Search

Begin New Search Topic Economics Political Geography Europe Content Type Working Paper Publishing Institution European Union Institute for Security Studies

1. Energy moves and power shifts: EU foreign policy and global energy security

Author:
Iana Dreyer and Gerald Stang
Publication Date:
02-2014
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
European Union Institute for Security Studies
Abstract:
Energy security has climbed the list of EU energy and foreign policy priorities in the last decade. This process was accelerated by the shock of the 2006 and 2009 disruptions in Russian gas supply through Ukraine, and by the new possibilities offered by the Lisbon Treaty. Efforts have been directed at interconnecting national gas and electricity markets, diversifying energy suppliers and promoting rules-based energy trade in the wider European neighbourhood. The EU's primary energy security goals are to reduce the strategic dependence of individual member states on single external suppliers and to ensure that energy markets are liquid, open and functioning according to stable market rules rather than power logics. Yet energy security also needs to be balanced against environmental and economic competitiveness concerns.
Topic:
Economics, Energy Policy, International Trade and Finance, and Border Control
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Ukraine

2. How EU sanctions work: a new narrative

Author:
Francesco Giumelli
Publication Date:
05-2013
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
European Union Institute for Security Studies
Abstract:
The European Union has devoted growing attention to sanctions since the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty.1 In total, the Council has imposed Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) sanctions targeting countries, economic sectors, groups, individuals and entities on 27 different occasions. The novelty in the area of sanctions is that targets are not only states, as in the recent cases of Iran and Syria, but they are also individuals and non-state entities, e.g. anti-terrorist lists, President Robert Mugabe and his associates, and several companies connected with the military junta in Burma/Myanmar. Additionally, the contexts in which sanctions are utilised can be diverse, ranging from the protection of human rights to crisis management and non-proliferation. Despite the fact that the effectiveness of sanctions has been much debated, the EU has developed a sanctioning policy and intensified its adoption of sanctions. Sanctions were traditionally seen as a way to impose economic penalties as a means of extracting political concessions from targets, but EU sanctions do not always impose a cost nor do they always seek to induce behavioural change. To this extent, a new narrative may be needed.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economics, Human Rights, International Cooperation, International Law, and Sanctions
Political Geography:
Europe, Burma, and Myanmar

3. The interpolar world: a new scenario

Author:
Giovanni Grevi
Publication Date:
06-2009
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
European Union Institute for Security Studies
Abstract:
Everyone agrees the world is changing. The question is in which direction? This paper offers an original contribution to the debate on the future shape of the international system. Based on a diagnosis of current developments, it argues that many factors point to the emergence of an 'interpolar' world. Interpolarity can be defined as multipolarity in the age of interdependence. The redistribution of power at the global level, leading to a multipolar international system, and deepening interdependence are the two basic dimensions of the transition away from the post-Cold War world. All too often, however, they are treated as separate issues. The real challenge lies in finding a new synthesis between the shifting balance of power and the governance of interdependence.
Topic:
International Relations, Cold War, Economics, and International Cooperation
Political Geography:
United States and Europe

4. €uros for ESDP – financing EU operations

Author:
Antonio Missiroli
Publication Date:
06-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
European Union Institute for Security Studies
Abstract:
The financing of EU-led crisis management operations is a somewhat neglected yet nevertheless crucial factor affecting the external effectiveness and internal consistency of the Union's foreign and security policy. Until recently, CFSP's operational acquis has been minimal, its legal underpinning limited and tortuous, its budgetary fundament ludicrous, and its administrative practice mostly contradictory and often fraught with inter-institutional turf battles between Council, Commission and Parliament. With the launch of the first ESDP operations proper (EUPM in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Concordia in FYROM) in 2003, the forthcoming Operation Artemis in the Democratic Republic of Congo and the possible takeover of SFOR after 2004, it has become all the more important and urgent to devise more appropriate arrangements and incentives for common action. The European Convention and the ensuing Intergovernmental Conference represent additional opportunities to be seized. In this respect, the main issues to be addressed regard: a) the speed and readiness of budgetary allocations, on the one hand, and their long-term sustainability, on the other; b) the coherence of the relevant provisions, in both institutional and functional terms, and their consistency with the peculiarities of the EU as an international actor; and c) the degree of transparency, accountability and internal fairness compatible with the imperatives of crisis management. The experience of other international organisations operating in this field (NATO, OSCE, UN) can also be taken into consideration with a view to selecting rules and modalities that may be helpful in tackling the problems highlighted here. First and foremost, it is desirable that the current fragmentation of CFSP expenditure in separate EU budgetary lines be overcome. The appointment of an EU 'Minister for Foreign Affairs' (or whatever title is given to the new foreign policy supremo) is expected to help solve this problem and reduce some inter-institutional tensions and bottlenecks. For example, it is desirable for all expenditure related to civilian crisis management (with the possible exception of the salaries of seconded national personnel) to be borne by the EU bud- get in a more transparent fashion. To this end, the relevant procedures have to be made less tortuous and more flexible. Secondly, expenditure for operations 'having military or defence implications' — in so far as it will remain distinct and separate from the rest — should be pooled in a more systematic, sustainable and explicit manner. Neither the current 'ad hocery' (as exemplified by EUPM and Concordia ) nor the minimalist approach adopted by the Convention's Praesidium (with the proposal of a subsidiary 'start-up' fund) address the essential issues. In fact, if a subsidiary budget has to be set up, then it should be more ambitious and create a long- term basis for covering all the 'common costs' arising from military operations. Such an EU Operational Fund could usefully draw upon the precedent of the European Development Fund and adopt a distinct 'key' for national contributions. Such a 'key' should take into account e.g. the member states' ability to pay but also their ability to contribute in kin through the actual involvement of personnel and equipment in EU operations. It should also be periodically adjustable and help overcome potential 'burden-sharing' disputes inside the Union by setting agreed criteria against which to measure and assess national contributions without resorting to the crude GDP scale. At the same time, the Fund's financial cycle should be the same as that of the EU budget. And, in perspective, the “common costs” thus covered should include also accommodation and transportation costs, especially if the Union develops common capabilities in the fields of strategic lift and logistics. By doing so, the EU would eventually have two main modalities for common operational expenditure at its disposal: the EU budget for all non-military aspects, and the Operational Fund. Both would guarantee a reliable financial perspective. If the separation between civilian and military aspects were ever to be bridged, their merger would not represent a problem. Thirdly, the European Parliament could consider reimbursing those member states who participate in ESDP operations a fixed somme for faitaire to cover partially the per diems of their seconded personnel (civilian as well as military). Such reimbursement could be made through the EU budget annually, ex post facto, with no political conditions attached. On the one hand, it would prove that the EU budget covers not only internal benefits (agriculture and structural funds) but also external commitments. On the other, it would add transparency to ESDP in that the Parliament could organise hearings with experts and officials as well as plenary debates. For their part, the member states would gain an additional incentive – however modest – to provide adequate human resources for external operations. Finally, participating 'third' (and especially remaining and future candidate) countries could well be associated with all these arrangements, either case by case or more systematically. And none of the proposals outlined here necessarily require treaty change, although it would be preferable to insert some 'enabling' clauses in the Constitutional Treaty. All proposals, however, would require collaboration — rather than competition — between EU institutions.
Topic:
Economics, Government, and Politics
Political Geography:
Europe, Bosnia, Herzegovina, and Democratic Republic of the Congo

5. The European Union and armaments Getting a bigger bang for the Euro

Author:
Burkard Schmitt
Publication Date:
08-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
European Union Institute for Security Studies
Abstract:
The proposals of the Convention on the Future of Europe and the recent European Commission Communication on a Defence Equipment Policy have revived the debate about the EU's possible involvement in armaments. There is indeed a chance today that a European Agency for Armaments, Research and Capabilities will be set up and anchored in the new EU Treaty. At the same time, there is a growing consensus that the EU Commission should have certain competencies in the field of security-related research, and even the establishment of a common defence equipment market is (again) under discussion.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Economics, and Government
Political Geography:
Europe