Does European defence really matter? Fortunes and misfortunes of the Common Security and Defence Policy

ABSTRACT

This article examines how the defence component of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) has been revisited over the last few years. It argues that while the CSDP has grown predominantly as a security – rather than defence – policy, the latest developments that include the creation of a military headquarter, the launching of a Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) and the new role for the European Commission in defence funding, attest to an evolution towards a more central EU defence policy. In the meantime, the article points to some structural impediments to the materialisation of European defence. The momentum says little about the form and finality of military operations that EU states will have to conduct so as to give a meaning to defence in a European context. Moreover, persisting divergences in the EU member states’ respective strategic cultures and institutional preferences – notably vis-à-vis NATO – are likely to continue to constrain European defence self-assertion.

KEYWORDS:

• European Union
• CSDP
• European defence
• military operations
• security policy
• strategic culture

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes on contributor

Dr Thierry Tardy is Senior Analyst at the European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS). He has researched and published extensively on military and civilian crisis management with a particular focus on the United Nations and the European Union, inter-institutional cooperation in security governance, security regionalism, and the EU Common Security and Defence Policy. His latest publications include the Oxford Handbook on United Nations Peacekeeping Operations (Oxford University Press, co-edited with J. Koops, N. MacQueen and P. Williams, July 2015); “CSDP in action. What contribution to international security?”, Chaillot Papers 134, EUISS, May 2015; and “Recasting EU Civilian Crisis Management”, Report n°32, EUISS, February 2017. He is a member of the editorial board of International Peacekeeping. He teaches on European Security and Crisis Management at the Institut d’Etudes Politiques (Paris), La Sorbonne, and the National Institute of Oriental Languages and Civilisations (INALCO). He also regularly lectures at the NATO Defense College and at the European Security and Defense College (ESDC), and sits at the ESDC’s Executive Academic Board.

Notes

1 In her article “The end of civilian power EU” (2000), K. Smith was arguing that “[b]y acquiring a defence dimension, the EU repudiates civilian power”, p. 16.

2 In October 2016, the European Parliament published a Report on the European Defence Union (doc. A8-0316/2016, 31 October 2016). And the third scenario of the European Commission (2017b) “Reflection Paper on the Future of European Defence” is about the EU turning into a “Security and Defence Union”.

3 Interview with a French Ministry of Defence official, Paris, 11 December 2015.

4 Ibid.

5 “Non-executive missions” are operations that support the host nation with an advisory role only.

6 Interview with a high-ranking officer of the EU Military Staff, Brussels, 25 April 2017.

7 Interviews with French and German officials, Paris, 7 June 2017; interviews with French officials, Paris and Brussels, 10, 17, 20 October 2017; interviews with officials of the European External Action Service (EEAS), Brussels, 11 October 2017; interviews with officials of the European Defence Agency (EDA), Brussels, 10 October 2017.

8 Although one cannot rule out a situation in which a CSDP operation, deployed in a neighbouring third state, would have to punctually cross an external border of an EU member state.

9 Interviews with officials of the European External Action Service (EEAS), Brussels, 11 October 2017; Interviews with French officials, Paris, 17 October 2018.