Jagiellonian University Kraków
The Centre for European Studies

Co-operative system of European Security
A Model or a temporary State of Being?

by

Heiko Bubholz

Prepared for:
European Security at the Turn of the XXI. Century
Kraków, 19 August 2002

Table of Content

1. Introduction ... 1

2. Defining Europe and Europe’s interests  ... 1
2.1 Europe’s interests ... 1
2.2 The Periphery ... 3
2.3 United States and Europe’s security ... 4
2.4 Europe’s relationship to Russia  ... 5

3. Security Architecture of Europe  ... 7
3.1 North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) ...  7
3.1.1 The objectives and legal basis of the Alliance ... 7
3.1.2 The evolution of the Atlantic Alliance ... 9
3.2 Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) ...  12
3.3 United Nations (UN) ...  14
3.4 Council of Europe (CoE)  ... 15
3.5 European Union as an emerging player ... 16
3.5.1 Bilateral Arrangements  ... 16
3.5.2 ESDP and EU Military Structure ... 17

4. A Co-operative System of European Security ... 21

5. Conclusion and Outlook  ... 23

Bibliography

Abbreviations

CFSP Common Foreign Security Policy
CoE Council of Europe
EC European Community/Communities
ECHO European Community Humanitarian Office
ESDP European Security and Defence Policy
EU European Union
EUMC European Union Military Committee
EUMS European Union Military Staff
IPTF International Police Task Force (in Bosnia and Herzegovina)
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
OSCE Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe
PSC Political and Security Committee
TEU Treaty on the European Union
TEC Treaty establishing the European Community
UN United Nations
WEU West European Union

1. Introduction

The process of European integration makes significant and visibly progress. Only few months ago a considerable number of European citizen decided enthusiastically to adapt the new € currency, while the procedure and negotiation towards the eastward enlargement of the Community produces predominantly positive news. At latest with the Council Meeting of Laeken it had been concluded that a major step of the enlargement – and thus an unprecedented step in Europe’s history – might be accomplished in 2004 [1]. Nonetheless, the events of two recent wars on the Balkans (Bosnia and Kosovo) and the consciousness of Europe’s inability to cope with these local conflicts prevails still in the collective memory of most of European political and military leaders. After the end of the Cold War the today’s security scenario is lacking the – to certain extent healthy – superpower polarity of the good old days that often served to impose tense order in a confrontational world. Intra-failed-state and regional conflicts are now joining with local instability and insurgencies, which may define the most likely forms of upcoming armed conflicts in Europe or its near periphery[2].

Thus, aim of this paper shall be to elaborate a feasible and predictable scenario of European future security policy and its accompanying means. To the purpose of this discussion it deems necessary first to identify where Europe is, or where it ends, and what should be considered indispensable for a European security model. Correspondingly, there are already a number of international organizations in existence, which solely may already provide sufficient security to what is considered of Europe’s interest. Part of this paper shall be the evaluation if these existing institutions. This should allow for some recommendations, which ought to be the last part of this discussion.

2. Defining Europe and Europe’s interests

2.1 Europe’s interests

Though probably contradicting the thinking of some Eurocrats, Europe is far more than the European Union it its today’s shape or even after its enlargement. On the other side, the elaboration of this issue should not necessarily touch historical considerations or cultural concerns [3]. To put it in the words of BARTOSZEWSKI: ‘The question for the geographical borders of Europe shall rather be answered by a philosopher’[4].Instead certain equivalence between the relevant territory and the interests of western, central and eastern-central European countries should be assumed[5]. After the experiences of two devastating World Wars, the attempts to reconcile and the rapprochement of the European nation states initiated a process, which prevented any hostile activities –even under the conditions of the Cold War –, from Europe’s soil. The predecessors of the today’s European Union thus coined probably best its interests. Accordingly, the TEU preamble thus emphasises “the historic importance of the ending of the division of the European continent and the need to create firm bases for the construction of the future Europe”. Further the contracting parties are “confirming their attachment to the principles of liberty, democracy and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and of the rule of law”, their desire “to deepen the solidarity between their peoples while respecting their history, their culture and their traditions … in view of further steps to be taken in order to advance European integration“ [6]. It is not less worth quoting the preamble of the Treaty establishing the European Community. The participating states herein declare to be “resolved to ensure the economic and social progress of their countries by common action to eliminate the barriers which divide Europe, … recognising that the removal of existing obstacles calls for concerted action in order to guarantee steady expansion, balanced trade and fair competition”, while being “anxious to strengthen the unity of their economies and to ensure their harmonious development by reducing the differences existing between the various regions and the backwardness of the less-favoured regions”. Regarding the designation of this paper, however, these objectives could be hardly achieved in an insecure environment. Accordingly the Member States of the EU/EC are thus determinate “pooling their resources to preserve and strengthen peace and liberty, and calling upon the other peoples of Europe who share their ideal to join in their efforts”[7]. Yet, PRODI himself probably identified the initial questions best, when he stated: “[I]f it is to exercise true leadership in the field of security, the Union will not be able, in the long term, to avoid a number of questions which have not hitherto been discussed: what cause would we all be willing to die for? How far can the efforts of technocrats ‘export stability’; when should human lives be put at risk?“[8].

[...]

1 European Council (2001).

2 Clark (2000), p. 16.

3 Halecki (1957).

4 Bartoszewski (2002), p. 860.

5 Pond (2000).

6 Preamble on the European Union.

7 Preamble establishing the European Community (Emphasizes added).

8 Prodi (2001).