Srl | Item |
1 |
ID:
067215
|
|
|
2 |
ID:
061858
|
|
|
3 |
ID:
052836
|
|
|
Publication |
Autumn-Winter 2003.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
ID:
052655
|
|
|
5 |
ID:
060776
|
|
|
Publication |
2005.
|
Description |
p153-166
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
ID:
080023
|
|
|
Publication |
2007.
|
Summary/Abstract |
Contrary to the expectations of many experts and politicians, one of the most politically sensitive sectors of the European integration process, the common foreign and security policy, has seen remarkable growth in recent years. The pressure of crises and conflicts beyond the EU's borders and the need to deal with them in a unitary way has driven the governments of member states and the community institutions to take development of CFSP/ESDP more seriously. The process has been pragmatic, establishing the mechanisms and policies required to respond to the challenges. It is this bottom-up, disorderly growth that the Constitutional Treaty had attempted to rationalise in a coherent framework, completing the work of the preceding treaties. With the stalled ratification of the CT, this growth has continued. But it cannot go on indefinitely. In order to bring order and coherence into CFSP/ESDP bodies and procedures, the substance of the Constitutional Treaty must be saved and approved rapidly
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
ID:
022722
|
|
|
Publication |
2002.
|
Description |
789-811
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
ID:
070963
|
|
|
Publication |
2006.
|
Summary/Abstract |
In May 2003 the European Union declared its European Security and Defence Policy fully operational. Simultaneously the EU appeared terminally divided over the conflict in Iraq and transatlantic divisions were emerging over the conduct of the 'War on Terror'. Given the already contentious nature of ESDP, this paper explores whether post-September 11 developments will undermine the development of this policy. After analysing the status of ESDP the paper explores its utility in the post September 11 era and in light of the European Security Strategy. While, in European eyes, military force is not particularly applicable to the 'War on Terror', this paper will argue that there are a number of other ways in which an enhanced and redefined European military capacity can play a role in promoting stability and upholding international norms and values. Secondly, as security priorities change the internal and external security aspects of EU need to become more integrated. Ultimately, a clearly defined ESDP with the unwavering commitment of the member states will give the EU a constructive, effective and essential role within the new framework of security.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
ID:
061075
|
|
|
10 |
ID:
079727
|
|
|
Publication |
2007.
|
Summary/Abstract |
Surveys such as the European Commission's Eurobarometer regularly reveal high levels of public support for European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). This paper argues, however, that public support for ESDP is only superficial, not substantial. First, there is no homogeneous 'European' public support for ESDP. Second, security and defence, as covered by ESDP with its focus on global crisis-management, rank very low among Europeans' priorities. Third, Europeans are very sceptical about the appropriateness of military means, and hence a core element of ESDP, as a legitimate instrument in international affairs. These reservations are likely to have constraining effects on ESDP's future development. At the same time, there are compelling reasons for the further development of ESDP. Therefore, Europe's political elites should initiate a public diplomacy campaign inside the EU in which the case for Europe's further evolution as a strategic security and defence actor is made. ESDP operations are the most promising starting points as they illustrate both the normative and the 'realist' necessities of European engagement in global security affairs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
ID:
064947
|
|
|
Publication |
Apr-Jun 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|