The European Union and the Member States - Essay Example

 The European Union and the Member States Question 2 How have the Member States Used the EU structure for other purposes than the economic one e.g. foreign and security, police, and judicial co-operation? Introduction The European Union (EU) has 28 member states bound by a number of treaties. The Union began immediately after the Second World War in efforts to promote peace and economic development in the Europe Continent. It has a political and a firm economic relationship with its member states. The founders of EU hoped at one point, the members would share sovereignty in trade, nuclear energy, economics, steel and coal production so that to promote interdependence and prevent the likelihood of occurrence of another intense war (Biscop & Anderson, 2008, pp.56). After the 1950s, the Union has made numerous strands on the economic sectors such as the creation of a single market where people, goods, and capital circulate freely, a common currency (Euro) that is a medium of trade in 19 States. Apart from the economic success achieved by the Union, it has also adopted an active role in the global affairs. Formulation of a Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP); Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP); has seen its great influence on the global affairs especially with the support of the 28 member states (Bojar, 2014, pp.145). Common Foreign and Security Policy The Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) was formulated in order to have a mechanism that adopts common guidelines and principles on diplomatic approaches, security and political issues, then the need to take a joint action. The EU currently is exploring avenues to expand their military ability and enlarge their sphere of defense integration. It has been conducting several missions, among them deploying civilians to operations in areas such as the training of police and rule of law (Bruun& Schol, 2012, pp.342). The Union is also engaging in external technical affairs such as humanitarian help, neighborhood policy, development assistance, and enlargement. Common Security and Defense Policy The Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP) is an arm of the CFSP, and it has both military and civilian operations. Civilians have been engaged in the judicial and police training. For the many years, that CSDP has been in existence it has dealt with various activities such as preventing conflict, peacekeeping, conflict stabilization, and crisis management instead of active military operations. However, the policymaker wants CSDP to have a more robust role through the establishment of enhanced EU member states military capabilities via increasing the deployable assets, a multinational reaction force “EU Battlegroups.” The force is drawn from the existing member state’s forces which are expected to act when needed during the EU operations (Chacha, 2012, pp.206-227). The move has been seen by experts as an effective way to remedy the tight budgets used on the European Military. The CSDP has many key actors and institutions similar to those responsible for the CFSP. The council of Ministers and European Council have the greatest responsibilities in ensuring that decisions are made with the provision of guidance. The body is entitled to implementation and building of consensus is the High Representative. The defense ministers of the EU normally convey meetings in liaison with Foreign Affairs Council to discuss defense and security issues. EU Military Committee (EUMC) consists of the Chiefs of Defense of the member states, which gives advice to the PSC on military related issues. Lisbon Treaty The Lisbon Treaty was established after the ratification by the 27 member states. The treaty was meant to reform the EU’s decision-making process and governing bodies to ensure that the Union has been expanded. The treaty also ensured that the EU grew stronger, had coherence in decision-making, had an identity in the world and making European Union a more democratic and transparent institution (Craig, 2019, pp.9). The treaty established two leadership offices that would help accomplish the set goals and objectives. The office of the presidency had the power to chair meetings attended by the Heads of States from respective member states or government representatives. The president is supposed to speak on behalf of the EU, ensure that there is continuity of the policy, and try to create consensus among the 28 member states. The office of High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy was of a diplomatic nature, where the office holder would be the chief diplomat of the EU. Lisbon Treaty also simplified the majority voting system by the expanding its use within the policy areas, according to European Union Politics Index (2006). The move was to ensure the EU decision-making process was fast and efficient. Through the process, the member states are expected to strike a consensus on delicate issues of policy, such as ways to combat terrorism, cooperation of police, and immigration issues, which are considered being central to the sovereignty of a state. Moreover, the treaty relatively increases the power vested in the European Parliament in an attempt to increase democratic accountability (Franchino, 2009, pp.403-420) The EU's parliament has the ability to extend the policy areas within the budgetary process and areas such as home affairs, and agriculture (Laursen, 2011, pp.54). The treaty also provides accountability through the national parliaments of the member states who can challenge EU’s drafted legislation to allow presentation of better legislative proposals that have the citizen’s interests. European Security Strategy The European Security Strategy (ESS) is important in EU foreign policy through three strategic objectives created for the policy makers. The first objective that is considered to be the most immediate is on the possible ways that EU is supposed to take actions to resolve certain issues. The issues to be addressed include how to react to regional conflicts, global challenges and security threats, the failure of a state, disease, the handling of weapons of mass destruction and destabilization of poverty (Golub, 2007, pp. 155-179). The second issue is how to foster regional security within the neighborhood in areas such as Middle East and Mediterranean region. Thirdly, the EU should maintain the order in the world based on rules that security, international law, and strong institutions within regions and the entire globe keep peace. ESS asserts that the identified challenges and threats cannot be fully addressed using military deployment. There should be a combination of political, military, and economic tools. The issue, of preventing conflict and threats, lies in the EU's Security Strategy, and it is, therefore, important to look for amicable ways to solve the causes of the problems (Grevi, 2008, pp.432). Conflict and instability can be addressed through enact the human rights and strengthening governance. Missions Africa By February 2013, CSDP has had 16 active missions. 12 of the missions are of a civilian nature, and four are military operations. In Africa, four missions have been launched; three being of a civilian nature and one is a military intervention (McElroy, 2006, pp.5-29). The missions are in Niger, Mali, Somalia, and South Sudan. The CSDP has completed 12 missions in the past years, and the EU conducts the missions totally based on a United Nation's mandate or in concurrence with the host country. In Africa, the EU has had active missions due various contentious issues. The issues include geographical instability spillovers, concerns on humanitarian issues and historical issues, which can be traced back to colonial relationships (Grevi, 2008, pp.432). The EU’s interest is to respond to problematic situations and intervene in order to try to bring stability. In Mali when a military training operation was launched, the French military began to regain a lost territory to the Islamist rebel groups who are affiliated to the al-Qaeda. In the mission, the EU was after training and advising the Mali soldiers so that to bring back law and order as enshrined in the constitution, and restoration of democratic authorities. The EUTM boasts of a total of 500 personnel and 200 of them being instructors. In July 2012, the EU initiated a civilian training mission in Niger known as EUCAP SAHEL. The mission aims to improve the capacity that the security forces and Nigerian police have in combating organized crime and terrorism (Stockemer, 2011, pp.26-46). Reinforcing governance, political stability, and security are the greater objectives of the mission in the Sahel region. In a different context, the EU sent civilian missioners to South Sudan so that they could strengthen airport security. The missions name is EUAVSVEC, and a team of 64 personnel constitutes it. In 2008, European Union Naval Force (EUNAVFOR) mission was sent to Somalia with the objective to root out piracy on the Somalia Coast; that had become a fertile ground for pirates to hijacking ships. The operation is also referred to as Atalanta, and it has a naval task force of 2 to 3 aircrafts used in patrols and 4 to 7 ships deployed at a time. In 2010, the EU once again embarked on another mission known as EUTM still in Somalia (Hage, 2011, pp.455-477). The mission this time round was based in Uganda and its objective was to give a military training to the Somali security forces with a group of 125 people. Later, in 2012, EU launched a civilian mission known as EUCAP NESTOR; its aim is to give training to Somalia Coast Police Force and increasing the maritime capacity in five neighboring countries namely Kenya, Djibouti, Somalia, Seychelles, and Tanzania. In the Concluded missions in Africa EUFOR RD Congo was a mission conducted by the military in the year 2006, with the support of the UN’s mission in DRC, which was after manning the country for elections to take place. The mission had a heavy deployment of personnel of about 24000 military troops. Between 2005 to 2007 EUPOL was launched in DRC Kinshasa to train the police force (Winzen, 2012, pp.297-323). Europe and Eurasia In Kosovo, the EU launched a mission known as European Union Rule of Law Mission (EULEX). The mission is based on civilian rule-of-law, and it trains judges, police, civil administrators, and customs officers in Kosovo. By 2012, a staff of 1,250 had gone to undertake the operation (Hibbert, 2007, pp.11). In 2004, a mission was launched, and it was called EUFOR that was a military intervention in Bosnia-Herzegovina, it is estimated that 7,000 people were sent to stabilize the situation. In Ukraine and Moldova, the EU launched an operation in 2005.The mission was known as EUBRAM, that offered technical advice and assistance so that customs and security operations could be conducted within the Ukraine-Moldova border. The concluded missions in Eurasia were on missions in the rule-of-law, military support and peacekeeping, and finally civilian police training mission. In 2004-2005, a mission known as EUJUST themis was carried out in Georgia. The mission was on the rule-of-law, which was intended to help the Georgian authorities in reforming the country’s criminal justice process and criminal legislation (European Union Politics Index, 2005) In Macedonia, EU launched CSDP missions. The first mission was a military operation in Concordia, after assuming responsibilities from NATO on peacekeeping and military support. After a military training, the EU conducted a mission known as EUPOL Proxima that involved civilian police training. Later a police advisory team (EUPAT) operation was undertaken (Johnson, 2004. pp.67). Conclusion The engagement of the EU on matters outside the economic sphere cannot be underestimated. From the above points, it is clear that the EU’s structure has been used to do some good work in attempts to restore peace and democratic governance (Kaunert&Pawlak, 2012. pp.201). The EU has deployed its own personnel in areas with variant needs, and its impact can be felt across the world. References Biscop, S. and Andersson, J. (2008). The EU and the European security strategy. London: Routledge. Bojar, A. (2014). Intra-governmental bargaining and political budget cycles in the European Union. European Union Politics. Bruun, N., Lörcher, K. and Schömann, I. (2012). The Lisbon Treaty and social Europe. Oxford, UK: Hart Publishing. Chacha, M. (2012). Regional attachment and support for European integration. European Union Politics, 14(2), pp.206-227. Craig, P. (2010). The Lisbon Treaty. Oxford: Oxford University Press. European Union Politics Index for 2005. (2005). European Union Politics, 6(4), pp.511-512. European Union Politics Index for 2006. (2006). European Union Politics, 7(4), pp.575-576. Franchino, F. (2009). Perspectives on European Immigration Policies. European Union Politics, 10(3), pp.403-420. Golub, J. (2007). Survival Analysis and European Union Decision-making. European Union Politics, 8(2), pp.155-179. Grevi, G. (2008). The European security strategy 2003-2008. Brussels: EGMONT - The Royal institute of international relations. Hage, F. (2011). The European Union Policy-Making dataset. European Union Politics, 12(3), pp.455-477. Hibbert, A. (2007). Keeping peace in the world. North Mankato, Minn.: Smart Apple Media. Johnson-Bennett, P. (2004). Cat vs. cat. New York: Penguin Books. Kaunert, C., LeÌonard, S. and Pawlak, P. (2012). European homeland security. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Laursen, F. (2011). The making of the EU's Lisbon Treaty. New York: P.I.E. Peter Lang. McElroy, G. (2006). Committee Representation in the European Parliament. European Union Politics, 7(1), pp.5-29. Stockemer, D. (2011). Citizens' support for the European Union and participation in European Parliament elections. European Union Politics, 13(1), pp.26-46. Winzen, T. (2012). European integration and national parliamentary oversight institutions. European Union Politics, 14(2), pp.297-323. Read More