Skip to Main Content
Have library access? Log in through your library
Research Report

A Stronger CSDP:: Deepening Defence Cooperation

Anne Bakker
Margriet Drent
Lennart Landman
Dick Zandee
Copyright Date: Jan. 1, 2016
Published by: Clingendael Institute
Pages: 12
OPEN ACCESS
https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep05553

Table of Contents

Export Selected Citations Export to NoodleTools Export to RefWorks Export to EasyBib Export a RIS file (For EndNote, ProCite, Reference Manager, Zotero, Mendeley...) Export a Text file (For BibTex)
  1. (pp. [i]-[ii])
  2. (pp. [iii]-[iii])
  3. (pp. 1-2)

    By June this year, High Representative Federica Mogherini will submit the EU Global Strategy on Foreign and Security Policy to the European Council. Although, as the HR has indicated, “security and defence will be an integral part of each chapter”¹, the Global Strategy will most likely define the implications for security and defence in general terms. Therefore, a translation into actionable proposals for a stronger CSDP and deepening defence cooperation is needed.

    An early opportunity to discuss the implications of the Global Strategy for European defence was provided by the Netherlands EU Presidency Seminar “A Stronger CSDP: Deepening Defence Cooperation”,...

  4. (pp. 2-2)

    Europe faces a complex mix of threats stemming from state and non-state actors, with instability beyond our borders causing spill-over effects within Europe. To the South a growing number of failed or fragile states not only causes regional instability in the Middle East and Africa; mass migration flows to the EU and heinous acts of terrorism in European capitals prove that external and internal security are closely linked. To its East the EU faces a non-cooperative Russia, not willing to adhere to the rules of international law and posing hybrid threats to European security. New risks arise from technological developments...

  5. (pp. 3-4)

    While CSDP has developed since 2000 its current ambition level is still based on goals set in another era. In that sense CSDP is outdated. The new security environment makes a fundamental review unavoidable. While all EU member states agree that Europe faces enormous challenges, the appreciation of these challenges differs. The high impact but lower probability risk of large-scale military aggression against the Union in the East is offset by instability and the ongoing migration crisis in the South. Diverging member state priorities result in a limited intersection of ambitions and geographical priorities. The choice is not between giving...

  6. (pp. 4-7)

    Without capabilities and the political will to use them, strategy and policies remain empty shells. However, the results of capability development at the European level are disappointing. Many of the well-known shortfalls persist, for example in the area of military communications and information systems. Words on improving capabilities are often not followed by deeds. There are multiple reasons for this, but voluntarism and bureaucratic resistance stand out as the main factors. Political declarations often remain empty shells as too few member states commit themselves to concrete programmes. The escape argument of national bureaucracies is often ‘that international defence cooperation is...

  7. (pp. 7-8)

    Europe faces unprecedented security challenges. This calls for a step change in the EU’s approach to security and defence. The threats to Europe are primarily of a hybrid nature and should be tackled with a diverse set of instruments, including the mutual assistance clause (Art. 42.7) which needs to be further developed.

    A CSDP White Book is necessary for the concrete implementation of the Global Strategy into a level of ambition, required capabilities and how to obtain these capabilities. It would signal the political will to realise a credible European defence. At the same time, it is a means to...