The EU Battle Groups in Sweden and the Czech Republic: What National Defense Reforms Tell Us about European Rapid Reaction Capabilities

Jacoby, Wade; Jones, Christopher

doi:10.1080/09662830802642587

“…2013; Chappell, 2009Chappell, , 2012Gowan, 2009;Jacoby & Jones, 2008;Reykers, 2016b). Yet in the many reflections upon the EU Global Strategy, they are hardly mentioned.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

EU Battlegroups: High costs, no benefits

Reykers

¹

2017

Contemporary Security Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the "Taverne" license above, please follow below link for the End User

show abstract

“…Koenig 2011, Menon 2011, or the EU's inability to deploy its Battlegroups as part of the 2008 EUFOR Tchad/RCA (e.g. Jacoby and Jones 2008). In an attempt to see the wood for the trees, Nováky (2015) identifies four groups of scholars: realists, focusing on EU great power interests and the EU's quest for prestige (e.g.…”

Section: Explanations For the Absence Of The Eu Battlegroupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

No supply without demand: explaining the absence of the EU Battlegroups in Libya, Mali and the Central African Republic

Reykers

¹

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the "Taverne" license above, please follow below link for the End User

show abstract

“…In this respect, most analyses pointed to how norm advocacy played a role in the transfer of national security practices to the EU level (Björkdahl, 2008;Brommesson, 2010;Forsberg and Vaahtoranta, 2001;Goetschel, 1999;Jakobsen, 2009;Rieker, 2004;Smith, 2000) as well as its limits (Herolf, 1999;Ojanen, 2000Ojanen, , 2002Wivel, 2005). Others have examined the extent of neutrality compatibility with European security initiatives (Ojanen et al, 2000;Jacoby and Jones, 2008;Rickli, 2008) or how neutrality has been an obstacle to deeper European security integration (Anderson and Seitz, 2006: 27;Bjereld, 1995b;Dahl, 1997;Graeger et al, 2002a: 25;Missiroli, 2003;Ojanen, 2008).…”

Section: Constructing Neutrality As Identitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Transformed beyond recognition? The politics of post-neutrality

Agius¹

2011

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The transition from neutrality to post-neutrality has been debated by constructivists and rationalists alike as a seemingly logical and unproblematic move: the end of the Cold War and the widening of the security agenda in a globalizing world have meant that a state-centric approach to security is no longer viable or desirable. The former neutrals are subsequently reconfiguring their security policies to reflect this development and contributing to European and NATO security initiatives, and at the same time contributing their own unique 'soft security' experiences and practices. This article aims to problematize this seemingly smooth move from neutrality to postneutrality by examining the discourses deployed to facilitate this change. Arguing that there is a politics of post-neutrality at work, it draws attention to how identity is being reconstituted in the process of European integration and identity-formation, and how discourses on changing forms of security cooperation are facilitating the discursive dissemination of an inevitable logic that neutrality in any form will eventually be abandoned.

show abstract

The EU Battle Groups in Sweden and the Czech Republic: What National Defense Reforms Tell Us about European Rapid Reaction Capabilities

Cited by 15 publications

References 2 publications

EU Battlegroups: High costs, no benefits

EU Battlegroups: High costs, no benefits

No supply without demand: explaining the absence of the EU Battlegroups in Libya, Mali and the Central African Republic

Transformed beyond recognition? The politics of post-neutrality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About