EU Open Strategic Autonomy and the Trappings of Geoeconomics

Abstract

The EU’s new trade strategy promises to advance open strategic autonomy that is to balance the benefits of economic interdependence with growing demands to manage Europe’s exposure to the risks it entails. What explains these shifting priorities? This article situates open strategic autonomy in the theoretical debates of International Political Economy (IPE) literature on economic interdependence and geoeconomics to aid our understanding of the debates ensnaring economic strategy in the EU, but also related debates in the United States, China and elsewhere. This framework, the article argues, helps us understand changing strategic priorities in economic policy by reference to wider structural shifts engulfing the global economy. It then identifies four priority targets of EU economic policy in which (new) autonomous policies are forthcoming: (i) tackle economic distortions; (ii) defend against economic coercion; (iii) link with values and sustainability; and (iv) protect critical assets and supply chains. These observations build towards addressing the main research question: Has open strategic autonomy turned a corner on EU principles of openness, liberalization and international cooperation? trade and investment, European Union, geoeconomics, International Political Economy

As Open as Possible, as Autonomous as Necessary: Understanding the Rise of Open Strategic Autonomy in EU Trade Policy

“…Meanwhile, those that care about reciprocity will find themselves reassured that the EU's continuing belief that the '"opportunity of openness" does not mean that we are woolly-headed idealists' (Hogan, 2020) and that openness can be qualified if it undermines autonomy. And those that want European standards, rules and values to spread will like the EU's commitment to do so more assertively (Interview 2) as well as its willingness to more explicitly connect trade policy with the EU's climate, digital or industrial policies (Gehrke, 2022).…”

“…2–3; Schimmelfennig, 2021, p. 313). Global dynamics, though, have profoundly shaped European integration and still do, from the Cold War to the War on Terror, from embedded liberalism to neoliberalism (Warlouzet 2017), from the ‘shock of the global’ (Ferguson et al ., 2010) to today's decentring of globalization (Lavery and Schmid, 2021; Gehrke, 2022). Bürbaumer (2020, p. 2), for example, argues that the single market itself ‘was devised to propel European firms into foreign markets’ and is therefore ‘inherently related to international competition’ (Bürbaumer, 2020, p. 12).…”

“…In short, whilst EU officials have long viewed interdependence as a ‘marker for wealth, stability, security – not loss of autonomy’ (Gehrke, 2022, p. 64), they increasingly follow most states in viewing ‘the global economy as a source of vulnerability as well as growth – a venue in which to limit […] dependencies while exploiting those of […] opponents. Geopolitics is slowly muscling free‐market relations out of the way’ (Farrell and Newman, 2021).…”

“…Theoretically, we combine various strands of European integration research in a novel theoretical framework that focuses on (i) how changes in the external environment (Sandholtz and Zysman, 1989; Lavery and Schmid, 2021; Schimmelfennig 2021) (ii) create an opening for actors to challenge a hegemonic compromise (van Apeldoorn, 2002; Bulmer and Joseph, 2016; Warlouzet, 2017) during which (iii) ambiguous ideas can be used as coalition magnets to forge a new compromise (Jabko, 2006; Béland and Cox, 2016). Empirically, we are among to first to shed light on the coalitional and ideational politics underlying the recent evolution of European trade policy under the banner of OSA (Eliasson and Garcia‐Duran, 2022; Gehrke, 2022; Helwig, 2022; Jacobs et al ., 2022).…”

“…But these events have undoubtedly provided much additional urgency and momentum to these debates, not least by prompting the Commission to launch its trade policy review one year earlier (Jacobs et al ., 2022). More than ever then, understanding why Europe embraced (open) strategic autonomy and how it already affects its (trade) policy is essential for understanding Europe's role in an increasingly geopolitical world (Gehrke, 2022). Before we present our findings, we detail our theoretical argument against the background of the existing literature, elaborate on our empirical strategy and provide a brief history of EU trade policy leading up to OSA.…”