Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The European Union in Crisis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Euro-Atlantic Security System in the 21st Century

Part of the book series: Global Power Shift ((GLOBAL))

  • 434 Accesses

Abstract

The seventh chapter is concerned with analyzing the crisis of the EU and its negative impact on the functioning of the Euro-Atlantic security system. The symptoms of the crisis came to the fore during work on the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe in 2002–2004, which ended in failure. With the Lisbon Treaty, which strengthened the inter-governmental character of the EU, the CSDP fall into stagnation. The EU also couldn’t function as an effective security policy actor on account of the financial and economic crisis 2008–2011. The EU then had to deal with the migration crisis that began in 2014. For many years, nationalistic and centrifugal tendencies threatening the EU’s survival as an integration project also had been on the rise. In 2016, the British decided to take their country out of the EU. The EU’s power to act weakened and the EU did not play a positive role in the Ukraine crisis. Nevertheless, the EU made successive attempts to revitalize the CSDP, drew up a new global foreign and security policy strategy in 2016, discussed how to build an European army, and established Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Zięba (2003), p. 268. For more, see McCormick (2006), Telò (2006), Bretherton and Vogler (2006).

  2. 2.

    Until the Amsterdam Treaty came into force (on May 1, 1999) the third pillar encompassed a wider range of issues making up cooperation in the fields of justice and home affairs. Some Parts of these issues were shifted to the first pillar by virtue of the Amsterdam amendment.

  3. 3.

    See Timmermans (1999), p. 181 ff.

  4. 4.

    For more on the subject of the doubts about whether the EU is an international “actor” or just an “extra”, see Gompert (2002).

  5. 5.

    In this book, use was made of the consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union, which takes into account the changes introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon. See Consolidated Version of the Treaty on European Union (2016).

  6. 6.

    Compare Edwards (2013), p. 276 et seq.

  7. 7.

    This is, however, a general provision whose practical application requires relevant and detailed procedures decided by the European Union Council. The institution of an alliance clause does not entail that the European Union has already become a defensive alliance, as only the European Council, through a unanimous vote, can make such a decision. Of high significance in this context are the reservations added in the Treaty on the European Union to the effect that the newly adopted clause “shall not prejudice the specific character of the security and defense policy of certain Member States. Commitments and cooperation in this area shall be consistent with commitments under the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which, for those States which are members of it, remains the foundation of their collective defense and the forum for its implementation.” (Art. 42, Section 7).

  8. 8.

    According to the Treaty of Lisbon, the EU may conduct the following crisis response missions: “joint disarmament operations, humanitarian and rescue tasks, military advice and assistance tasks, conflict prevention and peace-keeping tasks, tasks of combat forces in crisis management, including peace-making and post-conflict stabilization. All these tasks may contribute to the fight against terrorism, including by supporting third countries in combating terrorism on their territories.” (Art. 43.1).

  9. 9.

    For more on the subject of the innovations introduced to the CFDP by the Treaty of Lisbon, see Węc (2015).

  10. 10.

    Aggestam and Johansson (2017).

  11. 11.

    Kupchan (2012), p. 154.

  12. 12.

    Authors making use of the neo-Gramscian concept of hegemony claim that the causes of the crisis of the CSDP lie deeper than in the lack of a strategic understanding between the EU member states. They indicate that “a key reason for the failure to develop a strategy for the CSDP is a continuing dependence on the USA.” Kempina and Mawdsley (2013), pp. 55, 56.

  13. 13.

    For more, see Hurd (1994), Nuttall (2000), pp. 166–169, Petersen (1993), pp. 17–23, Duke (2000), pp. 88–92.

  14. 14.

    The Petersberg missions (tasks) are humanitarian and rescue operations, peace missions and combat tasks intended as a response to crisis situations, including the restoration of peace initially taken on by the WEU beyond the territories of Eu member states. They were instituted by a decision of the WEU Ministerial Council on June 19, 1992 as operations lying beyond the provisions of art. V of the modified Treaty of Brussels. For more, see Zięba (2000), pp. 56, 57, and 235.

  15. 15.

    For more on the subject of building the EU’s military capabilities see Zięba (2007), pp. 95–101, Zięba (2005), pp. 65–75.

  16. 16.

    Marseille Declaration 2000.

  17. 17.

    Blanc and Fennebresque (2001), pp. 30–33.

  18. 18.

    See Philippart and Edwards (1999).

  19. 19.

    See Jaeger (2002), pp. 314–316, de La Serre (2001), Colard (2001).

  20. 20.

    Zięba (2013), p. 81.

  21. 21.

    For more see Hughes (2010), Gross and Juncos (2011), Nováky (2015).

  22. 22.

    Only Poland noted a GDP increase of 1.7%, even though it didn’t take advantage of European Central Bank support.

  23. 23.

    Niemcy redukują liczebność … (2011).

  24. 24.

    Niemcy wzmacniają … (2015).

  25. 25.

    Francja spowalnia … (2013).

  26. 26.

    Redukcja brytyjskiej … (2013).

  27. 27.

    Council of the European Union (2010).

  28. 28.

    Terpan (2015).

  29. 29.

    J. Kaczyński wymyśla … (2006).

  30. 30.

    Kaczyński (2006), Cienski, J., & Wagstyl, S. Poland proposes an EU army tied to NATO. Financial Times, November 5, 2006.

  31. 31.

    Military Unity … (2011).

  32. 32.

    Juncker (2015).

  33. 33.

    More Union in European … (2015).

  34. 34.

    Janning (2015).

  35. 35.

    Kaczyński (2016).

  36. 36.

    Skutki Brexitu (2016), Niemiecka minister … (2016).

  37. 37.

    Niemcy i Francja … (2016).

  38. 38.

    In 2019 Poland was supposed to assume command of the Eurocorps. ‘Macierewicz: Polska nie wycofuje się z Eurokorpusu’, Rzeczpospolita. March 28, 2017.

  39. 39.

    Keohane (2018).

  40. 40.

    Ibidem.

  41. 41.

    For more, see Steindler (2015).

  42. 42.

    The Berlin Plus format was arranged at the Washington NATO summit in April 1999. It provides for the EU’s access to the Alliance’s resources, capabilities and planning data in conducting crisis management operations by the European allies without US involvement. The name originates from earlier agreements which were made during a Berlin meeting of the North Atlantic Council in June 1996, and which concerned the conducting of such operations by the WEU. In preparation for conducting military operations within the framework of the CSDP, the EU concludes an agreement with NATO in the Berlin Plus formula, if it intends to make use of the Alliance’s resources.

  43. 43.

    Zięba (2013), p. 82.

  44. 44.

    Simón (2011), pp. 13–14. For more, see Simón (2010).

  45. 45.

    Chobielin is a locality not far from Bydgoszcz, where Minister Radosław Sikorski occasionally hosted his foreign partners in his country house.

  46. 46.

    Text of the Weimar letter—author’s archive.

  47. 47.

    For more, see Węc (2014), pp. 110–116, Ciupiński (2013), pp. 387–398.

  48. 48.

    See the report prepared by the former French foreign minister Hubert Védrine (1997–2002) and submitted to president François Hollande in December 2012: Rapport pour le Président de la République Française sur les conséquences du retour de la France dans le Commandement Intégré de l’OTAN, sur l’avenir de la relation transatlantique et les perspectives de l’Europe de la défense, November 14, 2012.

  49. 49.

    Gomis (2011), Ostermann (2015).

  50. 50.

    For example: considering the joint use of existing military capabilities, the acceleration of national procedures for deciding to use armed forces in crisis management operations, the regular increase of national defense budgets, greater efforts for cooperation in cyber-defense, participation in at least one new project concerning the creation of new military capabilities, participation in the EU’s Battle Groups, preferences given to European cooperation in armaments purchases.

  51. 51.

    See: Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) first collaborative PESCO projects—Overview http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/32079/pesco-overview-of-first-collaborative-of-projects-for-press.pdf (Accessed January 27, 2018).

  52. 52.

    Zięba (2017a), p. 51.

  53. 53.

    Migration and migrant population … (2017). In total, in the years 2014–2016, 1,424,000 immigrants applied for asylum in Germany.

  54. 54.

    Batalla Adam (2017), Collett (2016).

  55. 55.

    Kupchan (2010). Also see Jones (2017).

  56. 56.

    Grabbe and Lehne (2017). On December 20, 2017 the European Commission undertook measures to defend the independence of the judiciary in Poland. It has concluded that there is a clear risk of a serious breach of the rule of law in Poland. The EC started the infringement procedure under Article 7(1) of the Treaty on European Union. The Commission has also issued a complementary Rule of Law Recommendation, setting out clearly the steps that the Polish authorities can take to remedy the current situation. Should the Polish authorities implement the recommended actions, the Commission is ready, in close consultation with the European Parliament and the Council, to reconsider its proposal. Furthermore, the EC has decided to take the next step in its procedure against Poland for breaches of EU law by the Law on the Ordinary Courts Organization, referring Poland to the Court of Justice of the EU. Whilst taking these unprecedented steps, the Commission has maintained its offer for a constructive dialogue with Polish authorities to remedy the current situation.

  57. 57.

    For more, see Modern Populism and Its Effect in Foreign Policy (2017), Luce (2017), Jones (2017–2018).

  58. 58.

    Orestein and Kelemen (2017).

  59. 59.

    On December 8, 2017 the EU and UK reached an initial agreement on citizenship rights, the border with Northern Ireland and a divorce bill. It paved the way for the two sides to move onto the next phase of negotiations on the future relationship in the areas of trade, security and defense.

  60. 60.

    For more, see Zięba (2016).

References

  • Aggestam, L., & Johansson, M. (2017). The leadership paradox in EU foreign policy. Journal of Common Market Studies, 55(6), 1203–1220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batalla Adam, L. (2017). The EU-Turkey deal one year on: A delicate balancing act. The International Spectator, 57(2), 44–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanc, É., & Fennebresque, M. (2001). La défense européenne après le Conseil européen de Nice. Défense nationale, 2, 23–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bretherton, Ch., & Vogler, J. (2006). The European union as a global actor. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciupiński, A. (2013). Wspólna Polityka Bezpieczeństwa i Obrony Unii Europejskiej: geneza—rozwój—funkcjonowanie. Warsaw: Difin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colard, D. (2001). L’Union européenne et les petits pas du traité de Nice. Défense nationale, 3, 18–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collett, E. (2016). The Paradox of the EU-Turkey Refugee Deal. Brussels: Migration Policy Institute https://www.migrationpolicy.org/news/paradox-eu-turkey-refugee-deal. Accessed January 27, 2018.

  • Consolidated Version of the Treaty on European Union. Official Journal of the European Union, C202, 59, 13–45, June 7, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of the European Union, Council Meetings 3055th and 3056th, Foreign Affairs: Defence and Development, Press Release 17745/10, Presse 342, Brussels, December 9, 2010. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_PRES-10–342_en.htm Accessed January 27 2018.

  • de La Serre, F. (2001). Le traité de Nice: déconstruction ou refondation de Union? Politique étrangère, 2, 259–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duke, S. (2000). The elusive quest for European security: From EDC to CFSP. Houndmills: Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, G. (2013). The EU’s foreign policy and the search for effect. International Relations, 27(3), 276–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Francja spowalnia modernizację armii i redukuje etaty w resorcie obrony, 03.05.2013, http://www.defence24.pl/3008,francja-spowalnia-modernizacje-armii-i-redukuje-etaty-w-resorcie-obrony. Accessed January 27, 2018.

  • Gomis, B. (2011, March). Franco-British defence and security treaties: Entente while it lasts?, Programme Paper: ISP PP 2001/01, Chatham House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gompert, D. C. (2002). Akteur oder Statist? Die Rolle der Europäischer Union auf der Weltbühne. Internationale Politik, 57(1), 17–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabbe, H., Lehne, S. (2017, November 15). An existential threat, Berlin Policy Journal, https://berlinpolicyjournal.com/an-existential-threat/. Accessed January 27, 2018.

  • Gross, E., & Juncos, A. E. (Eds.). (2011). EU conflict prevention and crisis management: Roles, institutions, and policies. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J. (Ed.). (2010). EU conflict management. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurd, D. (1994). Developing the Common foreign and security policy. International Affairs, 70(3), 421–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • J. Kaczyński wymyśla 100-tysięczną euroarmię. Gazeta Wyborcza, November 3, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger, Th. (2002). Enhanced cooperation in the treaty of nice and flexibility in the common foreign and security policy. European Foreign Affairs Review, 7(3), 297–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janning, J. (2015). (April 1. European Council of Foreign Relations: A pragmatic approach to building a European Army.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, E. (2017, July 6). Populism and the crisis of European integration: An Interview with …. EuropeNow, http://www.europenowjournal.org/2017/07/05/populism-and-the-crisis-of-european-integration-an-interview-with-erik-jones/. Accessed Jan. 27, 2018.

  • Jones, E. (2017–2018). From the end of history to the retreat of liberalism. Survival, 59(6), 165–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juncker, J-C., (2015, March 8). Halten Sie sich an Frau Merkel. Ich mache das!, Welt am Sontag. https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article138178098/Halten-Sie-sich-an-Frau-Merkel-Ich-mache-das.html. Accessed January 27, 2018.

  • Kaczyński, L. (2006, November 6). UE potrzebuje własnej armii. Wirtualna Polska (wp.pl). https://wiadomosci.wp.pl/lech-kaczynski-ue-potrzebuje-wlasnej-armii-6037670794683009a. Accessed January 27, 2018).

  • Military unity could make EU a superpower: Kaczynski, September 10, 2011. http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/poland-politics.c3t/. Accessed January 27, 2018.

  • Kaczyński: Musimy wyjść z inicjatywą zmian UE, Rzeczpospolita, June 26, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kempina, R., & Mawdsley, J. (2013). The common security and defence policy as an act of American hegemony. European Security, 22(1), 55–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keohane, D. (2018, January 15). EU Military Cooperation and National Defense, (The German Marshall Found of the United States), Policy Brief.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kupchan, C. (2010, August 29). As nationalism rises, will the European Union fall? The Washington Post.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kupchan, C. A. (2012). No one’s world: The West, the rising rest and the coming global turn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Luce, E. (2017). The retreat of Western liberalism. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marseille Declaration, WEU Ministerial Council, Marseille, November 13, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, J. (2006). The European super power. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Migration and migrant population statistics, Eurostat Statistics Explained, March 2017 http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Migration_and_migrant_population_statistics#Further_Eurostat_information. Accessed January 27, 2018.

  • Modern Populism and its Effect on Foreign Policy. (2017). The SAIS. Review of International Affairs, 37(1), 3–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • More Union in European Defence. Report of a CEPS Task Force, Brussels, February 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemcy i Francja stawiają na europejską armię, Dziennik.pl, September 10, 2016. http://wiadomosci.dziennik.pl/swiat/artykuly/530597,niemcy-i-francja-stawiaja-na-europejska-armie-to-bylaby-wlasciwa-odpowiedzia-na-brexit.html. Accessed January 27, 2018.

  • Niemcy redukują liczebność Bundeswehry. Newsweek, September 21, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemcy wzmacniają armię. 800 żołnierzy i 40 czołgów w wojsku pancernym, Telewizja Republika, February 27, 2015 http://telewizjarepublika.pl/niemcy-wzmacniaja-armie-800-zolnierzy-i-40-czolgow-w-wojsku-pancernym,17691.html. Accessed January 27, 2018.

  • Niemiecka minister obrony chce “europejskiej unii obronnej”, Dziennik.pl, September 8, 2016. http://wiadomosci.dziennik.pl/swiat/artykuly/530449,niemiecka-minister-obrony-chce-europejskiej-unii-obronnej-razem-jestesmy-bardzo-silni.html. Accessed January 27, 2018.

  • Nováky, N. (2015). Deploying EU military crisis management operations: a collective action perspective. European Security, 24(4), 491–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nuttall, S. J. (2000). European foreign policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Orestein, M. A., & Kelemen, R. D. (2017). Trojan horses in EU foreign policy. Journal of Common Market Studies, 55(1), 87–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostermann, F. (2015). The end of ambivalence and the triumph of pragmatism? Franco-British defence cooperation and European and Atlantic defence policy traditions. International Relations, 29(3), 334–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petersen, N. (1993). The European union and foreign and security policy. In O. Nørgaard, Th Pedersen, & N. Petersen (Eds.), The European community in world politics (pp. 9–30). London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Philippart, E., & Edwards, G. (1999). The provisions on closer Co-operation in the treaty of amsterdam: The politics of flexibility in the European union. Journal of Common Market Studies, 37(1), 87–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redukcja brytyjskiej armii weszła w kluczową fazę, 20.06.2013, http://www.defence24.pl/927,redukcja-brytyjskiej-armii-weszla-w-kluczowa-faze. Accessed January 27, 2018.

  • Simón, L. (2010). Command and Control? (p. 81). Planning for EU Military Operations, Occasional Paper, Paris: EU Institute for Security Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simón, L. (2011). Zarządzanie kryzysowe nie jest receptą na dalsze cięcia: planowanie wojskowe i wspólna polityka bezpieczeństwa i obrony po Lizbonie. In M. Terlikowski (Ed.), System planowania i dowodzenia misjami Unii Europejskiej. Struktura, problemy i możliwości reform (pp. 7–18). Warsaw: PISM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skutki Brexitu: Europejska armia bez Brytyjczyków, Rzeczpospolita, August 23, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steindler, C. (2015). Mapping out the institutional geography of external security in the EU. European Security, 24(3), 402–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Telò, M. (2006). Europe, A civilian power?: European Union, global governance, world order. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Terpan, F. (2015). Financing common security and defence policy operations: explaining change and inertia in a fragmented and flexible structure. European Security, 24(2), 221–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Timmermans, Ch. (1999). The EU and international public law. European Foreign Affairs Review, 4(2), 181–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Węc, J. J. (2014). Pierwsza polska prezydencja w Unii Europejskiej: uwarunkowania—procesy decyzyjne—osiągnięcia i niepowodzenia. Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka.

    Google Scholar 

  • Węc, J. J. (2015). Dynamika wspólnej polityki bezpieczeństwa i obrony po wejściu w życie traktatu lizbońskiego. In J. Zając, A. Włodkowska-Bagan, M. Kaczmarski (Eds.), Bezpieczeństwo międzynarodowe Polska–Europa–Świat. Księga Jubileuszowa dedykowana Profesorowi Ryszardowi Ziębie z okazji czterdziestolecia pracy naukowej (pp. 427–444). Warsaw: Wydział Dziennikarstwa i Nauk Politycznych UW.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zięba, R. (2000). Europejska Tożsamość Bezpieczeństwa i Obrony: koncepcje—struktury—funkcjonowanie. Warsaw: Scholar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zięba, R. (2003). Unia Europejska jako aktor stosunków międzynarodowych. Warsaw: Scholar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zięba, R. (2005). Europejska Polityka Bezpieczeństwa i Obrony. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Sejmowe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zięba, R. (2007). Wspólna Polityka Zagraniczna i Bezpieczeństwa Unii Europejskiej. Warsaw: Wydawnictwa Profesjonalne i Akademickie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zięba, R. (2013). Polityka zagraniczna Polski w strefie euroatlantyckiej. Warsaw: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zięba, R. (2016). Współczesne wyzwania i zagrożenia dla bezpieczeństwa międzynarodowego. Stosunki Międzynarodowe. International Relations, 52(3), 9–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zięba, R. (2017a). Próby ożywienia polityki bezpieczeństwa i obrony Unii Europejskiej. Krakowskie Studia Międzynarodowe, XIV(1), 35–52.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Political Science and International Studies, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

    Ryszard Zięba

Authors
  1. Ryszard Zięba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ryszard Zięba .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Zięba, R. (2018). The European Union in Crisis. In: The Euro-Atlantic Security System in the 21st Century. Global Power Shift. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-79105-0_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation