I H S — Heidrun Maurer / Scholar — 81
Research Interests
Current Research Interests
Foreign Policy of the EU and its member states; Security Policy; Environmental Policy; The European Union’s role in International Politics
Dissertation Outline
Title: Coherence within the External Policy Areas of the European Union
With the Treaty of Maastricht (TEU), the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) was incorporated into the institutional framework of the European Union. But as many member states did not want to integrate the field of external relations fully into Community competence, three pillars with different degrees of integration were created. The CFSP made up the second pillar, where decisions still remained intergovernmental.
Nevertheless, not all external actions towards third states emerge from this second CFSP pillar. Actions primarily related to the economy and development are realized in the first pillar, the European Community. To accomplish good cooperation between these two pillars and their actors and to ensure an effective appearance of the Union in international affairs, Art. 3 of the TEU asks for coherence in the external actions of the European Union. This fundamental principle should guarantee that external actions of different policy areas as well as of different actors do not contradict themselves. (see for example Gauttier 2004; Nuttall 2001)
Puzzle
Within scientific literature the still existing lack of coherence is often criticized. (see for example Gauttier 2004; Olsen 2000, 2004; Szymanski 2005) Coherence in the external affairs of the European Union may apply at different levels: vertical coherence can appear between the foreign policies of the member states as well as between foreign policies of the member states and the external actions of the European Union. Horizontal coherence, on the other hand, applies to different EU policy areas and to the cooperation between first (EC) and second pillar (CFSP). As the literature primarily focuses on coordination between foreign policies of the member states and CFSP, my work focuses on horizontal coherence.
Thereby, I want to answer the following research questions:
How coherent is the foreign policy of the European Union towards specific states and what factors explain the degree of (in-)coherence in these particular cases?
The following questions will also be addressed:
How does the European Union try to coordinate its external actions?
How much of a problem is incoherence for the main actors?
I H S — Heidrun Maurer / Scholar — 83
In comparing the external relations of the European Union towards selected countries or regions, possible differences concerning the degree of coherence will be examined.
First, I want to examine if foreign policies towards different countries differ in regard to coherence. If this answer has to be verified (as I assume) and different degrees of coherence exist in the European Union’s foreign policies, I would like to work out factors that might explain these differences. The independent variables I will extract from my theoretical framework, where I distinguish between three types of factors: EU-level, member state related and target country related influences.
Theoretical Framework
Michael E. Smith (Smith 2001) has elaborated a useful scheme of “Governance of the EU´s external relations”, where he categorizes EU external relations on the basis of institutional differences between the three pillars while also integrating the various policy areas. Smith argues that, especially in the fields of pillar-overlapping competencies, questions of power and responsibilities occur, and that horizontal coherence can best be analysed while looking at policy outcomes from such areas. Mixed competencies occur primarily within the policy fields of human rights, democracy/good governance and conflict prevention.
Three categories of factors that explain incoherence are set up to create a suitable theoretical framework and hypotheses:
1) EU-level factors
Within this category the importance of the institutional setting and the cooperation of different actors especially between first and second pillar are emphasised. Theoretically, I would like to use the bureaucratic politics approach that focuses on the importance of organizational cultures and suggests that preferences and outcomes are influenced by several mechanisms, but that the institutional organization is the more important.
2) Member State related factors
Rational-choice approaches emphasise stable preferences and interests, while constructivism focuses on global norms and ideals. This confrontation underlies my main research interest, namely in how far a possible conflict of (economic) interests and moral norms influences (in)coherence of European foreign actions.
3) Target-Country related factors
Furthermore, I assume that also the target country influences the degree of (in-)coherence.
Here, international relations theories (primarily realism) will be used to form possible hypotheses. Possible independent factors are the economic and political power of the third country, the proximity to Europe etc.
While hypotheses within these categories will be set up, I also want to look which of these three categories has to strongest influence on the degree of coherence.
Method
My dissertation will be structured in two parts: on the one hand, I want to look at mechanisms within and between the institutions (Commission, Council) and how these actors try to improve cooperation and coherence. On the other hand, I want to focus on the policy outputs (common positions, common actions of the EC/EU) towards selected states.
I intend to analyse the EU policy output on specific case studies. Although the case selection is still vague, possible target countries could be Russia and China, as on the one hand European economic interests towards these countries are high, but on the other hand human rights violations burden the relationship. Nevertheless, the case selection still has to be thought out more in detail, as it will also depend on my hypotheses.
Methodically, I will analyse the relevant documents and conduct interviews with experts who work in that particular field. My current focus is on my theoretical framework and possible hypotheses. My next step will be the selection of cases to examine.
Literature
Gauttier, Pascal, 2004: Horizontal Coherence and the External Competences of the European Union. In: European Law Journal 10(1), 23-41.
Nuttall, Simon J., 2001: "Consistency" and the CFSP: A Categorization and Its Consequences. EFPU Working Paper 2001/3.
In: <http://www.lse.ac.uk/Depts/intrel/EuroFPUnit.html#workingpapers>.
Olsen, Grom Rye, 2000: Promotion of Democracy as a Foreign Policy Instrument of
‘Europe’: Limits to international idealism. In: Democratization 7(2), 142-167.
Olsen, Grom Rye, 2004: Challenges to Traditional Policy Options, Opportunities for New Choices: The Africa Policy of the EU. In: The Round Table 93(375), 425-436.
Smith, Michael E., 2001: The Quest for Coherence: Institutional Dillemmas of External Action from Maastricht to Amsterdam. In: Alec; Fligstein Stone Sweet, Neil; Sandholtz, Wayne; (ed.) The Institutionalization of Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 171-193.
Szymanski, Marcela / Smith, Michael E., 2005: Coherence and Conditionality in European Foreign Policy: Negotiating the EU-Mexico Global Agreement. In: Journal of Common Market Studies 43(1), 171-192.
Previous Research
The EU on its way to a “Common Security and Defence Policy”? (Diplomarbeit) Abstract
In 2003, the European Union carried out its first military and civil missions. Considering the fact that the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) only began in 1999, this was
I H S — Heidrun Maurer / Scholar — 85
quite an achievement. Compared to other (especially economic) policy areas and to the ongoing process of European integration, the current status quo of ESDP is the subject of much discussion and debate. This thesis offers an overview and critique of the relevant debates.
The aims of this thesis are to clarify how security and defence policy are positioned within the framework of the European Union, what progress has been made over the last five years and what goals are being pursued through these activities. In order to discuss the need for this policy area on not just an intergovernmental but also supranational level, and also to question the need for military power in international relations nowadays. Another aim is to bring together the findings offered by the current literature on the status quo, and to organize, compare and analyse them. With this background and the focus on newly developments and ideas within ESDP, possible future developments are presented. The final aim of this thesis centres on the analysis of effects of ESDP on international politics, especially on international security institutions (NATO, UN) as well as on the reactions of two other “big players” Russia and the USA.
In conclusion, at the moment the European Security and Defence Policy is an intense coordination of the single security policies of its member states, which is organised intergovernmentally within the framework of the EU. This is also confirmed by the structure of the recently created “Rapid Reaction Force”, which is not at all a “European army”, as critics have often argued, but a conglomeration of national troops with national or European leadership. Complicated financial structures for conflict management, unsuitably trained and equipped national troops etc. constitute different problem fields that are to be solved in future, but one should always bear in mind that at present ESDP is in the process of development and further practical realisation will follow.
I H S — Eric Miklin / Scholar — 87