From ESDP to Today’s New Initiatives: Does Neofunctionalism Work?

Abstract

The ESDP is always one of the most significant policies of the EU for shaping both foreign relations and the integration process. After security and defense issues have become more important due to political developments since the beginning of 2000s, the ESDP has started to move towards the CSDP. From ESDP to CSDP and today's new initiatives, the EU has taken good steps for further integration. Although new tools brought by the Lisbon Treaty like mutual defense and solidarity clauses and new initiatives which aim to move the CSDP one step further such as EUGS, PESCO, and EDF could lead to long-term results in bolstering the EU's defense capabilities, EU Member States ask for cooperation efficiently in research and acquiring new military capabilities. Analyzing the period from the ESDP to the CSDP by applying neofunctionalist integration theory with a particular focus on new tools and initiatives launched after the Lisbon Treaty came into force, this paper aims to demonstrate that even the pauses in further integration efforts in the defense security and defense issues take place, the EU is continuing to follow a possessed path going to a common security and defense policy.

Keywords

• ESDP
• CSDP
• Neofunctionalism
• Lisbon Treaty

AGSP’den Bugünün Yeni Girişimlerine: Neofonksiyonalizm (Yeni İşlevselcilik) Çalışıyor mu?

Abstract

AGSP, dış ilişkilerini ve bütünleşme sürecini şekillendirmede AB'nin en önemli politikalarından biri haline gelmiştir. 2000lerden başlayarak siyasi gelişmelerin de etkisiyle güvenlik ve savunma konuları ivme kazanmış ve AGSP, OGSP'ye doğru ilerlemeye başlamıştır. AGSP'den OGSP'ye ve bugünün yeni girişimlerine kadar, AB ileri entegrasyon için gerçekten iyi adımlar atmıştır. Karşılıklı savunma ve dayanışma maddeleri gibi Lizbon Antlaşması'nın getirdiği yeni araçlar ve ‘‘Avrupa Birliği Küresel Stratejisi’’, ‘‘Daimî yapılandırılmış İş birliği’’ ve ‘‘Avrupa Savunma Fonu’’ gibi OGSP'yi bir adım daha ileriye taşımayı amaçlayan yeni girişimlerin, AB'nin savunma yeteneklerini güçlendirmede uzun vadeli faydalar sağlayabileceği beklenmektedir. AB üye ülkeleri ayrıca araştırma ve yeni askeri yetenekler edinme konusunda verimli bir şekilde iş birliği yapmayı istemektedir. Lizbon Antlaşması'nın yürürlüğe girmesinden sonra başlatılan yeni araçlara ve girişimlere özel olarak odaklanarak neofonksiyonel (Yeni İşlevselci) bütünleşme teorisini uygulayarak AGSP'den OGSP'ye kadar olan dönemi analiz eden bu makale, AB’nin, savunma ve güvenlik konularında daha fazla bütünleşme çabaları sırasındaki duraklamalara rağmen, ortak bir güvenlik ve savunma politikasına giden yolda kendinden emin bir şekilde ilerlediğini göstermeyi hedeflemektedir.

Keywords

• AGSP
• OGSP
• Neofonksiyonalizm
• Yeni İşlevselcilik
• Lizbon Anlaşması

References

1. Bergmann, J. (2019). Neofunctionalism and EU external policy integration: the case of capacity building in support of security and development (CBSD). Journal of European Public Policy, 6(9), 1253-1272. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2018.1526204
2. Bergmann, J. and Niemann, A. (2018). From neo-functional peace to a logic of spillover in EU external policy: a response to Visoka and Doyle. Journal of Common Market Studies, 56(2), 420-438. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12608
3. Billon-Galland, A. and Quencez, M. (2017). Can France and Germany make pesco work as a process toward EU defense? (GMF Policy Brief. No: 033). Retrieved from https://www.gmfus.org/publications/can-france-and-germany-make-pesco-work-process-toward-eu-defense
4. Bono, G. (2002). ESDP: theoretical approaches, nice summit, hot issues (Research and Training Network/ ESDP and Democracy Project). Retrieved from https://bits.de/CESD-PA/esdp02.pdf
5. Cebeci, M. (2018). Hukuki, siyasi ve iktisadi yönleriyle Avrupa bütünleşmesinde son gelişmeler ve Türkiye-AB gelişmeleri. In S. Baykal, S. Akgül Açıkmeşe, B. Akçay and Ç. Erhan (Eds.), AB’nin güvenlik ve savunma politikalarında güncel tartışmalar (pp. 151-178). Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basım Evi.
6. Euractiv. (2019). Macron’s coalition of European militaries grows in force. Retrieved from https://www.euractiv.com/section/defence-and-security/news/macrons-coalition-of-european-mil
7. European Commission. (2020). European defence fund – factsheet. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/34509
8. European Defence Agency. (2020). Europe needs a military Schengen. Retrieved from https://www.eda.europa.eu/webzine/issue12/cover-story/europe-needs-a-military-schengen

9. European Parliament. (2020a). Mutual defence clause: what the requirement to help out other member states means. Retrieved from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/security/ 20160119STO10518/mutual-defence-clause-what-the-requirement-to-help-other-member-states-means#:~:text=The%20mutual%20defence%20clause%20was,consistent%20with%20potential%20NATO%20commitments
10. European Parliament. (2020b). Common security and defence policy. Retrieved from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/159/common-security-and-defence-policy
11. European Union External Action Service. (2020a). The Petersberg tasks. Retrieved from https://eeas.europa.eu/topics/common-security-and-defence-policy-csdp/5388/shaping-of-a-common-security-and-defence-policy-_en#:~:text=link%20is%20external),The%20Petersberg%20 Tasks,tasks%2C%20peacekeeping%2C%20and%20peacemaking)
12. European Union External Action Service. (2020b). Shaping of a common security and defence policy. Retrieved from https://eeas.europa.eu/topics/common-security-and-defence-policy-csdp/5388/shaping-of-a-common-security-and-defence-policy-_en
13. Fiott, D., Missiroli, A. and Tardy, T. (2017). Permanent structured cooperation: what’s in a name?. (Chaillot Paper. No: 142.) Retrieved from https://www.iss.europa.eu/sites/default/files/EUISSFiles /CP_142_ONLINE.pdf
14. Forsberg, T. (2006, September). Explaining the emergence of the ESDP: setting the research agenda. Paper presented at the European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR), Standing Group for International Relations (SGIR) Conference, Torino, Italy. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.408.5728&rep=rep1&type=pdf
15. Guerzoni, F. (2017). A European integrated force for an ambitious permanent structured cooperation (UEF Reflection Paper). Retrieved from https://www.federalists.eu/fileadmin/files_uef/ Publications/Reflection_Paper/2017_Nov_Reflection_Paper_Francesco_Guerzoni.pdf
16. Haas, E. B. (1958). The uniting of Europe: political, social and economic forces 1950-1957. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
17. Haas, E. B. (1961). International integration: the European and the universal process. International Organization, 15(3), 366- 392. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300002198
18. Haas, E. B. (1964). Beyond the nation state: functionalism and international organization. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
19. Haroche, P. (2020). Supranationalism strikes back: A neofunctionalist account of the European defence fund. Journal of European Public Policy, 27(6), 853-872. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2019.1609570
20. Hill, C., Smith, M. and Vanhoonacker, S. (2005). International relations and the European Union. London: Oxford University Press.
21. Hoffmann, S. (1966). Obstinate or obsolete? The fate of the nation-state and the case of Western Europe, Daedalus, 95(3), 862-15. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/20027004
22. Hooghe, L. and Marks, G. (2019). Grand theories of European integration in the twenty-first century. Journal of European Public Policy, 26(8), 1113-1133. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2019.1569711
23. Keukeleire, S. and Delreux, T. (2014). The foreign policy of the European Union. London: Red Globe Press.
24. Manners, I. (2002). Normative power Europe: A contradiction in terms?. Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(2), 235-258. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5965.00353
25. Niemann, A. (2016). Theorising internal security cooperation in the European Union: a neofunctionalist perspective. In M. Rhinard and R. Bossong (Eds.), Theorising internal security cooperation in the European Union (pp. 129- 152). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. Niemann, A. and Ioannou, D. (2015). European economic integration in times of crisis: a case of neofunctionalism?. Journal of European Public Policy, 22(2), 1-23. doi:10.1080/13501763.2014.994021
27. Niemann, A. and Schmitter P. C. (2009). European integration theory. In A. Wiener and T. Diez (Eds.), Neofunctionalism (pp. 45–66). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28. Nováky, N. (2018). France’s European intervention initiative: towards a culture of burden sharing. European View, 17(2), 238- 38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1781685818811062
29. Ojanen, H. (2006). The EU and NATO: two competing models for a common defence policy. Journal of Common Market Studies, 44(1), (57-76). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2006.00614.x
30. Rehrl, J. (2015). Invoking the EU’s mutual assistance clause. what it says, what it means. Retrieved from https://www.egmontinstitute.be/invoking-the-eus-mutual-assistance-clause-what-it-says-what-it-means/#:~:text=This%20clause%20aims%20to%20create,%3A%20responsibility%2C%20area%20and%20tools
31. Risse, T. (2005). Neofunctionalism, European identity, and the puzzles of European integration. Journal of European Public Policy, 12(2), 291-309. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760500044033
32. Rosamond, B. (2000). Theories of European integration. Macmillian Palgrave: Basingstoke.
33. Schimmelfennig, F. (2018). European integration (theory) in times of crisis: a comparison of the Euro and Schengen crises. Journal of European Public Policy, 26(7), 969- 989. doi:10.1080/13501763.2017
34. Schimmelfennig, F. and Rittberger, B. (2006). European Union: power and policy-making. J. Richardson (Ed.), Theories of European integration: assumptions and hypotheses (pp. 74- 93). New York: Routledge.
35. Sweet, A. S. and Sandholtz, W. (1997). European integration and supranational governance. Journal of European Public Policy, 4(3), 297- 317. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501769780000011
36. Sweeney, S. and Winn, N. (2020). EU security and defence cooperation in times of dissent: analysing PESCO, the European Defence Fund and the European intervention initiative (EI2) in the shadow of Brexit. Defence Studies, 20(3), 224-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2020.1778472
37. The Defense Post. (2019). Italy ‘willing to join’ European military intervention initiative, government says. Retrieved from https://www.thedefensepost.com/2019/09/19/italy-military-european-intervention-initiative/
38. The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. (2009). The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri= CELEX:12012E/TXT
39. Tranholm-Mikkelsen, J. (1991). Neofunctionalism: obstinate or obsolete? a reappraisal in the light of the new dynamism of the European community. Millennium: Journal of International Studies. 20(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298910200010201
40. Treaty on European the Union. (2009). Treaty on European the Union. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:2bf140bf-a3f8-4ab2-b506-fd71826e6da6.0023.02/DOC_1&format=PDF
41. Turhan, E. (2019). Avrupa Birliği’nin ortak güvenlik ve savunma politikasının savunma boyutunun gelişiminde PESCO’nun rolü: fırsatlar ve zorluklar [The development of the European Union’s common security and defense policy’s security dimension and PESCO’s role: opportunities and challenges]. İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 20(2), 347-374. doi:10.24889/ifede.627263
42. Visoka, G. and Doyle, J. (2016). Neo-functional peace: The European Union way of resolving conflicts. Journal of Common Market Studies, 54(4), 862–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12342
43. Vocal Europe. (2019). Europe’s defence: between EI2 and PESCO. Retrieved from https://www.vocaleurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/Europe%E2%80%99s-defence-between-EI2-and-PESCO.pdf
44. Wessel, R.A., Marin, L. and Matera, C. (2011). Crime within the area of freedom security and justice: A European Public order. In C. Eckes and T. Konstadinides (Eds.), The external dimension of EU’s area of freedom, security and justice (pp. 272- 300). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.