scholarly journals Modern approaches of the European Union to creating own armed its forces

2020 ◽  
pp. 75-94
Author(s):  
Andrei Manoilo

This article is devoted to the basic principles, stages and features of the formation of a new type of armed forces in the European Union – the pan-European army of the EU. It is noted that over the entire period of its existence, the European Union has not been able to form its own army, although attempts to implement this project have been made repeatedly – in 1999, 2003, 2004, and possibly in 2018 (in connection with the implementation of the EU program of ongoing structured cooperation PESCO). Initially, the European army was supposed to be equipped with units of all combat arms (from aviation to naval ships); its number at the initial stage should have been at least 50–60 thousands military personnel (then it was planned to increase its number to one hundred and even one hundred and fifty thousand people). However, to date, all that the EU has to intervene in armed conflicts is the multinational EU rapid reaction force, consisting of several battalion tactical groups of 1,500 persons each. These forces showed themselves quite well during the EU military operations in the Balkans, the Middle East and Africa (Somalia, Mali, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Sudan, Central African Republic), but they are clearly not in the full-fledged army of the European Union or even its core pulling. To compensate for these shortcomings, the PESCO program was launched in March 2018, but after two years of its implementation, the results of this program are rather modest. A good effect was achieved only in the field of «military mobility» (logistics); but on the fulfillment of a number of «obligations» of the countries participating in this program, the European Council does not even have rough information (countries refuse to give it).

Vojno delo ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 72 (3) ◽  
pp. 53-68
Author(s):  
Miloš Jevtić

This paper focuses on the engagement of the Serbian Armed Forces and other defense forces outside the national territory, activities planned and carried out within multinational operations (MNOs) of the European Union (EU), in particular. The primary goal of this research has two aspects - firstly, to analyze and compare the positive legislation and contents of the most significant strategic documents, which regulate the engagement of these capacities in multinational operations, in compliance with the concept of MNO and critical judgment on the legal framework governing this area, and secondly, to systematically explain the significance of the participation of the Serbian Armed Forces capacities in such military activities of the European Union.


2020 ◽  
pp. 39-42
Author(s):  
Sergey Asaturov ◽  
Andrei Martynov

The choice between modern nation-building and integration into supranational European and Euro-Atlantic structures remains a strategic challenge for the Balkan countries. Success in solving this problem of predominantly mono-ethnic Croatia and Slovenia has not yet become a model to follow. Serbian and Albanian national issues cannot be resolved. Serbia's defeat in the Balkan wars of 1991–1999 over the creation of a "Greater Serbia" led to the country's territorial fragmentation. Two Albanian national states emerged in the Balkans. Attempts to create a union of Kosovo and Albania could turn the region into a whirlpool of ultra-nationalist contradictions. The European Union has started accession negotiations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of Northern Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro. The success of these negotiations depends on the readiness of the EU and the ability of these Balkan states to adopt European norms and rules. The accession of all Balkan nation-states to the European Union must finally close the "Balkan window" of the vulnerability of the united Europe. Nation-building in the Balkans on the basis of ethnic nationalism sharply contradicts the purpose and current values of the European integration process. For more than three decades, the EU has been pursuing a policy of human rights, the rule of law, democracy and economic development in the Balkans. The region remains vulnerable to the influences of non-European geopolitical powers: the United States, Russia, Turkey, and China. The further scenario of the great Balkan geopolitical game mainly depends on the pro-European national consolidation of the Balkan peoples and the effectiveness of the European Union's strategy in the Balkans.


2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-55
Author(s):  
E. G. Entina

Traditionally the phenomenon of the European integration towards South East Europe is regarded starting from the XXI century. The explanation for such a periodization are resolution of the open conflicts on the territory of the former Yugoslavia and implementation of the complex EU strategy for the region. Starting point of the majority of researches is the year of 2003 when the EU Agenda for the Western Balkans was started in Thessaloniki. The topic of EEC-Yugoslavia relations, SFRY having been first socialist country to institutionalize its trade and economic relations with Brussels, are unfairly ignored in domestic and foreign scientific literature. It is regarded solely as a chronological period of trade agreements. Nevertheless, this issue is of fundamental importance for understanding the current neighborhood of the European Union. The main thesis the author proves is that in the 1960s and 1980s as it is the case nowadays, the main imperative of Brussels' policy towards the Balkans was to prevent Moscow from increasing its influence. This led to the formation of a very specific format of relations with Belgrade and was one of the reasons why the economic crisis in Yugoslavia became extreme and its economy irreformable. In addition, at a later and structurally much more complicated stage of relations between the countries of the former Yugoslavia and the European Union the specificity and main components of relations of the Cold War period did not fundamentally change. As for the policy of so-called containment of the external actors one could see that besides Moscow, we can speak about similar attitude of the EU towards China. It makes it possible to consider the EU policy towards the countries of the former Yugoslavia in the paradigm of neoclassical realism, rather than in the paradigm of traditional liberal European integration approaches which allows us to unite neorealists elements with the specifics of internal processes, including the modernization of institutes, relations between society and state, types of political leadership.


2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pavlo Latkovskyi ◽  
Anna Marushchak

Three countries: Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine have concluded European Union Association Agreements, under similar terms and conditions of European Partnership. Analytical review allowed determining that in their political integrative development, they have similar problems and ways to overcome them. They are distinguished by a relatively high level of democratic freedoms and political pluralism; however, none of them can be considered as a consolidated democracy, these countries have hybrid political regimes. Among the main obstacles occurring on the way of their integration processes, one can distinguish problems associated with ethical, regional, and cultural conflicts; specific features of the formation of constitutional systems; features of the formation of PR technologies of government and society; deep-rooted corruption and influence of oligarchs in party systems and, as a consequence, propensity to use non-constitutional means of political struggle and economic development. Despite these structural problems, favouring European values and norms demonstrated by societies of the three countries holds the promise of consolidating democratic institutions and overcoming problems. The purpose of the article is to determine problems and prospects of deepening relations of the EU with three countries: Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia, and to substantiate theses stating that consistent and reinforced integration of the European Union in this region is crucial for further success and development of all actors of this process. Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine do not compose a single region (both in a geographical and economic context); however, since 2014 they are developing according to the same scenarios. Their aspiration to integration has provoked problems in relations with Russia and intensified opposition to the policy of Europeanisation within the countries. In Ukraine, the most difficult and severe events took place: it passed through government overthrow, loss of territory, and military actions in Donbas caused by Russia, which continue to this day. For Moldova and Georgia, the choice of democratic imperatives also had grave consequences. In Georgia, they were identified as two long-term wars for the separation in Abkhazia and South Ossetia; ended with the defeat of central authorities and creation of two unrecognized states. Moldova has faced a similar problem in Transnistria in 1992. In all countries, Russian armed forces were important actors who played an important role in determining the results of these conflicts. According to the Democracy Index, Moldova is evaluated as “imperfect democracy”; Georgia – as “hybrid regime”; Ukraine has moved below, from the category of “imperfect democracy” to the lowest “hybrid regime”. Over the political pressure of Russia, the EU and Ukraine postpone the provisional application of the DCFTA (Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area) to January 1, 2019. There are marked positive consequences of Ukrainian export to the EU, which volume has increased by 30% in 2017. The structure of exports to the EU has shifted towards machines and equipment, fats and oils of vegetable or animal origin, ready-made meals, and products of animal origin. The EU share in Ukrainian exports and imports has also increased due to a significant reduction in trade with Russia. The application of the EU tariff quotas for agricultural production has increased over the 2014–2017 years because Ukrainian producers have gradually overcome the problems with food safety and weak demand for their production. European choice is an extremely important factor for continuous democratization of all these three countries. In spite of competition among European and Eurasian identities, each of them considers itself a European country. The choice to continue the path of association with Europe, made by these countries, despite obvious political risks (especially severe for Ukraine), is the best evidence of their real adherence to European development path.


Author(s):  
Maxime H. A. Larivé

This empirical and historical analysis of the Western European Union (WEU), an intergovernmental defense organization, contributes to the broader understanding of the construction and integration of European security and defense policy. The WEU was established in 1954 by the Modified Brussels Treaty after the failure of the European Defense Community and at the time of the construction of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Over its lifetime, the WEU was confronted by two major trends: the centrality of collective defense agreement providing security on the European continent enforced by NATO and the construction of a European security and defense policy within the broad integration process of the European Union (EU). The WEU provided a platform for Western European powers, particularly France, the United Kingdom, and Germany, to engage in the construction of a European defense. Historically, these countries had diverging visions ranging from an autonomous force to one that should remain under the NATO auspice. The end of the Cold War accelerated the transfer of the WEU mission to the EU, but the crises in the Gulf region and in the Balkans in 1990s led to a period of activity for the WEU. The institutionalization of the EU, beginning with the 1992 Treaty of Maastricht, accelerated the construction of a European defense and security policy within EU structures. The transfer from the WEU to the EU began in the late 1990s and the WEU was dissolved in 2011.


2011 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 45-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meike Froitzheim ◽  
Fredrik Söderbaum ◽  
Ian Taylor

The European Union (EU) is increasingly aspiring to be a global peace and security actor. Using the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) as a test case to analyse such ambitions, this article reveals that the EU's attempts to build peace and security are severely compromised by its bureaucratic and organizational complexity as well as by its ineffective policies. In fact, the EU's state-centred approach in the DRC has resulted in the EU's inability to deal with 1) the realities of governance in the DRC and 2) the strong trans-border dimensions of the conflict. As a result, the EU continues to lack a coherent strategy for the DRC, despite a large budget. The analysis concludes that the EU is more concerned with establishing a symbolic presence and a form of representation than with achieving specific goals.


2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-122
Author(s):  
Marius Pricopi

AbstractThe European Union’s military operations represent and essential vector in implementing the priorities of the Joint Africa-EU Strategy that was signed in 2007, as an official acknowledgement of the geographical, historical and cultural relations between the two continents. In its’ pursuing of a strengthened profile in the EU, Romania has been a constant contributor to such military initiatives. Therefore, in this paper we review the national contribution to the ongoing military operations conducted by the European Union in Africa, presenting and analysing relevant data regarding the deployment of Romanian troops in such faraway regions.


2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 87-107
Author(s):  
Luiza Wojnicz

This paper presents a quantitative and qualitative measurement of the components of Europeanisation ad extra in the EU civilian mission in Bosnia and Hercegovina from 2003-2012. The study aims to show that Europeanisation ad extra affects third countries to a certain extent and it is thus a form of exporting the European organisational, normative, and axiological model. The exploration relates to a completed civil mission. For the needs of this study, the Author generated two basic indicators; one quantitative and one qualitative, and used them as tools for synthesising and categorising the studied area, based on the assumption that, in this way, it will be possible to measure the intensity of the Europeanisation process in the external trajectory (ad extra). The analysis of the quantitative and qualitative indices shows the number of activities in the area of security carried out in the framework of the civilian missions in question. As evidenced by these indicators, the export of European norms, values, solutions, and practices is more likely to succeed for the Balkans than for other continents where EU civilian missions are deployed. Measurement of the Europeanisation ad extra, taking the example of Bosnia and Hercegovina, proves that in its expeditionary policy, the European Union has a significant impact on third countries through transferring European standards in various areas of security such as social or axiological.


2018 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-84
Author(s):  
Kamila Kasperska-Kurzawa

SOCIETY OF THE 21ST CENTURY AGAINST THE THREAT OF ISLAMIC TERRORISMThe subject matter includes the issue of transformation in the consciousness of the societies of European Union countries, but also communities in other areas of the world, perception of the phenomenon of migration to the territories of native countries, mainly in the European Union. The period of rapid socio-political changes in Islamic states, as well as the outbreak of civil war in 2011 in Syria, was the largest stimulator of migration movements from the Middle East, especially those covered by military operations in Europe. Hundreds of thousands of migrants continued to reach EU countries. Germany widely opened the door of its state and accepted the largest number of migrants. Some countries, such as Poland or Hungary, refused to accept migrants from countries with an Islamic origin. Migration on such a mass scale caused many social problems. The perceived sense of security of the community has deteriorated considerably in the EU countries where the most migrants came. The decline in the sense of security included areas not only of safety for life and health, but also concerns about reducing the level of social status or increasing unemployment. However, the biggest threat to the community of the EU countries, and many other countries in the world was ahuge increase in terrorist attacks, where the attackers came from orthodox Islamist groups. It should be added that the majority of migrants were Muslims. Another phenomenon also affecting the reduction of the level of perceptible security of European societies was the reactivation of political groups that in their ideologies presented the slogans of populism, nationalism, racism, or even fascism. There has been a clear polarization of Western societies, where until now they were arefuge of democracy, tolerance and values for which they fought for years. Undoubtedly, the politics of Erdogan, the president of Turkey, and the president of Russia, Putin, also influencedthestate of security of societies, and tried to influence EU decisions with their actions. Russia, let the annexation of Crimea and activities in Ukraine be left in peace, and Turkey, to force the EU to acceleratethe admission of this country to the EU. Also calling up the so-called Islamic state posed a huge threat to the security of the communities of European Union countries with attacks inspired by this terrorist group.


2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 458-476
Author(s):  
Orlanda Obad

The author is using a series of examples from her three-year research on social perception of the European Union in Croatia in order to pose several critical questions regarding the current application of the Balkanist criticism in the region and beyond. The research was conducted with three groups of interviewees who were, in different ways, related to the EU. Various notions of Europe and the Balkans, which appeared throughout these interviews, differed from the predominant discourse of the 1990s. The article also indicates the decline of the importance of symbolic geography in the interpretation of notions associated with the EU. In the questioning of metatheoretical level, the author suggests several new paths of research in Balkanist and other, closely related fields of study: admitting the importance of economy, which has been, in the past twenty years, secondary to the examination of questions related to culture and history, and also the production and flow of knowledge. In conclusion, the author proposes examining the approaches which would also enable the inclusion of the enriching, non-repressive and useful encounters between the center and periphery.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document