The Evolution of the Common Security and Defence Policy

This chapter explores the historical legacy of CSDP, with a special emphasis on the Anglo-French compromise on European collective security. Furthermore, the chapter presents the theoretical premises of the project, namely historical institutionalism and its relevance for studying the evolution of CSDP. Historical institutionalism is also examined in relation to neo-functionalism and constructivism.

The chapter elaborates on the notion of critical junctures, key concept of the historical institutionalist approach, and examines how it applies in the area of CSDP. Τhe term denotes moments of profound fluidity where important events create the need for institutional responses. Critical junctures are at the origin of important changes, mainly institutional but also capability-driven. In so doing, they also had a long-lasting effect in the way the EU deals with Security and Defence. The events selected did not only influence the direction and the content of ESDP/CSDP, but have presented the EU with new dilemmas, related to its self-perception and its aspirations, in ways that led to its transformation.

This chapter reviews the debate on the need for a distinctly European strategic culture and links it to the Euro-Atlantic legacy. The issue at hand is not the replacement of national strategic cultures but their convergence. This is closely related to EU’s hybrid nature and its aspiration to become a global security actor.

The chapter explores the agents of change in the CSDP framework. Who is in charge during critical moments of the development of the policy is the question the chapter tries to address. Fundamentally an intergovernmental policy, the CSDP is marked by the tension between intergovernmentalism and supranationalism, as the Commission and the European Parliament try to influence in an ever more pronounced way security and defence policy.

This chapter explores the impact of the Yugoslav Wars on the role and the scope of the EU foreign action. The wars that put an end to the former Yugoslav Federation and their devastating effect on the EU’s self-image constitute the first critical juncture in the evolution towards a Common European Security and Defence. The Franco-British relationship will prove to be the arbiter of ESDP/CSDP until Brexit occurs. Soon, the British will have second thoughts on a future autonomous ESDP but, constrained by the very institutions they contributed to emerge, cannot go backwards. However, using the unanimity rule they would block any development towards more autonomy in security and defence.

The US-led war against Iraq in 2003, with the participation of certain EU member states under the name ‘alliance of the willing’, was a major blow to European cohesion at the foreign policy level. The war dramatically divided the member states, on an issue pertaining to the very essence of EU foreign policy: should there be a military intervention without a UN Security Council resolution? The heated debate led to the adoption of the first ever European Security Strategy—ESS by Javier Solana in 2003, in an effort to overcome the divisions among member states on the war. Despite its weaknesses, the ESS managed to realign the member states around a series of principles (e.g. ‘effective multilateralism’) and initiatives that would pave the way for future developments. In that sense, the Iraq War was the critical juncture that permitted a reflection on the strategic goals, principles and objectives of the EU leading to the adoption of a European strategy. This strategic framework was crucial, as in 2003 the Union started to conduct military and civilian missions and operations.

The chapter explores the impact of two significant events, the Libyan campaign (2011) and the Ukrainian crisis (2014) on the institutional framework of CSDP. The effect of the two crises led to a reaffirmation of the US role in Europe, as well as to a reassessment of EU’s capability to act as one. They proved that the EU did not have the capabilities to match its foreign policy aspirations in the European neighbourhood. These critical junctures triggered a number of institutional changes, while presenting the EU with the reality of the new nature of war.

The chapter explores EU efforts to systematically integrate Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) issues into its foreign policy, that led to important paradigm shifts in the way to handle Internal Affairs and Security and Defence respectively. The importance of this project became even more pronounced with the gradual blurring of lines between internal and external security, as the threats crossed boundaries and more often than not traditional security and defence mechanisms could not provide for an answer. Of great significance has been the process of securitising migration and militarising border management. The catalyst to move forward towards this institutional and political development was, again, a critical juncture, the Syrian Crisis that led to massive migration flows in 2015.

The chapter explores the rupture of the Anglosphere, which refers to the combined effect of the UK referendum on EU membership and the coming to office of President Donald Trump in the United States. The British retreat was combined with the return of American isolationism after many decades. These two critical junctures were significant for the new transatlantic reality and the efforts to build a new relation between the EU and the UK, not always successfully. They also led to new initiatives in EU defence (PESCO, CARD, EDF) that could potentially pave the way to an EU Defence Union. In this framework, the EU Global Security Strategy of 2016 is discussed and analysed.

This chapter considers the lessons learnt through the six crises discussed, six critical junctures that were catalytical for security cooperation in the EU. It underlines that the development of CSDP is a mix of radical and incremental change, while the drivers for defence cooperation have been both exogenous and endogenous. In this context, it defines the concept of “European Strategic Autonomy” dynamically, as the residual effect of negotiation over time. Finally, it elaborates on the inter-institutional balance on issues pertaining to security and defence. Although the policy is fundamentally intergovernmental, the role of the Commission and the European Parliament gradually becomes more pronounced. The chapter also discusses the ‘Strategic Compass”, a two-year exercise that is meant to operationalise EU’s strategic vision.

The chapter examines the state of play at the level of EU military capability development. Today the bar of expectations is higher than ever before; still, the capabilities are still lagging behind the EU ambition, as it is proven by the PESCO Strategic Review and the CARD Review. The chapter elaborates on the concept of trust as the missing link in the explanation of the capability gaps and the lack of political will to move quicker in the area of CSDP. As the European Union is a multilevel and multidimensional system, trust is needed in order to address complexity and create the social capital necessary to make the Union a credible global actor.