The EU Global Strategy and diplomacy

ABSTRACT

The new EU Global Strategy has significant implications for EU diplomacy, in terms of both goals and means. This article first analyses the timing of the strategy as an exercise in diplomacy in its own right. Second, it argues that the strategy outlines a more expansive and noticeably more smart power-oriented approach to diplomacy in practical terms. Finally, it notes that the strategy has a new meta-narrative for EU diplomacy, which seeks to project a blend of both realistic assessment and idealistic aspiration.

KEYWORDS:

• European Union
• EU Global Strategy
• Diplomacy
• Smart power

Acknowledgements

This article builds on the author’s previous work on European diplomacy and smart power, especially ‘Building a European Diplomacy: Recruitment & Training to the EEAS’, European Foreign Affairs Review, Vol. 16, No. 4 (2011): pp. 447–64, and The Politics of Crisis in Europe (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017).

Disclosure statement

No conflict of interested was reported by the author.

Notes on contributor

Dr Mai'a K. Davis Cross is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Northeastern University in Boston, and an affiliated researcher at the ARENA Centre for European Studies in Oslo. She writes about European Union politics, especially foreign and security policy, epistemic communities, crises, diplomacy, and public diplomacy. She is the author of three books: The Politics of Crisis in Europe (Cambridge University Press, 2017), Security Integration in Europe: How Knowledge-based Networks are Transforming the European Union (University of Michigan Press, 2011), and The European Diplomatic Corps: Diplomats and International Cooperation from Westphalia to Maastricht (Palgrave Macmillan, 2007). Her second book is the 2012 winner of the Best Book Prize from the University Association of Contemporary European Studies (UACES). Dr. Cross holds a PhD in Politics from Princeton University, and a bachelor’s degree in Government from Harvard University. She is also a term member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Notes

1. Articles in this forum that deal with other aspects include Michael E. Smith, ‘Implementing the Global Strategy Where It Matters Most: The EU’s Credibility Deficit and the European Neighbourhood’, Contemporary Security Policy, Vol. 37, No. 3 (2016), this issue; Jolyon Howorth, ‘EU Global Strategy in a Changing World: Brussels’ Approach to the Emerging Powers’, Contemporary Security Policy, Vol. 37, No. 3 (2016), this issue; Sven Biscop, ‘All or Nothing? The EU Global Strategy and Defence Policy after the Brexit’, Contemporary Security Policy, Vol. 37, No. 3 (2016), this issue.

2. Christoph O. Meyer, The Quest for a European Strategic Culture: Changing Norms on Security and Defence in the European Union (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2006); Jolyon Howorth, ‘The Political and Security Committee and the Emergence of a European Security Identity’, IntUne Integrated and United: A Quest for Citizenship in an ‘ever closer Europe’ (Siena, Italy, 2007); Stephen Keukeleire, ‘The European Union as a Diplomatic Actor: Internal, Traditional, and Structural Diplomacy’, Diplomacy & Statecraft, Vol. 14 No. 3 (September 2003); Mai’a K. Davis Cross, The European Diplomatic Corps: Diplomats and International Cooperation from Westphalia to Maastricht (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2007).

3. Teresa La Porte and Mai’a K. Davis Cross, ‘The European Union & Image Resilience During Times of Crisis: The Role of Public Diplomacy’, under review 2016; Simon Duke, ‘The European External Action Service and Public Diplomacy’, Discussion Papers in Diplomacy (Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’, September 2013).

4. Cross, The European Diplomatic Corps (note 2), Chapter 1.

5. Mai’a K. Davis Cross, ‘The Public Diplomacy Role of the EEAS: Crafting a Resilient Image for Europe’, in David Spence and Jozef Batora (eds), The European External Action Service: European Diplomacy Post-Westphalia (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015), pp.341–55.

6. The many early thinkers and actors who were influential in the inception of the European project, such as David Mitrany, Jean Monnet, Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi, and Altiero Spinelli, to name a few, are particularly representative of this idealistic vision for European integration.

7. Giovanni Grevi, ‘A Global Strategy for a soul-searching European Union’, European Policy Centre Discussion Paper, 13 July 2016.

8. Maria Mälksoo, ‘From the ESS to the EU Global Strategy: External Policy, Internal Purpose’, Contemporary Security Policy, Vol. 37, No. 2 (2016), this issue.

9. Hans Kundnani, ‘The Strategic Consequences of the Brexit Vote’, German Marshall Fund US Blog, 8 July 2016.

10. Nathalie Tocci, ‘The Making of the EU Global Strategy’, Contemporary Security Policy, Vol. 37, No. 3 (2016), this issue; Balazs Ujvari, ‘The EU Global Strategy: From Effective Multilateralism to Global Governance that Works?’ Egmont Security Policy Brief No. 76, July 2016.

11. Smith, ‘Implementing the Global Strategy’ (note 1).

12. Ibid.

13. Tocci, ‘The Making of the EU Global Strategy’ (note 10).

14. Mälksoo, ‘From the ESS to the EU Global Strategy’ (note 8).

15. Grevi, ‘A Global Strategy for a Soul-searching European Union’ (note 7).

16. Mai’a K. Davis Cross, The Politics of Crisis in Europe (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017).

17. Ernest Wilson, ‘Hard Power, Soft Power, Smart Power’, The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 616, No.1 (2008), pp.110–24; Joseph Nye, ‘Get Smart: Combining Hard and Soft Power’, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 88, No. 4 (July/August 2009); Joseph Nye, ‘Smart Power’. New Perspectives Quarterly, Vol. 26, No. 2 (March 2009), pp.7–9; Mai’a K. Davis Cross, ‘Europe, A Smart Power?’ International Politics, Vol. 48, No. 6 (December 2011), pp.691–706.

18. David Spence, ‘Foreign Ministries in National and European Context’, in Brian Hocking (ed.), Foreign Ministries: Change and Adaptation (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999) pp.247–68; Cross, The European Diplomatic Corps (note 2).

19. European Union, ‘Shared Vision, Common Action: A Stronger Europe: A Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy’(June 2016), https://europa.eu/globalstrategy/sites/globalstrategy/files/eugs_review_web.pdf (accessed 14 September 2016), p. 4. Civilian power refers to François Duchêne ‘Europe’s role in world peace’, in R. Mayne (ed.), Europe Tomorrow: Sixteen Europeans Look Ahead (London: Fontana, 1972), pp.32–47.

20. European Union, ‘Shared Vision, Common Action’ (note 19), p. 44.

21. Ibid, p. 10.

22. Helene Sjursen, ‘What Kind of Power?’ Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 13 No. 2 (August 2006): pp.169–81; Ian Manners, ‘Normative power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?’ Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 40, No. 2 (2002), pp.235–258; Zaki Laïdi Norms Over Force: The Enigma of European Power (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008).

23. Mai’a K. Davis Cross, ‘Building a European Diplomacy: Recruitment & Training to the EEAS’, European Foreign Affairs Review, Vol. 16, No. 4 (2011), pp.447–64.

24. Tocci, ‘The Making of the EU Global Strategy’ (note 10).

25. Smith, ‘Implementing the Global Strategy Where It Matters Most’ (note 1); Howorth, ‘EU Global Strategy’ (note 1).

26. European Union, ‘Shared Vision, Common Action’ (note 19), p.16.

27. European Council, ‘A Secure Europe in a Better World: European Security Strategy’, Brussels, 12 December 2003.

28. European Union, ‘Shared Vision, Common Action’ (note 19), p. 3.

29. Jan Techau, ‘The EU’s New Global Strategy: Useful or Pointless?’ Carnegie Europe, 1 July 2016.