A historic reminder, an ever-present dilemma? - Assessing Brexit’s potential consequences for European security. EPC Commentary, 18 May 2016

On 9 May 2016, in a further attempt to discourage the British public opinion from opting for their country’s abandonment of the European Union (EU) in the ‘in/out’ referendum on 23 June, Prime Minister David Cameron stated that the UK has regretted "turning its back" on Europe in the past, and that the EU had "helped reconcile" countries and maintain peace on the Old Continent.

Turkey's Accession to the European Union in terms of impact on the EU's security and defense policies: potential and drawbacks

This study explores the impact of Turkey's likely entry in the European Union (EU) in terms of the EU's foreign, security and defense policies. It reviews Turkish capabilities, namely its military capabilities, which could provide the EU with valuable defense assets. There are differences related to Turkey's relations with the EU, which have increasingly spilled over into the NATO, hindering the development of cooperation over crisis management operations. The article then delves in the implications of Turkey's strategic geographical location to EU policies. It reviews how far the EU and Turkey may have convergent interests in some of the neighboring regions, especially in the Middle East.

From a European to a common security and defence policy. IES WORKING PAPER 5/2010

The Lisbon Treaty has introduced significant changes in the field of EU security and defence. On the one hand, important institutional reforms, such as the creation of a renewed High Representative, have of course a great impact on this policy field. On the other hand, the Lisbon Treaty has also introduced specific innovations in the security and defence of the European Union. The mutual defence clause and the new mechanisms for flexible cooperation such as the permanent structured cooperation, are only some of the key innovations. Generally, the European Security and Defence Policy receives its own section in the Treaty on European Union and is rebranded as Common Security and Defence Policy. Thus, the Lisbon Treaty sets the objective for a common policy in this field. However, does this reform really provide for the means for the realization of such a common policy? Furthermore, does the Lisbon Treaty increase the importance of CSDP or is the increasing importance of this policy field just reflected in the Treaty text? These are the main questions that the present paper attempts to address through the analysis of the new institutional setting of the post-Lisbon security and defence policy, as well as through the examination of the specific innovations in this area.

Prospects for Security on the European Continent. EU Diplomacy Paper 05/2015.

This collective EU Diplomacy Paper on relations between the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and the European Union (EU) consists of essays written by students of the EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies programme at the College of Europe in the class on EU-NATO relations taught by Fulbright Professor Mark Sheetz in the academic year 2014-15. It seeks to provide a blueprint of what the near future of the transatlantic alliance and of the European security framework might look like. Special attention will be given to the possible effects of Finland joining NATO, Swedish-NATO relations, the question whether NATO should continue to exist at all, and finally the use of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) in relation with the transatlantic military alliance.

The Challenge of Migration and the Global Security Strategy of the European Union

This article discusses the challenges of irregular migration for the security of the EU. They are analyzed starting with the European Security Strategy 2003, and the Report on its Implementation, 2008, and notes many failures: The EU Members did not follow the directives adopted in Brussels, the mismanagement of migration and asylum policies, and numerous actions that can be characterized or described as improvised, scattered or irresponsible. The 2016 Global Strategy recognizes these failures and call attention to the European leaders to reconsider how the EU functions and operates, suggesting the need for greater unity and cooperation to achieve a more effective migration policy. However, the article points out that practically all of the sections of the new Strategy dealing with migration were already embodied in previous Strategies, and stress that in parallel with the publication of the 2016 Global Strategy, actions are already undertaken, such as the EU readmission agreements signed with several important third countries of origin.

When ESDP confronts ENP: security sector reform as a bridge in the EU’s foreign policy

The European Neighbourhood Policy’s birth has taken place in parallel with the renewed momentum of the European Security and Defence Policy, which has launched 14 operations since 2003. Both policies’ instruments have converged in the neighbouring area covered by ENP: Georgia, in the East and the Palestinian Territories in the South. In both cases, the Security Sector Reform strategies have been the main focus for ESDP and an important objective for ENP. In this paper, two objectives are pursued: first, to assess the EU’s involvement in both cases in SSR terms; and second, to analyse whether the convergence of ESDP operations with a broader EU neighbourhood policy implies that the former has become an instrument for the a EU external action.

The Role of Parliaments in European foreign policy

This book addresses the debate on the democratic deficit of European foreign and defence policies. This debate revolves around two dimensions. The first one has to do with the accountability of CFSP institutions. Is the current degree of parliamentary oversight of these policies the most appropriate? Has the disengagement of national parliaments regarding European foreign policy been counterbalanced by giving sufficient powers to the European Parliament? And, regarding the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP), are national parliaments effectively controlling it? The second dimension of the debate is related to the wider question of whether the European Parliament is capable of legitimising EU policy outcomes. In the absence of a Europe-wide demos and of a true party system, what interests do Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) represent when dealing with foreign policy issues? Are there transnational cleavages in foreign policy or are they mainly national? Furthermore, is the European Parliament developing a transnational, autonomous stance on foreign policy issues, different from that of the Council or the Commission? The present volume is the result of the 2nd Meeting of the FORNET Working Group on “Evolution and Accountability of CFSP Institutions” organised by the Observatory of European Foreign Policy (Research line of the Institut Universitari d’Estudis Europeus), which took place in Barcelona, the 4 and 5 March 2005.

Preparing for a post-Assad Syria: What role for the European Union? CEPS Commentary, 2 August 2012

In this CEPS Commentary, Steven Blockmans notes that a prolonged period of instability lies ahead for Syria, with an on-going risk of spill-over effects affecting the entire region. The author argues that the EU’s plans for a post-Assad Syria should extend beyond the half-hearted responses to the monumental changes that have ripped through other parts of the Arab world. In recognition of the geostrategic shifts in the Middle East and the Gulf, and pursuant to the obligation imposed upon it by the Lisbon Treaty, the EU should plan for the creation of a regional space of shared security. Such a plan would fit well into the current efforts to revamp the European Security Strategy.

‘European defence before and after the "turn of the tide"’

Review essay on recent literature on the transformation of European security politics in the 1980s

Safeguarding the EDTIB: the Case for Supervising non-EU FDI in the Defence Sector. Security Policy Brief No. 41, December 2012

It is time for the EU member states to start collectively supervising non-EU FDI in Europe’s defence industries and infrastructures. This should be a prudent element of the nascent EDTIB and a way to maintain European security by encouraging greater coordination between the national supervisory frameworks.