The Balkan wars of the 1990s and NATO's military intervention in Kosovo at the end of the past decade can be seen as two major catalysts which have triggered various readjustments within the EU's system of foreign policy-making.
Materially, the EU has been forced to reshape its relations with the countries of South-Eastern Europe, but it has also adapted its post-Cold War foreign policy tools more generally. In terms of overall political strategies, the adoption of new security doctrines (such as the Petersberg tasks) and the implementation of peace-building initiatives for the Western Balkans (such as the Stability Pact for South-Eastern Europe or the joint police mission in Bosnia-Herzegovina) have been widely acknowledged as both internal and external successes for the EU.
Institutionally, the member states have demonstrated a commitment to reinforce their visibility and influence in world politics by establishing the position of a High Representative for the CFSP, a Political and Security Committee (PSC) and a Policy Planning and Early Warning Unit. It was also recognised that restricting CFSP to an adhoc arrangement of informal or reactive policies would not be sufficient if the EU's declared ambition to become a significant international actor was to be taken seriously.
Still, it might well be argued that CFSP experienced a considerable boost only after other actors had criticised the EU's seeming complacence and self-limitation to the role of a 'paymaster' in international security affairs. Partly as a reaction to the mistakes made between 1991 and 1995, a specifically 'European' approach to preventing and managing security crises appears to have emerged. Ultimately, the EU has learnt a lot from its Balkan entanglements.
In this essay, I will first trace back member states' different convictions as to how the resurgence of nationalist conflict and outbreak of violence in Croatia and Bosnia should be tackled. Secondly, I will outline how these experiences have led the EU to adapt its traditional policies conducted within Pillar One to the objective of developing a more cohesive CFSP within Pillar Two. Some lessons which have not yet been translated into policy changes will be discussed as well. Based on these insights, I will conclude that the EU has generally been successful in turning its past failure into a future potential, although a number of problems remain.
Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)
- Introduction
- Assessing the EU's Past Failure and Future Potential of Conflict Management in the Western Balkans: Permanence of Lacking Capabilities or Emergence of a Distinctive ‘European' Approach?
- European Views on Conflict Prevention and Crisis Management, 1991-1995: Clear Objectives, but Multiple Strategies
- The Emerging Nexus between 'Soft' and 'Hard' Power Policies: Does the EU have a Comparative Advantage in Projecting Regional Stability?
- Kosovo and Beyond: Recognising the Need for Further Substantive and Institutional Adjustments in the EU's Approach to Conflict Resolution
- Conclusion: Lessons Learnt or Opportunities Missed?
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This essay aims to analyze the EU's evolving role in conflict management in the Western Balkans, specifically focusing on the lessons learned from its past failures and the potential for future success. The essay will examine how the EU's approach to conflict resolution has shifted from a reactive, ad-hoc model to a more strategic and comprehensive one. Here are some of the key themes explored in the essay:- The EU's evolving foreign policy approach in the context of the Balkan conflicts
- The interplay of "hard" and "soft" power in the EU's conflict management strategy
- The challenges of achieving coherence and effectiveness within the EU's foreign policy decision-making processes
- The potential for the EU to establish a distinctive "European" approach to conflict resolution
- The need for continued institutional and policy adjustments in the EU's approach to the Balkans
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
The introduction provides a brief overview of the impact of the Balkan conflicts on the EU's foreign policy and the subsequent adjustments that have taken place. It highlights the adoption of new security doctrines, peace-building initiatives, and institutional reforms aimed at enhancing the EU's role in international security. The second chapter explores the EU's approach to conflict management in the Western Balkans, analyzing its past failures and potential for future success. It examines the different perspectives on the EU's capabilities, with both neorealist critics and neoliberal supporters acknowledging the potential for a "European" approach based on a combination of "hard" and "soft" power. The first sub-section (2.1) focuses on the EU's early response to the Balkan conflicts, specifically the period between 1991 and 1995. It analyzes the internal constraints and conflicting views on conflict prevention and crisis management that resulted in a fragmented and incoherent EU response. This section highlights the challenges of achieving coordination and consensus among member states, particularly in relation to the recognition of new states and the role of national self-determination.Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
This essay examines the EU's involvement in the Western Balkans, exploring key concepts such as conflict management, European security, "hard" and "soft" power, foreign policy, and the development of a distinctive "European" approach. The essay also delves into the internal challenges faced by the EU in achieving coherent and effective foreign policy decision-making, including issues of coordination, consensus, and the interplay of national interests.- Quote paper
- Dipl.-Pol., MSc (IR) Jan-Henrik Petermann (Author), 2006, The EU and its Balkan Entanglements, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/182616
