Skip to main content
main-content

Über dieses Buch

This book discusses Brexit’s implications for the two most important security institutions in Europe, the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). While Brexit is still unfolding, this book asks what it would mean for the future embedding of the UK into CFSP and NATO, as well as how it will most likely affect the inner mechanics of the transatlantic alliance (NATO) and CFSP in particular, in the years to come. The book is divided into two parts. Part I provides a historical overview of the evolution of the relationships between the UK and NATO and the EU, respectively. Part II discusses the geopolitical contexts and potential impacts of Brexit, focusing on the contemporary security environment, as well as the options that the EU has, in the event an agreement is concluded. Using both predictive and normative arguments, this book provides likely scenarios for an event that continues to be a source of much uncertainty for the global community.

Making an important contribution to one of the most important policy debates in international security affairs today, this book is of interest to students and researchers of international security affairs, European politics, and global governance as well as policymakers and practitioners working on the Brexit file.

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Frontmatter

Chapter 1. Introduction

Abstract
The outcome of the so-called Brexit, which is an abbreviation of “British exit” from the European Union (E.U.) that Britons had voted for in a nation-wide referendum on 23 June, 2016 surprised many, not only in the United Kingdom (U.K.). Other members of the E.U. were also astonished to learn that the U.K. decided to be the first country in the history of the E.U. to leave the mostly intergovernmental Union. This would mean that is the U.K.
Benjamin Zyla

Historical Evolutions of the U.K.—NATO and U.K.—E.U. Relationship

Frontmatter

Chapter 2. A Brief History of the U.K.—NATO Relationship

Abstract
The United Kingdom (U.K.) has been at the center of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) since the organization’s creation in 1949. And even before that the U.K. was a member to the Treaty of Brussels, which is widely considered the precursor to NATO. The aim of this chapter is to briefly trace the development of the U.K.-NATO relationship.
Benjamin Zyla

Chapter 3. A Brief History of the U.K.—E.U. Relationship

Abstract
The History of British and European relations is long and storied, filled with conflicts, bickering, rejections, but also cooperation. It is thus inaccurate to characterize the relationship as solely rejecting; indeed, it has always oscillated between one of integration and distancing. Moreover, the historical baggage of hundreds of years prior to the 20th century cannot be discounted when considering the current relationships between Britain and Continental Europe.
Benjamin Zyla

Contemporary Contexts and Impacts of the Brexit

Frontmatter

Chapter 4. The Geopolitical Contexts of the Brexit

With Arnold Kammel
Abstract
Brexit is taking place at a time of growing security challenges and insecurities facing Europe’s strategic and economic position. Included in these challenges and insecurities are threats to its internal cohesion from the rise of nationalism and political extremism in several E.U. member states (e.g. in France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Poland). These voices mainly reject the governance system of the European Union and are calling for a return of competences back to the national level that are currently held by the European Commission. Furthermore, some Eastern and especially Southern European states currently experience fragile state institutions (e.g. Albania, Montenegro, Serbia); indeed, some of them even are at the brink of collapse. This cocktail of fragility, as we know from the literature, can quickly result into full state failure. Last but not least, especially Europe’s eastern frontiers currently witness a relatively high number of frozen conflicts (e.g. Ukraine, Georgia). The increased assertiveness of Russia there, coupled with the impact of fake news and hybrid warfare, along with multiple spill-overs from political turmoil and conflicts in the Arab world and Africa (ranging from Mali via Chad to Sudan and South Sudan as well as the developments in Ethiopia) mean that the security challenges to Europe are more significant than at any time since the end of the Cold War. The demographic developments in these regions, coupled with conflicts over resources and political influence and overall state fragility, trigger strong migratory movements to the E.U. The refugee crisis since 2015 and subsequently the continuous flow of migrants from northern Africa until this day underline this point.
Benjamin Zyla

Chapter 5. The Impact of Brexit on E.U. Security

With Arnold Kammel
Abstract
As noted, the Brexit is taking place at a time when the E.U. is confronted with a variety of internal and external challenges related to its very own foundation as well as the security environment it is embedded in. Nonetheless, a set of shared values and geographical proximity suggest that both the U.K. and the remaining 27 E.U. members (that is the current twenty eight member states minus Britain) will have powerful reasons to continue cooperating on security issues after Brexit, and to limit the collateral damage to shared security interests. Thus, despite the possibility of the U.K. leaving the European Union as a consequence of the Brexit vote, we charge that it is not likely that the United Kingdom will leave European security per se, in spite of the strong political framing during the negotiations. Indeed, it is in its own (security) interest to keep and maintain a healthy relationship with the E.U.’s security institutions.
Benjamin Zyla

Chapter 6. Conclusion

Abstract
The E.U. is currently confronted with a range of internal as well as external challenges. On the one hand, the Brexit is showing that the E.U. integration process as such is not only being put on hold; it is actively in question. Moreover, nationalist as well as disintegration forces in various E.U. countries seem to gain political ground and influence. On the other hand, looking at the external challenges, the E.U. is confronted with the most imminent and threatening of these over the short term, namely a hostile Russia and protracted instability in the Middle/Near East and North Africa. Doubts concerning the commitment of President Trump to NATO and the growing rapprochement between Ankara and Moscow show that European states cannot rely on NATO attending to their security requirements. Moreover, in cases of an imminent emergency it is certain that it will be difficult to activate NATO mechanisms, which requires the consent of all 29 members—such as e.g. the VJTF—in good time, should Turkey have any objections. The increasing tensions between Brussels and Washington alongside growing foreign policy differences (e.g. in relation to the Iranian nuclear agreement and the threat that country poses for the entire Middle East) have also boosted arguments in favour of boosting European strategic autonomy. This concept of strategic autonomy underlies the European Global Strategy. However, the eastern European members states are not alone in fearing that there is a growing divide between rhetoric and reality. In addition, any impulsive and ill-thought-out promotion of strategic autonomy would risk encouraging those in America (both within and outside the Trump Administration) who would like to refocus on the Asia/Pacific area and to rein in transatlantic obligations.
Benjamin Zyla
Weitere Informationen

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise