CC BY
12
https://doi.org/10.29013/ESR-20-1.2-64-68
Sultanova Nigar Tahir Qizi, Phd candidate at the Academy of Public Administration under the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan E-mail: [email protected]
EU ON GLOBAL ARENA: NEED FOR REBOOT OF A FOREIGN POLICY
Abstract. This article explores EU's ability in establishing its strong position in world politics. Essential to this analysis is the assumption that the EU will remain closely entangled with its immediate neighbors and this will shape the evolution of its external action. Key aim of this article is to analyze main ways for EU to enhance its involvement in global issues. The article begins by exploring the history of formation of EU foreign policy and current level of its involvement in different regions. It also analyzes the reasons EU is being criticized today for its passive international participation. Then article suggests main responses EU might take with response to challenges it faces today. The conclusion sums up the state of the of EU external action and concludes EU needs to take serious actions in order to face the impact of the challenges in the global arena.
Keywords: European Union, foreign policy, global politics.
Introduction of instruments available for EU action in this field.
The world today is dominated by the rivalries of But despite this, in many areas, EU foreign policy
global powers. The criteria for being considered the center ofpower as well as the list of states that can be attributed to these centers are also debatable. Often along with such countries as USA and China, European Union also finds itself in that list. Let us see to what extent this approach is justified.
There are different views related to EU's position in world affairs. Over the last years EU is putting a lot of efforts in order to consolidate its foreign policy. In defense issues there has been made some progress, notably Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) and the European Defense Fund (EDF) were established [10, P. 7]. However, EU foreign policy overall still fails to find quick common response to modern international challenges. Although the Lisbon Treaty has created quite an extensive institutionalized machinery of EU and also strengthened its foreign policy apparatus, today there are fears over a decrease in Europe's general influence over the global politics. With respect to the evolution of the CFSP the Lisbon Treaty has boosted the range
still falls short. Pertinent research questions would be why does the EU have great or weak power in global affairs?
The formation of EU foreign policy
EU member States realized that a common foreign policy was inevitable and the idea itself started to form in 70s (European political cooperation and Common Foreign and Security Policy). It was then reaffirmed in Maastricht and Amsterdam Treaties and in a more elaborated way in the Lisbon Treaty of2009 [5; 8; 9]. Despite of abovementioned institutional reforms until Lisbon foreign policy remained profoundly intergovernmental. Lisbon Treaty granted EU's foreign policy an institutional and legal basis. The post of the High Representative of the European Union for foreign affairs (at the same time Vice President of the European Commission) was set up in order to encourage the coordination of Member States.
EU enlargements made the decision-making process more complicated. Member States seek to show that their national interests are in some cases more
important than the common EU policy. Therefore, despite the creation of a single institutional structure, the EU still has limited opportunities to act with one voice in the international arena. Quite often we see states like Russia, China or USA seek to develop bilateral and multilateral formats for interaction with European states rather than tedious and futile negotiations on certain aspects with Brussels. Today in the context of Brexit, as well as discrepancies with the United States, experts suggest EU needs to enhance its independence in the field of foreign policy.
EU as global actor
The EU traditionally relies in its foreign policy on political and economic instruments such as European Neighborhood Policy, attention to standards of democracy and human rights, humanitarian assistance in the event of disasters, cooperation with the UN and other multilateral institutions. The EU played an important role in developing dialogue between Serbia and Kosovo in 2013, in concluding a "nuclear deal" with Iran in 2015, in reaching the world's first universal, legally binding peace agreement, adopted at the Paris Climate Conference.
Indeed, the EU has strong arguments in favor of its claim to be a global player. First of all, it is the economic potential and a high standard of living. The EU ranks third in the world in terms of population (after China and India). With its high GDP indicators, it ranks largest economy in the world and largest trading block [1].
Secondly, we need to underline its "soft power". Despite a number of crises being experienced by Europe, the democratic and integration EU remains attractive, both for European countries and for more distant countries.
Third argument would be the "hard power" of the EU: 22 out of 28 EU member states are members of the North Atlantic Alliance. EU military leaders are Britain, France and Germany, with the first two possessing nuclear weapons.
Today more than ever, EU member states are striving to find ways to focus on the European com-
mon interest. "Promoting European interests and values on the global stage" is among the main priorities of the European Council's new strategic agenda for 2019-2024 [4]. In it, covering issues like migration policy, fight against crime, resilience against disasters, strengthening single market, social and environmental issues, the European Council commits to make CFSP and CSDP "more responsive and active and be better linked to the other strands of external relations". Relations with strategic partners are to be guaranteed by "more synergies between the EU and the bilateral levels" and in an "integrated manner" and "in a joint endeavor".
Looking back on a bit more than ten years since the Lisbon Treaty was signed illustrates how difficult it remains to find the necessary consensus and support for joint foreign policy action within the CFSP framework. The EU often had no adequate answers to foreign policy crises, and its influence on the international system as a whole has declined.
Along with outlined priorities of the mentioned agenda, EU also outlined as a priority the six Balkan states (Serbia, Kosovo, Montenegro, Albania, Bosnia and North Macedonia) aspiring to join the Union, stronger EU arms export control, a policy to stabilize Libya and maintaining EU sanctions on Russia [7].
With its immediate neighbors the EU has strong links via Eastern Partnership. We witness today EU's unity in its support of Ukraine's territorial integrity and sovereignty as well as in restrictive measures towards Russia over Ukraine crisis. European diplomatic response comprises dialogue with Russia and at the same time commitment to support such principles as principle of democracy and territorial integrity.
One of the main challenges the EU faces is the migration crisis. Along with its humanitarian aid today EU seeks to back UN activities to advance good local governance and a political transition in Middle East (Syria, Yemen) which is key to the return of refugees. The same approach is also valid with respect to Israeli-Palestinian conflict where EU strives
to play crucial role of facilitator in communication between all parties.
EU foreign policy: lack of ability to act
Today EU foreign policy is being criticized for its irrelevance which is due to the structural inconsistency between supranational and intergovernmental elements of EU CFSP. This inconsistency refers to the lack of unity and flexibility both between the member states themselves and also between EU institutions and member states. The decision of UK to leave the EU, US withdrawal from the Iran nuclear accord [6] and EU's inability to contribute to stabilize neighbor countries starting from the Caucasus region to Africa have further undermined the EU's global weight. Critics claim that foreign policy still remains in a national domain of EU member states [3]. This and also voting rules of the Council of Ministers hold back frequently collective action at union level.
EU is also being criticized for having neither means nor the political will to play a decisive role in world politics issues ranging from transatlantic partnership to EU enlargement. It has been largely absent in the Middle East, including the crisis in Syria and Libya. EU's failure to act as an effective player on a global politics is quite often depends on its relative lack of military might. But it is obvious that not only lack of military resources makes the EU weak.
With respect to the EU's shrinking role in world politics, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice-President of the European Commission Josep Borrell, who assumed his post in December 2019, underlined the need for EU to become a real geopolitical player:
"...we see the rebirth of geostrategic competition," notably between China, Russia and the United States, the EU "has the option of becoming a player, a true geostrategic actor, or being mostly the playground" [2].
To be able to become a true global player Borrell as well as other leadership team in Brussels, namely recently nominated President of European Commission Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President Charles Michel need to have a mandate from the
member states to lead some priority foreign policy portfolios and member states go along with them.
One of the main reasons critics argument the inefficient EU foreign policy is the fact that foreign policy related decisions are taken unanimously with a possibility of veto by any member state. In 2019, for instance, veto was applied by Italy during a resolution on Venezuela and by Poland and Hungary on migration accord between the EU and the Arab League. Another example would be China-friendly EU member states driven by their needs blocking EU initiatives aimed against China.
Another reason for criticism would be different perception of certain problems and country-specific attitude of particular EU members. For instance, Germany' support to the gas pipeline project (to be built between Russia and Germany through Baltic Sea) rises concerns of EU members over increase of energy dependence from Russia.
In the area of security and defense the need for further reform derives from the fact that, the PESCO does not guarantee the participation of all EU Member States.
Suggestions
Common proposal suggested to fix at least partly the problem of lack of unity is to abolish unanimity voting on certain issues and introduce qualified majority voting (when 55% of member states representing at least 65% of the EU's population are in favor) for foreign policy. This would have enabled EU to certain actions (impose sanctions, authorize civilian missions etc.) which it is unable to implement today unless unanimous decision is made. However, if adopted, it will not be a whole solution because, as per Treaty of European Union, there will still be issues for member states to decide unanimously.
Another option to overcome the deadlock in a decision-making process would be to implement constructive abstention in order to avoid the situation when a decision is blocked by a member state(s). Experts also suggest ideas such as to have a single seat at United Nations Security Council, form "ad
hoc coalitions" of like-minded member states that would act together but don't undermine the cohesion of the EU and to grant EU exclusive competence in the field of foreign policy. The latter seems for now unrealistic but it would have enabled EU
with true united stance in world politics.
With respect to transatlantic relations EU can still use existing legal frameworks to face new challenges with greater unity. Solution here would be promoting structured dialogue with different U.S. stakeholders based on common values.
Enlargement of EU will still be based on the support of democratic development, pluralism, etc. But, more transparent, open and constructive approach is to be demonstrated in the accession process itself. For instance, Turkey, a candidate for accession since 1999, has strained relations with EU despite
of strong economic and social relations. It is obvious that enhanced dialogue between the two parties would be beneficial both for Turkey and the EU.
Conclusion
Overall analysis of global politics shows that the EU cannot stay aside from world affairs and on the contrary needs to figure out common response to the modern challenges. By using its wide diplomatic experience, the EU needs to position itself in a more united way in today's world order. can face the growing number of challenges is by uniting and acting even stronger together. Despite of national politicians are in favor of prioritizing their national interests over the EU interests, it is clear that weakened EU means weakened nation states. In a globalized world effort will be not be spared to create an effective and united common European foreign policy!
References:
1. An official website of the European Union. (2020). The economy |European Union. [online] Available at: URL: https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/figures/economy_en [Accessed 4 Feb. 2020].
2. Bloomberg.com. (2019). The EU Risks Being Crushed Between the U.S. and China. [online] Available at: URL: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-10-28/eu-trapped-between-u-s-and-china [Accessed 8 Jan. 2020].
3. Bloomberg.com. (2020). The EU's Foreign Policy Is a Failure. [online] Available at: URL: https://www. bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-01-06/the-european-union-s-foreign-policy-is-a-failure [Accessed 8 Jan. 2020].
4. Consilium.europa.eu. (2019). A New Strategic Agenda 2019-2024. [online] Available at: URL: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/39914/a-new-strategic-agenda-2019-2024.pdf [Accessed 8 Jan. 2020].
5. Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union - Consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union - Protocols - Declarations annexed to the Final Act of the Intergovernmental Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon, signed on 13 December 2007. Official Journal - C. 326, 26/10/2012 P. 0001-0390 URL: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A12012M%2FTXT (assessed on 05.01.2019)
6. Magri P. and Perteghella A. Iran after the deal. Milano: ISPI. 2015.
7. Reuters. (2019). Mission impossible: Next EU foreign policy chief warns of EU irrelevance. [online] Available at: URL: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-commission-borrell/mission-impossible-next-eu-foreign-policy-chief-warns-of-eu-irrelevance-idUSKBN1WM1QW [Accessed 8 Jan. 2020].
8. Treaty of Amsterdam amending the Treaty on European Union, the Treaties establishing the European Communities and certain related acts, as signed in Amsterdam on - 2 October, 1997. - Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1997. - 144 p.
9. Treaty of Maastrich, Treaty on European Union, as signed in Maastricht on - 7 February, 1992. URL: https://europa.eu/european-union/sites/europaeu/files/docs/body/treaty_on_european_union_ en.pdf [Accessed 30.01.2019].
10. Wyss M. and Meijer H. The handbook of European defence policies and armed forces. - Oxford: University press. 2018.
