The European Union (EU) has been portrayed as a force for good in the international system. However, due to systemic changes in the international environment and the crises of European integration, its role in the world is becoming more contentious. This paper applies the politicization literature to EU foreign policy and, using the case of the EU Global Strategy (EUGS), questions the effects of emerging politicization for EU political integration. The paper analyses how the EUGS has downscaled the transformative ambition of EU foreign policy, showcasing an adverse framing of its strategic narrative. However, it also argues that this narrative has been accompanied by more integrationist practices, as shown by the institutional developments during the making of the EUGS and its implementation in security and defence. The paper concludes that the effects of emerging politicization in EU foreign policy can simultaneously reflect a less transformative narrative but lead to more integrated practices and policies.

Is the new intergovernmentalism well positioned to explain the inter-institutional dynamics of EU external action, as reflected by the policy-making process of the EU Global Strategy (EUGS)? This article argues that, despite the divisive and crisis-ridden dynamics in European integration and external action, de novo bodies such as the HR/VP and the EEAS have increased their autonomy in the traditionally intergovernmental EU foreign and security policies. By tracing the making of the EUGS through 39 interviews with officials from EU institutions and member states, this article argues that the increased autonomy of the HR/VP and the EEAS in external action has also facilitated the parallel convergence of initiatives in security and defence. The value of the EUGS should thus be found in the ad intra integration dynamics it has generated; particularly when, ad extra, it embodies a more troubled environment for EU external action.

No abstract

No abstract

Over the past two decades, the European Union (EU) has provided assistance and is unequivocally committed to the European perspective of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). The EU strategy has evolved from a top-down approach to democratization and statebuilding in the 2000s towards a more pragmatic approach that seeks to foster resilience. However, BiH still suffers from internal party contestation and political paralysis, socio-economic challenges and areas of limited statehood. Thus, to what extent is the EU enhancing resilience? In this article we answer this question by examining how the EU is contributing to the three sources essential to obtain resilience, as understood by this Special Issue: efficient governance institutions, social trust, and the legitimacy of governance actors. By revising the EU support of BiH and interpreting to what extent it is contributing to these three sources, we conclude that the EU intervention in BiH is resulting in continuitya process of slow progress that is increasingly perceived as frustrating for the local populationrather than peaceful change.