Conclusion

Abstract

The E.U. is currently confronted with a range of internal as well as external challenges. On the one hand, the Brexit is showing that the E.U. integration process as such is not only being put on hold; it is actively in question. Moreover, nationalist as well as disintegration forces in various E.U. countries seem to gain political ground and influence. On the other hand, looking at the external challenges, the E.U. is confronted with the most imminent and threatening of these over the short term, namely a hostile Russia and protracted instability in the Middle/Near East and North Africa. Doubts concerning the commitment of President Trump to NATO and the growing rapprochement between Ankara and Moscow show that European states cannot rely on NATO attending to their security requirements. Moreover, in cases of an imminent emergency it is certain that it will be difficult to activate NATO mechanisms, which requires the consent of all 29 members—such as e.g. the VJTF—in good time, should Turkey have any objections. The increasing tensions between Brussels and Washington alongside growing foreign policy differences (e.g. in relation to the Iranian nuclear agreement and the threat that country poses for the entire Middle East) have also boosted arguments in favour of boosting European strategic autonomy. This concept of strategic autonomy underlies the European Global Strategy. However, the eastern European members states are not alone in fearing that there is a growing divide between rhetoric and reality. In addition, any impulsive and ill-thought-out promotion of strategic autonomy would risk encouraging those in America (both within and outside the Trump Administration) who would like to refocus on the Asia/Pacific area and to rein in transatlantic obligations.