Karen E. Smith "European Union Foreign Policy in a Changing World"

Résumé du document

European Union Foreign Policy in a Changing World provides a clear introduction to the complexities of the contemporary European Union foreign policy, and offers a comprehensive and a distinctive perspective on the nature of the European Union's international identity. Karen E.Smith is a Senior lecturer in International Relations at the London School of Economics and her research interests focus on EU foreign policy, and principally the role of normative issues in EU external strategy. Her book offers a fresh approach to the complicated framework of the EU foreign policies. Now a days, it is a common view to consider the EU as an ineffective and an incomplete actor whose foreign policy is inconsequential and weak, notably compared to the US. Its absence in hot spots in Rwanda, Kosovo or Bosnia as well as its member states‘ division over the conflict in Iraq only emphasized this picture.

Extraits

[...] The absence of any agreed definition and treaty relative to democracy together with the well- known ‘democratic deficit' of the EU constitute an obstacle to the promoting of this objective in third countries. The promoting of these objectives implies also the using of similar instruments of foreign policy in their achieving. Unlike the USA, the EU insists on its image of civil power and tends therefore to use a set of non- coercive tools such as diplomatic instruments or financial aid. It clearly prefers positive to negative measures as such measures seem to challenge less the sovereignty of third countries and do not antagonize these states and hurt population. [...]

[...] The consensus among the member states on the definition of these objectives is certain. However, the way in which the EU promotes human rights and democracy and good governance is subject to a debate. The author argues that the incorporation of the objectives in the EU foreign relations with third countries has been inconsistent and mostly inefficient. Yet, the EU is a leading actor in promoting these values and its large toolbox of instruments and its own democratic framework might appear as a substantial advantage in the relations with third countries. [...]

[...] And how is it efficient in achieving these goals? Two main questions serve to the author in her analysis which is presented in a structured (maybe over-structured) way using exact and very recent data that support her hypothesis. Strictly in the choice of these objectives, the EU's goals do not appear as unique as the desired objectives are shared by most international actors. Where the EU stands out distinctively is in foreign policy instruments it has at its disposition only few of whom could be wielded by other actors. [...]

[...] Her book offers a fresh approach to the complicated framework of the EU foreign policies. Nowadays, it is a common view to consider the EU as an ineffective and incomplete actor whose foreign policy is inconsequential and weak, notably compared to the US. Its absence in hot spots in Rwanda, Kosovo or Bosnia as well as its member states‘ division over the conflict in Iraq only emphasized this picture. However, according to the author, to concentrate only on the absence of the EU in these crisis is to ignore areas where its impact is much stronger. [...]

[...] That is also why the promoting of democracy is rather a late-comer in the foreign policy topics becoming a clearly defined objective only in 1998 whereas the promoting of human rights is explicitly mentioned already in 1986 and figures even before this date on the agenda of the European political cooperation (EPC). However, in both cases the EU seems quite committed to promoting the human rights as well as democracy and good governance as an expression of its own identity. These values have formed the very basis of the European community from its creation. Already the initiatory idea that leads the founding fathers of the community was to prevent the spread of undemocratic ideologies such as fascism and Nazism and never allow again the violation of human rights. [...]