The EU Foreign Policy – Myth or Reality?

Résumé du document

European Union (EU) critics are a very heterogenic group. Amongst them, there are people who think that this organization has too many responsibilities. Sometimes this disapproval is summarized in only one word: ‘Brussels', the city where several institutions of the EU and especially the European Commission have their seat. According to these critics, the European Commission and its bureaucracy interfere in national legislation everywhere and every time. Their desire is to prevent this and to protect the sovereignty of the EU member states, in particular as regards the important aspect of foreign policy. In opposition to this point of view, even if it is a rarer phenomenon, other detractors complain that the EU hasn't got enough responsibilities and is in fact too weak. Some want the EU to become a genuine federation with exclusive or large competences in the field of foreign and defense policy. The debate about latter is particularly controversial: Should the EU get more competences in foreign and defense policy or should this be a domain reserved for the nation-states? Of course, this issue is purely matter of opinion. No truth about this controversy can be established. In opposition to this normative approach, however, there is the possibility of a positive approach, i.e. to find out to what extent the EU has got competences today in the area of foreign policy. The result of such an analysis could then serve as a base for a later comment on the question. The positive approach is the topic with which this term paper will deal. But first of all, we have to define what is meant by ‘European foreign policy' and what ‘competences' we are talking about in order to limit the topic and make clear what is exactly the question to which we will try to answer.

Extraits

[...] Assessment of the institutional framework of CFSP and CSDP The Europeanization of foreign and security policy As we have seen, the institutions of the EU have obtained more and more competences in the field of CFSP and CSDP. Today, there isn't any area of foreign policy anymore which is excluded from the European decision process. This is why we can speak of a Europeanization of foreign and security policy. But the fact that European institutions are allowed to deal with a policy matter doesn't mean necessarily that it is a supranational, integrated policy. [...]

[...] It is kept regularly informed and consulted on the broad orientation and choices in CFSP by the GAERC. So the European Parliament has an advisory role. Generally, the GAERC takes its decisions by unanimity. The exceptions differing from the principle of unanimity There are however exceptions. If measures were already passed by the European Council by unanimity, the GAERC can decide subsequent joint actions and common positions relative to these measures by a qualified majority voting (QMV) of 10 member states[19]. This procedure is called reinforced QMV. [...]

[...] This brings a considerable limit to the foreign policy of the EU seen as a unified entity. There are, however, elements which strengthen this unified character of CFSP and CSDP. The current HR Javier Solana for instance has managed to personify efficiently European foreign policy and has gathered a momentum of its own. Moreover, recent treaties have created several possibilities of decision-making within the GAERC which differ clearly from the intergovernmental principle of unanimity. We can therefore conclude this second part by saying that CFSP 'has developed almost as a third way between the intergovernmental and communautarian methods'[22]. [...]

[...] What competences of the EU are we talking about? There are several aspects to consider: To what extent are foreign and defence matters discussed at all in the EU? Are they maybe taboo subjects which are excluded of any cooperation at all? And then there is the question of the quality of the cooperation: Is the EU foreign policy only the sum of national policies which are more or less coordinated? Another question concerns the institutional question, the way of decision-making and implementation: who are the main actors behind the different institutions used for EU foreign and defence policy, the member states or Community institutions? [...]

[...] The European Council takes its decisions in any case by unanimity. If the currently 25 EU member states can't find a consensus, the measure in question can't be decided neither executed. The decision-making of CFSP and CSDP measures Based on the guiding lines and general principles fixed by the European Council, more concrete CFSP and CSDP matters are then decided by the GAERC. Generally unanimous decisions by the GAERC without intervention of the European Parliament The GAERC meets at least once a month and is used by EU member states to inform mutually about their Foreign policies and to coordinate them. [...]