How to strengthen EU foreign policy By Charles Grant and Mark Leonard ★ Although the EU faces a wide array of challenges from beyond its borders, it is ill-equipped to deal with them. The Union seldom takes a strategic approach to foreign policy. Its institutions and member-states often fail to co-ordinate their various policies and instruments – including trade, aid, defence, policing and diplomacy – in the pursuit of common objectives. The institutions of the ‘rotating presidency’ and the ‘troika’ (the representation of the EU by the presidency’s foreign minister, the High Representative and the commissioner for external relations) limit the EU’s effectiveness. ★ The loss of the constitutional treaty has deprived the EU of some sensible reforms to the way it makes and manages foreign policy. However, even with the current treaties, the EU could do plenty to strengthen its foreign policy. ★ This policy brief suggests ways of encouraging the EU to take a more strategic approach to foreign policy; of diminishing the role of the rotating presidency; of ensuring that the memberstates and EU institutions feel a sense of shared ownership of external policies; and of achieving more coherence between the policies of the member-states and the institutions.
The European Union urgently needs a plan for a more effective foreign policy. Opinion polls suggest that a majority of Europeans would support a stronger EU foreign policy. The gravity of current issues such as the Iranian nuclear problem, the future of the Western Balkans, EU energy security and the deteriorating relationship with Russia show the urgent need for a more effective Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). When its member-states disagree, as over Iraq, the EU cannot hope to be credible. But even when the governments do agree to pursue common foreign policies, the EU’s ramshackle institutional machinery often prevents it from delivering in an effective and timely manner. The making of foreign policy has suff e red more from the constitutional debacle than any other area. The French and Dutch No votes have deprived the E u ropean Union of the innovations promised in the treaty, such as a permanent president of the Euro p e a n
Centre for European Reform 14 Great College Street London SW1P 3RX UK
Council to replace the rotating presidency; a Euro p e a n ‘ f o reign minister’ combining the jobs now held by High Representative Javier Solana and external relations commissioner Benita Ferre ro - Waldner; and an External Action Service (EAS), a kind of diplomatic s e rvice bringing together staff from the Commission and Council with national diplomats. Yet the failure of the constitution has made it harder for the EU to engage in any discussion on how to improve its foreign policy. Some of the innovations due in the treaty, such as the EAS, were under construction before the French and Dutch re f e rendums, because the member-states had a g reed that this work should begin after the signature of the treaty. But EU governments have now halted this work because of a paralysing fear – shared by bureaucrats and politicians alike – of being accused of implementing parts of the treaty ‘by the back door’.
T: 00 44 20 7233 1199 F: 00 44 20 7233 1117 info@cer.org.uk / www.cer.org.uk