The essay deals with the question whether the EU has established a strategic culture regarding its foreign and security policy. It begins with a discussion of the concept of strategic culture, to then dive into the sources of strategic culture and the extent to which the member states of the EU have similarities within those sources, namely geography and history, and political structure and institutions. Afterwards, the European Security Strategy of 2003 is considered as a potential manifestation of EU strategic culture, followed by developments after 2008. The essay concludes that the EU is growing closer to having a common strategic culture, but that it has not happened yet.
Due to significant changes with regard to the security situation after the end of the Cold War, caused by conflicts in former Yugoslavia, the attacks on September 11, 2001, and the differences regarding the Iraq war for instance, the necessity for a coordinated European foreign and security policy became evident. Therefore, on December 12, 2003, the European Council agreed to the European Security Strategy (ESS), whose development was seen as an important step in defining common interests and goals of the EU regarding foreign and security policy.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Theoretical context
Geography and history
Political structure and institutions
The European Security Strategy of 2003
Developments after 2008
Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
This academic paper investigates whether the European Union has successfully established a cohesive strategic culture regarding its foreign and security policy. By analyzing historical, geographical, and institutional foundations alongside key policy documents like the 2003 European Security Strategy (ESS), the author evaluates the progress made toward a unified strategic identity versus the challenges posed by the diverse national interests of member states.
- Theoretical definitions of strategic culture and its origins.
- The impact of geography and national history on security perceptions.
- The role of political systems and institutions in shaping security cooperation.
- Evaluation of the 2003 European Security Strategy as a foundational document.
- Analysis of post-2008 developments and current progress toward a common strategic culture.
Excerpt from the Book
Geography and history
The geography of a country, its locality and size, has a major influence on a country’s perception of “external threats” and its reaction to these dangers (Moore II 1998, 12). To illustrate this point, it is best to give examples: The strategy of Great Britain as an island is based on a “strong navy” and a “small land army”, while for France as a “continental power” that is surrounded by other countries that could pose a threat on its frontiers, this strategy would be ineffective (Moore II 1998, 12). Spain, for instance, whose frontiers are limited by the sea and which only borders on France and Portugal, would probably follow the UK’s strategy, while nations such as Austria and Hungary, that border on several other countries, would not focus on a navy but rather an army. Therefore, there are both similarities and differences with regard to geographies in the EU.
The geographical aspect is closely related to the history of a nation and its historical memories which also have a significant impact on a nation’s strategy and often show the strengths and weaknesses of its geography (Moore II 1998, 12). According to Meyer, “’(t)raumatic defeats, oppression, betrayal and exclusion, guilt as well as military triumphs plant themselves deep into collective memories as ‘lessons learnt’ and ‘beliefs held’’” (Biava, Drent and Herd 2011, 1232). As a consequence, national strategic cultures do not only show differences, but often remain the same and just hardly change (Biava, Drent and Herd 2011, 1232). Events such as the two world wars, the Holocaust, the Cold War and “US/USSR subordinate ‘allies’ status (where autonomous strategic ambition was discouraged)”, were important factors to prevent the development of new national strategic cultures in Europe and therefore also an EU strategic culture (Biava, Drent and Herd 2011, 1232).
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Outlines the security challenges faced by the EU post-Cold War and establishes the research question regarding the emergence of a common strategic culture.
Theoretical context: Defines the concept of strategic culture as used by scholars like Jack Snyder and identifies five core origins relevant to the EU context.
Geography and history: Examines how divergent national backgrounds and geographical positions create varying security priorities among member states.
Political structure and institutions: Analyzes how the convergence toward democratic governance and the establishment of EU-level security bodies facilitate institutional social pressure.
The European Security Strategy of 2003: Evaluates the effectiveness and the critical reception of the ESS as a roadmap for European strategic action.
Developments after 2008: Reviews the mixed progress of security cooperation, including the impact of national skepticism and the introduction of the Global Strategy and PESCO.
Conclusion: Summarizes that while a fully formed EU strategic culture does not yet exist, ongoing institutionalization points toward an emergent, developing process.
Keywords
European Union, Strategic Culture, European Security Strategy, Foreign Policy, Security Policy, Defense Policy, CSDP, Institutionalization, Threat Perception, International Order, Military Cooperation, Crisis Management, Multilateralism, European Integration, Geopolitics
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this research paper?
The paper explores whether the European Union has managed to develop a unified strategic culture, analyzing both the obstacles created by national diversity and the progress driven by EU institutional structures.
What are the primary themes discussed in the work?
The study centers on the intersection of geography, history, political systems, and key policy documents that influence the EU's collective approach to security and defense.
What is the core research question?
The author seeks to answer whether the European Union has established a strategic culture regarding its foreign and security policy.
Which methodology is employed by the author?
The work utilizes a qualitative analysis of academic literature, political history, and key foundational documents like the European Security Strategy of 2003 and subsequent assessments.
What aspects are covered in the main body of the text?
The body analyzes the theoretical foundations of strategic culture, the divergent impacts of national histories, the role of institutional frameworks, and the evaluation of major strategic policy texts.
Which keywords best characterize this research?
Essential terms include Strategic Culture, European Union, Foreign Policy, CSDP, Security Strategy, and Institutionalization.
How does the author view the role of the 2003 European Security Strategy (ESS)?
The author views the ESS as a significant, though imperfect, first step toward strategic planning that helped promote coherence, despite criticisms regarding its vague formulations and lack of legal binding.
Why does the author consider geography a source of conflict for a common EU strategy?
Because member states have different geographical realities—such as being an island nation versus a continental power—they develop different threat perceptions, which complicates the formation of a single, uniform strategic approach.
What impact did the post-2008 period have on European strategic development?
The period is described as a "mixed record," marked by setbacks such as reduced military engagement by Germany and Brexit, but also by progress through new initiatives like the 2016 Global Strategy and PESCO.
- Citar trabajo
- Carolina Gerwin (Autor), 2018, Strategic culture in the European Union. The significance of the European Security Strategy of 2003, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/510896
