|
Papers > Politics > European Security
This is a preview of a paper to view the full text you need to signup and login.
European Security |
|||
|
The European idea and the Atlantic idea have coexisted in uneasy fashion throughout the post-war period. ... While ensuring the continued reality of US power when the Atlantic Alliance was formed in 1949, the United States (US) Senate Foreign Relations Committee report endorsing the Washington Treaty took note of the process of European integration already underway; among the Alliance’s main benefits, the Committee affirmed, was that it would create ‘a favourable climate for further steps toward progressively closer European integration [and give it] added momentum. ... Political integration - involving successful resolution of the Franco-German conflict, international trade, and economic cooperation were developed to consolidate and sustain an enhanced sense of security. This eventually took the form of the European Union (EU), now composed of fifteen Member States . ... ‘…Europe has grown in economic clout and political self-confidence, but it has not matched these attributes with the ability to project a common foreign policy…We have issued communiqués replete with enough rhetoric to rattle windows of chancelleries around the world…But our ambitions to do more in common foreign and security policy have outstripped our ability to deliver. ... The Balkan wars have been the greatest impetus for a strengthening of European political and military security structures. ... The EU has agreed on the setting up of a European Rapid Reaction Force (RRF) and has almost put in place political and military structures to allow for this. ... 1986, The Single European Act signalled the start of real European unity. ... 1991, The Maastricht Treaty put in place the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). ... 1992, The Petersburg Declaration by the Western European Union (WEU). ... The primacy of NATO in military-security matters was maintained. ... The Atlanticist UK government took a more pro-European stance, not blocking the creation of an EU military force structure. ... Thus ‘[t]he RRF is the principle military instrument of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP), which is a subset of the EU’s CFSP…with a range of foreign policy instruments available to the Union…’ , not least of which is the RRF but also civilian crisis management structures and an External Affairs Commissioner, a “Mr/s CFSP” to coordinate and work on behalf of EU foreign policy. ... It ‘held together…the US and Europe’ due to three unifying forces ‘the Soviet threat, the American stake in the European economy and the political elites that had developed the habit of working together in a common endeavour. ... In short, politically European Security is progressing with Mr/s CFSP and the establishment in 2003 of the RRF. ... In the US this is perceived as the threat to American dominance of European affairs in the realist sphere. ‘There needs to be wholehearted, unambiguous European adherence to the principle that the [RRF] will act only “where NATO is not engaged”. ... In this instance, the US has been primarily focused on military activity; with the EU demanding credit for non-military contributions to a broader definition of security. ... ’ Washington always wanted Western Europe to assume more responsibility for continental security, but it has never wanted it to do too much, because of the implications of a too powerful Europe, which may clash with US ambitions within and outside Europe. ... Malo in 1998 of the UK and France, two of the leading EU and European NATO members. With these two allowing for a ‘credible military force’, the Atlanticist and European camps within the EU had a meeting of minds. ... Thus, the RRF is not and does not wish to be a European standing army. ... But, since US troop numbers are again in decline in the Balkans, another case for European leadership arises. ... These European officers, under the CJTF will lead any EU military operations. ... Since 1990 most European nations [have] reviewed their armed forces…[which] results in a force structure tailored to meet expected commitments and available funds. ... But an operation that may indirectly threaten or lessen US power, such as a Balkans-type scenario, may prove significantly more difficult for the EU to hitch a ride with the US Strategic Airlift Command, or to get the full picture from the US Defence Intelligence Agency/National Security Agency. ... How the US proceeds with NATO enlargement and missile defence ‘will have a profound effect on US-Russia relations and whether Russia can truly become integrated into European affairs. ... Since September 11 the US has had a lessening of interest in the Balkans and ‘the focus of attention in transatlantic relations – including the role played with these by European institutions – turned first and foremost to NATO. |
|||
To link to this page, copy the following code to your site:
Paper Information |
|||||
Title: European Security
|
|||||
Signup & Login |
|||||
If you don't currently have a login then Signup here |
|||||
| Pre-Written Papers | |||||
|
|||||
| Custom Papers | |||||
|
|||||
Copyright 2003-2008 doingmyhomework.com. All rights reserved.