This cutting-edge book explores the practices and socialization of the everyday foreign policy making in the European Union (EU), focusing on the individuals who shape and implement the Common Foreign and Security Policy despite a growing dissension among member states.
The authors provide theoretically informed analyses based on up-to-date empirical material from the Political and Security Committee, Council working groups, the European External Action Service, EU delegations, military and civilian missions and operations and EU member state embassies. They illustrate the ways in which European foreign policy is shaped through the daily work of diplomats, exploring the communities of practice that are formed in the process of policy-making in the EU. Combining socialization and practice approaches, the book offers an innovative take on the motivations behind integration at a time of European discord.
Providing a unique inside account of diplomatic practices and the coordination of EU foreign policy, this insightful book is crucial reading for students of political science and international relations at all levels seeking to better understand the minutiae of formulating and coordinating EU foreign and security policy. Its empirical analyses will also benefit scholars and researchers interested in European integration and socialization in international organizations, as well as practitioners, such as diplomats and European civil servants.
This cutting-edge book explores the practices and socialization of the everyday foreign policy making in the European Union (EU), focusing on the individuals who shape and implement the Common Foreign and Security Policy despite a growing dissension among member states.
Recenzijos
This is a fascinating and insightful text which reveals many of the underpinnings of EU foreign policy practice at multiple institutional levels. Its added value is to flesh out the practice turn in the analysis of EU foreign policy and the interplay between EU and member state diplomats, civil servants and military personnel. It's an essential addition to any bookshelf on European foreign policy. -- Ben Tonra, University College Dublin, Republic of Ireland Innovative and original, this book provides a fresh take on the European Unions foreign and security policy. Examining the everyday practices at play across national and EU policy communities, it sheds new light on the paradox of the EUs advances as a foreign policy actor, despite continued contestation. -- Kathleen McNamara, Georgetown University, US
About the authors |
|
vii | |
Preface |
|
ix | |
Acknowledgments |
|
xi | |
|
|
xii | |
|
PART I EUROPEAN FOREIGN AND SECURITY POLICY: HISTORY, AND CONCEPTUAL AND THEORETICAL APPROACHES |
|
|
|
1 The everyday making of EU foreign and security policy |
|
|
2 | (10) |
|
|
|
|
|
2 European foreign and security policy in the making: a historical overview |
|
|
12 | (12) |
|
|
3 Contending theories of European foreign policy integration |
|
|
24 | (13) |
|
|
4 Communities of practice and the everyday making of EU foreign and security policy |
|
|
37 | (20) |
|
|
|
PART II THE EVERYDAY MAKING OF EUROPEAN FOREIGN AND SECURITY POLICY: EMPIRICAL FINDINGS |
|
|
|
5 Council Working Groups: communities, hierarchies and the management of contestation |
|
|
57 | (22) |
|
|
6 The Political and Security Committee: practices and persuasion |
|
|
79 | (17) |
|
|
7 The European External Action Service: a melting pot of EU foreign policy practice |
|
|
96 | (17) |
|
|
8 Diplomatic practices beyond Brussels: the EU delegations and the coordination of EU foreign and security policy |
|
|
113 | (18) |
|
|
9 EU missions and operations: practices of learning lessons intheCSDP |
|
|
131 | (18) |
|
|
|
10 Conclusion: learning and contestation in EU foreign and security policy |
|
|
149 | (12) |
|
|
|
|
Appendix 1 Methodological choices |
|
161 | (6) |
Appendix 2 Interview guide |
|
167 | (3) |
Appendix 3 List of respondents |
|
170 | (5) |
Appendix 4 Qualitative Survey |
|
175 | (1) |
Bibliography |
|
176 | (15) |
Index |
|
191 | |
Niklas Bremberg, Associate Professor, Stockholm University, August Danielson, Ph.D. candidate, Department of Government, Uppsala University, Elsa Hedling, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Political Science, Lund University and Anna Michalski, Associate Professor, Department of Government, Uppsala University, Sweden