Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Treaty on European Union (TEU) pp 911–926Cite as

Article 24 [Union Competence in CFSP]

(ex-Article 11 TEU)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 2759 Accesses

Abstract

Prior to the Treaty of Lisbon, Art. 11 TEU-Nice was the first article dedicated to CFSP in the Treaty on European Union. It identified three main points: (1) the scope of CFSP, (2) its objectives and (3) the commitments of the MS in the field of CFSP. Now, Art. 24 TEU replaces ex-Art. 11 TEU-Nice, and comes after Art. 23 TEU, which is a totally new provision explaining how CFSP takes place within the Union’s comprehensive external action (→ Art. 23 para 1–6).

This is a preview of subscription content, 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   189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   249.99
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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Terpan (2003).

  2. 2.

    Barav and Philip (1993), p. 831.

  3. 3.

    Franck (2007) and Smith (2001a, 2003). For a sceptical point of view of the institutionalisation of CFSP: Petiteville (2011).

  4. 4.

    Trybus (2007), p. 43.

  5. 5.

    The idea of a European defence policy was still alive though, thanks to the re-launching of the Franco German relation in 1982, as well as the re-launching of the WEU in 1984. But it remained an idea.

  6. 6.

    Eaton (1994), p. 216.

  7. 7.

    Fink-Hooijer (1994), p. 173.

  8. 8.

    Marauhn (1996).

  9. 9.

    Terpan (2004).

  10. 10.

    Terpan (2010), p. 11.

  11. 11.

    Petiteville and Terpan (2008), p. 67; Tsagourias (2007), p. 102.

  12. 12.

    Pagani (1998), p. 737.

  13. 13.

    Krück, in Schwarze (2000), Art. 11–28.

  14. 14.

    Trybus (2005).

  15. 15.

    Krieger (2007), p. 174 et seqq.; Quinlan (2001), and Terpan (2007).

  16. 16.

    On the law of EC’s external policies: Dashwood and Hillion (2000), Eeckhout (2004), Fenet (2006), and Neframi (2011).

  17. 17.

    On the architecture of EU external action before the Treaty of Lisbon: Cannizzaro (2002); Cremona and de Witte (2008). On the consistency of EU’s external action: Duke (1999); Gauttier (2004), p. 23; Koutrakos (2007), p. 249; Smith (2001b), p. 171; Wessel (2000), p. 1135.

  18. 18.

    Terpan (2008), p. 183.

  19. 19.

    Terpan (2011), p. 157 et seqq.

  20. 20.

    Jaeger (2002), p. 297 et seqq.; Missiroli (2000); Dekker and Wessel (2001), p. 381.

  21. 21.

    On the evolution of this role before the Treaty of Lisbon: Buchet de Neuilly (2002), p. 13.

  22. 22.

    Cameron (1997), p. 99 et seqq.

  23. 23.

    Diedrichs (2004), p. 31 et seqq.; Stavridis (1997), p. 136 et seqq.

  24. 24.

    See for example: Case C-229/05, PKK and KNK v Council (ECJ 18 January 2007).

  25. 25.

    The Crisis over Iraq is a good example of such difficulties. See Gueldry (2005).

References

  • Barav, A., & Philip, C. (1993). Politiques communes. In A. Barav & C. Philip (Eds.), Dictionnaire juridique des Communautés européennes (pp. 831–833). Paris: PUF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchet de Neuilly, Y. (2002). L’irrésistible ascension du Haut représentant pour la PESC. Politique européenne, 4(8), 13–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, F. (1997). Where the European Commission comes in: From the Single European Act to Maastricht. In E. Regelsberger, P. De Schoutheete de Tervarent, & W. Wessels (Eds.), Foreign Policy of the European Union: From EPC to CFSP and beyond (pp. 99–108). Boulder: Lynne Riener Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cannizzaro, E. (Ed.). (2002). The European Union as an actor in international relations. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cremona, M., & de Witte, B. (Eds.). (2008). EU foreign relations law: Constitutional fundamentals. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dashwood, A., & Hillion, C. (Eds.). (2000). The general law of E.C. external relations. London: Sweet & Maxwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dekker, I. F., & Wessel, R. A. (2001). The European Union and the concept of flexibility. Proliferation of legal systems within international organizations. In N. M. Blokker & H. G. Schermers (Eds.), Proliferation of international organizations (pp. 381–414). The Hague: Kluwer Law International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diedrichs, U. (2004). The European parliament in CFSP: More than a marginal player? The International Spectator, 39(2), 31–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duke S. (1999). Consistency as an issue in EU external activities. Working Paper. 99/W/06, European Institute of Public Administration.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eaton, M. R. (1994). Common Foreign and Security Policy. In D. O’Keefe & P. Twomey (Eds.), Legal issues of the Maastricht treaty (pp. 215–226). London: Wiley Chancery Law.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eeckhout, P. (2004). External relations of the European Union. Legal and constitutional foundations. New York: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fenet, A. (Ed.). (2006). Droit des relations extérieures de l’Union européenne. Paris: Litec.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fink-Hooijer, F. (1994). The Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union. European Journal of International Law, 42(3), 173–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franck, C. (2007). L’émergence d’un acteur global: expansion géographique et renforcement institutionnel de l’action extérieure de l’Union européenne. Politique européenne, 22, 15–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauttier, P. (2004). Horizontal coherence and the external competences of the European Union. European Law Journal, 10(1), 23–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gueldry, M. (2005). Les Etats-Unis et l’Europe face à la guerre d’Irak. Paris: L’Harmattan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger, T. (2002). Enhanced cooperation in the treaty of Nice and flexibility in Common Security and Defence Policy. European Foreign Affairs Review, 7(3), 297–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koutrakos, P. (2007). Security and Defence Policy within the context of EU external relations: Issues of coherence, consistency and effectiveness. In M. Trybus & N. D. White (Eds.), European Security Law (pp. 249–269). Oxford: OUP.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Krieger, H. (2007). Common European Defence: Competition or compatibility with NATO? In M. Trybus & N. D. White (Eds.), European Security Law (pp. 174–197). Oxford: OUP.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Marauhn, T. (1996). Building a European Security and Defence Identity: The evolving relationship between the Western European Union and the European Union. Bochum: Universitätsverlag N Brockmeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Missiroli, A. (2000). CFSP, flexibility and defence. Chaillot Paper, No. 38. http://www.iss.europa.eu/uploads/media/cp038e.pdf. Accessed 5 Aug 2012.

  • Neframi, E. (2011). L’action extérieure de l’Union européenne. Fondements, moyens, principes. Paris: LGDJ, Lextenso éditions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pagani, F. (1998). A new gear in the CFSP machinery: Integration of the Petersberg tasks in the Treaty on European Union. European Journal of International Law, 9(4), 737–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petiteville, F. (2011). Les mirages de la politique étrangère européenne. Critique internationale, 51(2), 95–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petiteville, F., & Terpan, F. (2008). L’avenir de la politique étrangère européenne. Questions internationales, 31, 64–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinlan, M. (2001). European defence cooperation. Asset or threat to NATO. Washington: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarze, J. (Ed.). (2000). EU-Kommentar. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. E. (2001a). Diplomacy by Decree: The legalization of EU Foreign Policy. Journal of Common Market Studies, 39(1), 79–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. E. (2001b). The quest for coherence. Institutional dilemmas of external action from Maastricht to Amsterdam. In A. Stone Sweet, W. Sandholtz, & N. Fligstein (Eds.), The institutionalization of Europe (pp. 171–235). Oxford: OUP.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. E. (2003). Europe’s Foreign and Security Policy: The institutionalization of cooperation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stavridis, S. (1997). The democratic control of the CFSP. In M. Holland (Ed.), Common Foreign and Security Policy: The record and reforms (pp. 136–147). London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terpan, F. (2003). La politique étrangère et de sécurité commune de l’Union européenne. Brussels: Bruylant.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terpan, F. (Ed.). (2004). La politique européenne de sécurité et de défense. L’Union européenne peut-elle gérer les crises? Toulouse: Presses de l’Institut d’études politiques de Toulouse.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terpan, F. (2007). EU-NATO relations: Consistency as a strategic consideration and a legal requirement. In M. Trybus & N. D. White (Eds.), European Security Law (pp. 270–294). Oxford: OUP.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Terpan, F. (2008). La politique extérieure de l’Union européenne. In J. Ziller (Ed.), L’Union européenne (pp. 180–185). Paris: La documentation française.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terpan, F. (2010). La politique étrangère, de sécurité et de défense de l’Union européenne. Paris: La documentation française.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terpan, F. (2011). La prise de décision dans la PESC: un mode de fonctionnement intergouvernemental controversé. In M. Blanquet (Ed.), La prise de décision dans le système de l’Union européenne (pp. 157–176). Brussels: Bruylant.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trybus, M. (2005). European Union law and defence integration. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trybus, M. (2007). On the Common Security and Defence Policy of the EU constitutional treaty. In M. Trybus & N. D. White (Eds.), European Security Law (pp. 43–55). Oxford: OUP.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tsagourias, N. (2007). EU peacekeeping operations: Legal and theoretical issues. In M. Trybus & N. D. White (Eds.), European security law (pp. 112–133). Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wessel, R. A. (2000). The inside looking out: Consistency and delimitation in EU external relations. Common Market Law Review, 37(5), 1135–1171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty for Economics, Law and Social Science, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany

    Hermann-Josef Blanke

  2. National Research Council Institute for Regionalism, Federalism and Self-Government, Rome, Italy

    Stelio Mangiameli

Authors
  1. Hermann-Josef Blanke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stelio Mangiameli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty for Economics, Law and Social Sc, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany

    Hermann-Josef Blanke

  2. National Research Council - Institute fo Regionalism, Federalism and Self-Governm, Rome, Italy

    Stelio Mangiameli

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Blanke, HJ., Mangiameli, S. (2013). Article 24 [Union Competence in CFSP]. In: Blanke, HJ., Mangiameli, S. (eds) The Treaty on European Union (TEU). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31706-4_25

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation