The European Union (EU) has a substantially more united foreign policy than any other international organisation. Said expansive joint foreign policy has developed in an inhospitable setting where...Show moreThe European Union (EU) has a substantially more united foreign policy than any other international organisation. Said expansive joint foreign policy has developed in an inhospitable setting where its members hold widely different interests and perspectives on joint foreign policy. Given states’ tendency to jealously guard sovereignty over their foreign policy, how the EU’s foreign policy structures and instruments have been aggregated remains unclear. This paper addresses this via the question “Through what mechanism did the EU aggregate its foreign policy between 2014 and 2021?” and applies a modified ‘Failing Forward’ framework where foreign policy is aggregated via a process of problem-solving by problem-making resulting in an iterative institutionalisation causal mechanism. To analyse whether this mechanism is present, this study adopts a theory-testing process-tracing research method on the development of EU foreign policy structures and instruments from 2014 to 2021. It argues that the aggregation of the EU’s foreign policy relies on iterative intergovernmental and neofunctional processes establishing an integrative causal feedback loop. Examining how the EU aggregates foreign policy is valuable to both EU policymakers and actors within other international organisations seeking greater unison in their foreign policy and contributes to research on international integration in intergovernmental settings.Show less
EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) is traditionally characterized as a delicate policy area in which Member States reach agreement through tardy intergovernmental decision-making...Show moreEU’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) is traditionally characterized as a delicate policy area in which Member States reach agreement through tardy intergovernmental decision-making procedures. However, from 2015 onwards new initiatives in the CSDP have revealed unprecedented policy progress. Several scholars have applied state-centred- and realist approaches in accounting for the suggested policy impetus. To offer a more complete account, this Thesis seeks to contextualise the impetus from a historical institutionalist perspective. By analysing the evolvement of the European External Action Service (EEAS) since the Treaty of Lisbon, the main findings suggest that inter-institutional interplays and institutional autonomy have weakened the influence of Member States in CSDP’s policymaking process. As a consequence, institutional bodies like the EEAS found a legitimate way to considerably influence the innovative policy initiatives.Show less
Advanced master thesis | Political Science (Advanced Master)
open access
In 2010, the European External Action Service (EEAS) was launched. This service should serve as a 'ministry of foreign affairs' of the European Union. Goal of the EEAS: Creating a more coherent...Show moreIn 2010, the European External Action Service (EEAS) was launched. This service should serve as a 'ministry of foreign affairs' of the European Union. Goal of the EEAS: Creating a more coherent European foreign policy by providing a bridge between the member states and the European institutions, and between the European institutions themselves (Council and Commission). This thesis investigates whether the EEAS, in the short timespan that it is active now, has been able to achieve this goal. Three levels of coherence are identified: Horizontal coherence (coherence between the external policies of the different European institutions and organs), vertical coherence (coherence between the foreign policies of the different member states) and, finally, external coherence (the EU's ability to speak with a single voice to the rest of the world). Making use of a Principal-Agent theoretical framework, and relying on more than ten interviews with officials in Brussels, this contribution draws the conclusion that the EEAS has enhanced European foreign policy coherence, albeit moderately. As a result of the creation of a single High Representative/Vice-President of the Commission (HRVP), external coherence was fostered most convincingly. On the other hand, horizontal coherence - if not deteriorated - did not grow as a result of the EEAS. Hence, there is still much work to be done in the realm of inter-institutional relations in the EU.Show less
