The EU global strategy: the dynamics of a more politicized and politically integrated foreign policy

Abstract

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.

Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe: What Impact Do they Have on Development Policy?

“…However, we know relatively little about whether developments at the EU level actually express a parallel trend at the member‐state level and, if so, to what extent politicization processes in member states are driven by PRRPs. Hence, through our focus on the role of PRRPs on the framing of development policy in EU member states, we add an important element to the broad picture of the politicization of the migration–security–development nexus (Barbé and Morillas, 2019).…”

From democratization to fostering resilience: EU intervention and the challenges of building institutions, social trust, and legitimacy in Bosnia and Herzegovina

“…30 Since 2012 the EU began to use resilience in humanitarian and development policies, although it was not until the Global Strategy that resilience was consolidated as an umbrella term to "navigate this difficult, more connected, contested and complex world." 31 The world was perceived as complex to Europeans because, internally, the economic and the Schengen crises, as well as the rise of far-right wing parties halted a coherent and ambitious foreign policy; 32 in addition, externally, the violence and fragility of neighbouring countries, as well as a global context of crisis of the liberal order, democracy and multilateralism, consider whether the growing contestation and resistance of EU's values, norms and policies, made necessary a reconfiguration of interventions. 33 The idea was to promote "state and societal resilience" to the east and south: "The EU will support different paths to resilience, targeting the most acute cases of governmental, economic, societal and climate/energy fragility, as well as develop more effective migration policies for Europe and its partners."…”

Autonomy in intergovernmentalism: the role ofde novobodies in external action during the making of the EU Global Strategy

“…On the one hand, the global transformations from 2003 to 2016 witnessed the effects of growing multipolarity, the erosion of the EU's normative power and the effects of instability in its neighbourhood (Smith 2016). On the other, the EU has been severely affected by internal crises, from the euro to the refugee and Brexit crises, and the questioning of the European integration project with the rise of populism and Euroscepticism (Barbé and Morillas 2019). From the outset, the motivation for new strategic thinking was more defensive, based on security threats, the diminishment of internal cohesion and a wobbly internal and external environment (interview MS-33).…”