To what extent does it make sense to consider the EU foreign policy as distinctive from the American one ?

Résumé du document

Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the literature on American and European international policy has been exuberant. However, the policies continue to remain blurred. Indeed numerous scholars have emphasized overall and increasing divergence. Contradicting this divergence are others who are insisting that convergence remains solid. This paper will attempt to see the extent to which Robert Kagan's views can be emulated. Robert Kagan, the American historian considers the EU foreign policy as distinctive from the American one. This paper will focus on the difference between the EU and the US concerning their approaches towards international relations. Despite the fact that some analysis and facts point out the importance of divergence insisting on a dissociative approach, we will argue that the picture is not explicit enough. It often appears that the European and American foreign policy models are similar. This will be answered through the study of rhetoric and practical case studies in attempting to avoid the caricature form of assessment.

Extraits

[...] Most of the time, the EU has valued its own interest through the tools of the partnership. A couple of objectives of the partnership has been not achieved since some issues have remained very national oriented such as immigration, because there has been a tension between democratizing and liberalizing political activities on one hand and carefully monitoring the activities of potentially subversive social and political movements on the other hand, and thirdly because of a discrepancy between discourses and acts. [...]

[...] To what extent does it make sense to consider the EU foreign policy as distinctive from the American one ? Introduction : Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the literature on American and European international policy has been as abundant as blurred. Indeed, sholars emphasising overall and increasing divergence are as numerous as those insisting that convergence remains solid. As Jolyon Howorth notices, chronologically, the picture is no clearer (Howorth 2003). After 1989, analysts underlined divergence but by the mid-1990's, the balance swung back again towards convergence. [...]

[...] We would like to stress the impact of September 11 on the American strategy. Both the EU and the US are divided into several positions and into the US one won the struggle and has imposed its view based on hard power and unilateralism since September 11. Into the EU, countries such United Kingdom would be more attracted by the American model whereas Germany or France want to reinforce the identity of the european foreign policy. Division is again maybe more visible into the US. [...]

[...] It is true that since September 11, we have seen clear signs of gap between the EU and the US on that subject. Mark A. Pollack assesses the situation in those terms : [ ] the US and the EU orientation towards multilateral rules and institutions can be described as ships passing in the night with the EU increasingly (but not invariably) inclined to support multilateral rules and institutions and the US increasingly (but not invariably) sceptical of both new and existing multilateral agreements (Pollack 2003). [...]

[...] Peterson, J. ; Pollack, M. (2003a) ‘Introduction Europe, America, Bush' in Peterson, J and Pollack, M (eds) Europe, America, Bush. Transatlantic Relations in the twenty-first century. London, Routledge. Peterson, J. ; Pollack, M.A. (2003b) ‘Conclusion The end of transatlanctic partnership ?' in Peterson, J and Pollack, M (eds) Europe, America, Bush. Transatlantic Relations in the twenty-first century. London, Routledge. [...]