Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Role of EU in European Disputes

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The European Union

  • 487 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter examines two dimensions of EU efforts regarding peacekeeping and peacebuilding. The first dimension is to highlight the EU role within EU bloc that was formerly called the EC. This dimension explores what are the imperatives of European ambition to resolve the inter-bloc disputes, conflicts and rivalries. This study entails that EU has been working hard for conflict resolution within the bloc, including Franco-German rivalry and ethno-national disparities of Northern Ireland. Second, this chapter underlines the role of EU in other European crises such as Yugoslav crises that turned the EC towards peacemaking during early and mid-1990s.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 59.99
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.

    Encyclopedia Britannica Online. www.britannica.com; Accessed on 10/07/2013.

  2. 2.

    Tahir, Naveed Ahmed (ed). 2006. The Role of Europe in Conflict Resolution, Conflict Management, Peace-building and Peace Keeping from the Balkans to South East Asia. Karachi: University of Karachi Press, p. ix (Tahir 2006)

  3. 3.

    Ibid, p. x. (Tahir 2006)

  4. 4.

    Official website: http://europa.eu/int; Accessed on 20/02/2007.

  5. 5.

    Ibid.

  6. 6.

    McGarry, John. 2001. Northern Ireland and the Divided World: The Ireland Conflict and the Good Friday Agreement in Comparative Perspective. London: Oxford University Press, p. ix. (McGarry 2001)

  7. 7.

    Ibid.

  8. 8.

    Ibid.

  9. 9.

    Hayward, Katy and Howard, Kevin. 2002. Europeanisation and Hyphe-Nation: Renegotiating the Identity Boundaries of Europe’s Western Isles (18). Dublin: Institute for British-Irish Studies, University College Dublin. (Hayward and Howard 2002)

  10. 10.

    Ibid. (Hayward and Howard 2002)

  11. 11.

    Ibid. (Hayward and Howard 2002)

  12. 12.

    Ibid. (Hayward and Howard 2002)

  13. 13.

    Ibid. (Hayward and Howard 2002)

  14. 14.

    Ibid. (Hayward and Howard 2002)

  15. 15.

    Ibid. (Hayward and Howard 2002)

  16. 16.

    Ibid. (Hayward and Howard 2002)

  17. 17.

    Ibid. (Hayward and Howard 2002)

  18. 18.

    Miller, Steven E., Kaysen, Carl, Malin, Martin B., Nordhans, William and Steinbruner, John D. 2008. War with Iraq: Costs, Consequences, and Alternatives. Cambridge: American Academy of Arts & Sciences, Committee on International Security. (Miller et al. 2008)

  19. 19.

    Ibid. (Miller et al. 2008)

  20. 20.

    Press release July 2004.

  21. 21.

    Juncos, Ana E. 2005. “The EU’s Post-Conflict Intervention in Bosnia and Herzegovina: (re)Integrating the Balkans and/or (re)Inventing the EU?” Southeast European Politics, VI(2). Loughborough: Loughborough University, November. http://www.seep.ceu.hu/archives/issue62/juncos.pdf; Accessed on 13/09/2009. (Juncos 2005)

  22. 22.

    Woodward, Susan. 1995. Balkan Tragedy: Chaos and Dissolution after the Cold War. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. (Woodward 1995)

  23. 23.

    Ibid. (Woodward 1995)

  24. 24.

    Gordon, Phillip H. 1997/1998. “Europe’s Uncommon Foreign Policy,”, International Security, 22(3), 74–100. (Gordon 1997/1998)

  25. 25.

    Gow, James. 1997. Triumph of the Lack of Will: International Diplomacy and the Yugoslav War. London: Hurst & Co, p. 204. (Gow 1997)

  26. 26.

    Bechev, Dimitar. 2004. Between Enlargement and CFSP: The EU and the Western Balkans. Oxford: South East European Studies Programme, European Studies Centre, University of Oxford, 2–3 June, p. 03. (Bechev 2004)

  27. 27.

    Ibid. According to the post-war constitution attached to the peace agreement, the territory of BiH was divided into two sub-state entities: a majority-Serb “Republika Srpska” (RS) covering 49 % of the state’s territory, and a “Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina” (FBiH) where Bosnian Muslims and Croats would share governmental power on an equal basis. According to Recchia, one crucial consequence of this settlement was reason why for several years after the end of the war, Bosnia’s common state institutions remained at the levels of government, dependent on budgetary transfers from the entities and without a common army, police or judiciary of its support. The relevance of Bosnia’s common state institutions was further undermined by some extremely burdensome mechanisms of ethnic power sharing, which affected both the legislative and executive branches of government. Executive power within Bosnia’s weak common state government is also shared on an ethnic basis. The head of state is a three-person collective presidency, composed of a Bosnia, a Croat and a Serb member, respectively. Any one of the presidency’s members can block its decision, again by declaring that they violate “vital” ethnic interests.

  28. 28.

    European defence – a proposal for a white paper, May 2004, p. 40.

  29. 29.

    Ibid, pp. 40, 41.

  30. 30.

    Ibid, p. 41.

  31. 31.

    Ibid, p. 42.

  32. 32.

    Solana, Javier. 2000. “The Development of the CFSP and the Role of the High Representative,”. Institute of European Affairs, 30 March, Dublin. “The experience of the Balkans has been a sobering one for the European Union. But it has I believe also provided us with an opportunity. It is a test of our commitment to the region, to a wider Europe, and to a mature common foreign and security policy. The Balkans has shown that the European Union can no longer remain a force for peace simply through example. It has also to be forthright in defending the basic values of democracy, human rights and the rule of law on which it is founded.” (Solana 2000)

  33. 33.

    Juncos, Ana E. 2005. “The EU’s Post-Conflict Intervention in Bosnia and Herzegovina: (re)Integrating the Balkans and/or (re)Inventing the EU?” Southeast European Politics, VI(2), (Loughborough: Loughborough University, November), p. 99. http://www.seep.ceu.hu/archives/issue62/juncos.pdf; Accessed on 13/09/2009. (Juncos 2005)

  34. 34.

    Ibid, p. 99. (Juncos 2005)

  35. 35.

    Solana, Javier. 2000. “The Development of the CFSP and the Role of the High Representative,” Institute of European Affairs, 30 March, Dublin.

    The Union has to be prepared to use military assets and resources […]. The deployment of troops will only ever be undertaken when the situation absolutely demands it. But our credibility in being able to offer a comprehensive response depends on our ability developing a military crisis management capacity at a European level […] We are not in the business of doing this for its own sake. But in support of the values and principles for which, the European Union is respected world-wide. (Solana 2000)

  36. 36.

    Juncos, Ana E. 2005. “The EU’s Post-Conflict Intervention in Bosnia and Herzegovina: (re)Integrating the Balkans and/or (re)Inventing the EU?” Southeast European Politics, VI(2) (Loughborough: Loughborough University, November 2005), p.99 (Juncos 2005)

  37. 37.

    Ibid, p. 101 (Juncos 2005)

  38. 38.

    “The Union must have the capacity for autonomous action, backed up by credible military force, the means to decide to use them, and a readiness to do so, in order to respond to international crises.” British-French Summit, St Malo, 3–4 December 1998, Joint Declaration, Maartje Rutten, “From St Malo to Nice-European Defence: Core Documents,” Chaillot Paper, No: 47, Paris: Institute for Security Studies, May 2001, Available at: www.iss-eu.org/chaillot. (Rutten 2001)

  39. 39.

    Tannam, Etain. 2007. “The EU and Conflict Settlement in Comparative Perspective: Northern Ireland and Cyprus”, University of Nottingham, England, 22–23 November. Accessed by https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/shared/shared_icmcr/Docs/tannam.pdf. (Tannam 2007)

  40. 40.

    Bilge, A. Suat. 2000. Buyuk Dus: Turk-Yunan Siyasi Iliskileri [Megali Idea: Turkish – Greek Political Relations]. Ankara: 21. Yuzyil Yayinlari. (Bilge 2000)

  41. 41.

    Clogg, Richard. 1992. A Concise History of Greece. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Clogg 1992)

  42. 42.

    Kamov, Georgi. June 2006. EU’s Role in Conflict Resolution: The Case of the Eastern Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy Areas. Nice: Institut Europeen des Hautes Etudes Intenationales. (Kamov 2006)

  43. 43.

    Ibid, p. 38. (Kamov 2006)

  44. 44.

    Juncos, Ana E. 2005. “The EU’s Post-Conflict Intervention in Bosnia and Herzegovina: (re)Integrating the Balkans and/or (re)Inventing the EU?” Southeast European Politics, VI(2), (Loughborough: Loughborough University, November 2005) Accessed: http://www.seep.ceu.hu/archives/issue62/juncos.pdf; Accessed on 13/09/2009. (Juncos 2005)

  45. 45.

    Jean-Yves Haire. 2004. “An Historical Perspective” in Nicolo Gnesotto (eds), The EU Security and Defence Policy – The First Five Years (1999–2004), Paris: EU Institute for Security Studies. (Jean-Yves 2004)

  46. 46.

    Rumelili, Bahar. January 2004. The European Union’s Impact on the Greek-Turkish Conflict, Working Paper Series, EUBorderConf, The European Union and Border Conflict. Birmingham: the University of Birmingham. (Rumelili 2004)

Bibliography

  • Bechev, Dimitar. 2004. Between Enlargement and CFSP: The EU and the Western Balkans. Oxford: South East European Studies Programme European Studies Centre, University of Oxford, 2–3 June.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bilge, A. Suat. 2000. Buyuk Dus: Turk-Yunan Siyasi Iliskileri [Megali Idea: Turkish – Greek Political Relations]. Ankara: 21. Yuzyil Yayinlari.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clogg, Richard. 1992. A Concise History of Greece. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, Phillip H. 1997/1998. Europe’s Uncommon Foreign Policy. International Security 22(3). http://www.jstor.org/pss/2539358. Accessed 20 November 2009.

  • Haire, Jean-Yves. 2004. An Historical Perspective. In The EU Security and Defence Policy – The First Five Years (1999–2004), ed. Nicolo Gnesotto. Paris: EU Institute for Security Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayward, Katy, and Kevin Howard 2002. Europeanisation and Hyphe-Nation: Renegotiating the Identity Boundaries of Europe’s Western Isles, 18. Dublin: Institute for British-Irish Studies, University College Dublin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juncos, Ana E. 2005. The EU’s post-Conflict Intervention in Bosnia and Herzegovina: (re)Integrating the Balkans and/or (re)Inventing the EU? Southeast European Politics VI(2). http://www.seep.ceu.hu/archives/issue62/juncos.pdf. Accessed 13 September 2009.

  • Kamov, Georgi. 2006. EU’s Role in Conflict Resolution: The Case of the Eastern Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy Areas. Nice: Institut Europeen des Hautes Etudes Intenationales, June.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGarry, John. 2001. Northern Ireland and the Divided World: The Ireland Conflict and the Good Friday Agreement in Comparative Perspective. London: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Steven E., Carl Kaysen, Martin B Malin, William Nordhans, and John D Steinbruner. 2008. War with Iraq: Costs, Consequences, and Alternatives, American Academy of Arts & Sciences. Cambridge: Committee on International Security.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumelili, Bahar. 2004. The European Union’s Impact on the Greek-Turkish Conflict, Working Paper Series, EU Border Conf, The European Union and Border Conflict. Birmingham: The University of Birmingham, January.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutten, Maartje. 2001. From St-Malo to Nice-European Defence: Core Documents, Chaillot Paper, No: 47. Paris: Institute for Security Studies, May 2001. www.iss-eu.org/chaillot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solana, Javier. 2000. The Development of the CFSP and the Role of the High Representative. Institute of European Affairs, 30 March, Dublin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tahir, Naveed Ahmed, ed. 2006. The Role of Europe in Conflict Resolution, Conflict Management, Peace-Building and Peace Keeping from the Balkans to South East Asia. Karachi: University of Karachi Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vickman, Leon. 1992. Why Nuclear Weapons Are Illegal?. In Waging Peace: Vision and Hope for the 21th Century, ed. David Krieger and Frank K. Kelly. Chicago: Noble Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, Susan. 1995. Balkan Tragedy: Chaos and Dissolution after the Cold War. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Director, Quality Enhancement Cell, Mohammad Ali Jinnah University, Karachi, Pakistan

    Munir Hussain

Authors
  1. Munir Hussain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hussain, M. (2017). Role of EU in European Disputes. In: The European Union. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2884-7_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation