThe article looks at the role of Italy in the decision-making arena of the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), analysing the initiatives it put in place to address and influence the construction of a common defence. The article aims to explain the ability or inability of Italy to build up a consensus around its proposals. By studying two initiatives in the field of European defence and security, it seeks to determine the factors which resulted in the differing outcomes of Italian actions at the European level.


IG ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 118-133
Author(s):  
Daniel Schade

The Interparliamentary Conference for the Common Foreign and Security Policy and the Common Security and Defence Policy (IPC) is a new parliamentary body set up after the Treaty of Lisbon which allows to create interlinkages between parliaments in the European Union (EU). It is part of an ongoing process which aims to challenge the executive dominance in EU policy-making in general and in the EU’s foreign and security policy in particular. Considering its sessions and the experiences of members of parliaments partaking in the Interparliamentary Conference to date, this article analyses its value-added to this overarching goal. The experiences so far suggest that the IPC faces significant practical challenges in contributing to the parliamentary scrutiny of the policy areas concerned despite the fact that the format of interparliamentary gatherings is a significant innovation in its own right. These challenges arise primarily out of a conflict between the European Parliament and national parliaments in the EU, the diversity of national parliamentarism, as well as the differing moti⁠v­a⁠tions and skills of the participating members of parliaments.


Author(s):  
Nataliia Karpchuk

The EU security policy is an inseparable part of the EU Common Security and Defence Policy elaborated within the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy. Sucurity and defence issues are quite vulnerable for any state sovereignty that is why it took Member Statets rather long time to agree on principles, directions and priorities of their common security policy as well as on cooperation with the NATO. With the development of the European Community, in the sphere of security policy a number of structures were established and a number of principled documents were adopted. The article researches the evolution of the EU security policy influenced by external cgallenges and threats


Author(s):  
Ian Bache ◽  
Simon Bulmer ◽  
Stephen George ◽  
Owen Parker

This chapter examines the European Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). From 1993 to 2009, external political relations formed the second pillar of the EU, on CFSP. Although CFSP was officially an intergovernmental pillar, the European Commission came to play an important role. There were serious attempts to strengthen the security and defence aspects of the CFSP in the face of the threats that faced the EU from instability in its neighbouring territories. However, the EU remains far from having a truly supranational foreign policy and its status as a ‘power’ in international relations is debatable. The chapter first provides a historical background on the CFSP, focusing on the creation of the European Political Co-operation (EPC), before discussing the CFSP and the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). It concludes with an assessment of EU power and its impact on world politics.


2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 540-552
Author(s):  
Michal Piechowicz

The Treaty of Lisbon (TL) altered the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) not only in its institutional structure, but also in its function and decision making processes. These changes affected the competences of member states, other authorities, and their relationships. They also influenced the prospects for intergovernmental cooperation and the evolutionary development of communitisation phenomena within this policy.


2012 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 433-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jolyon Howorth

For scholars and practitioners of European politics alike, the distinction between supranationalism and inter-governmentalism has always been fundamental. This distinction has underpinned the various schools of European integration theory, just as it has remained crucial for European governments keen to demonstrate that the Member States remain in charge of key policy areas. Nowhere is this considered to be more central than in the area of foreign and security policy, which has consciously been set within the rigid intergovernmental framework of Pillar Two of the Maastricht Treaty and, under the Lisbon Treaty, remains subject to the unanimity rule. However, scholarship on the major decision-making agencies of the foreign and security policy of the EU suggests that the distinction is not only blurred but increasingly meaningless. This article demonstrates that, in virtually every case, decisions are shaped and even taken by small groups of relatively well-socialized officials in the key committees acting in a mode which is as close to supranational as it is to intergovernmental.


2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (68) ◽  
pp. 106-127
Author(s):  
Beatrica Šmaguc

Abstract After decades of reliance upon NATO in security matters, the EU ought to develop security assets of its own in order to protect its interests and citizens. The Common Foreign and Security Policy as an expression of EU readiness and willingness to play a more significant role in security matters on the international stage led to the creation of the European Security and Defence Policy, thus putting at the EU’s disposal civilian and military capabilities for dealing with the crisis spots around the world. The EUBG concept originated with the first member states’ pledges in November 2004 which gave added value to the EU in the security and defence area, at least on paper, while so far no EUBG has been deployed in the theatre of operations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document