Understanding the ambition in the EU’s Strategic Compass: a case for optimism at last?

ABSTRACT The quest for substance, capability, and strategic autonomy goes on – or does it? Is the objective of CSDP territorial defence and strategic autonomy, or crisis management and softer security concerns like peacekeeping, border management, protection of shipping lanes, and/or cyber security? The Union needs to move beyond familiar complaints about the lack of common strategic culture and EU intrusion into NATO responsibilities. Geostrategic and economic imperatives dictate that the EU should progress CSDP beyond civilian crisis management in the EU Neighbourhood, and military training and security sector reform (SSR). The Strategic Compass must signal CSDP clarity of objectives, coherence, enhanced capability, and appropriate burden sharing with NATO. The response to the Strategic Compass must build European strategic autonomy in ways that strengthen NATO. For military strategic and economic reasons, both the EU and the post-Brexit UK need intensive cooperation to maintain their geostrategic relevance and strengthen the NATO alliance. This paper reflects on prospects for the EU Strategic Compass and offers timely analysis of recent trends in EU foreign and security policy and expresses cautious optimism regarding the enhanced European strategic autonomy/actorness.

[1]  Niklas I. M. Nováky.  The Strategic Compass: Charting a New Course for the EU’s Security and Defence Policy , 2021 .

[2]  J. Howorth.  Europe and Biden: Towards a New Transatlantic Pact? , 2021 .

[3]  Barry r. Posen.  Europe Can Defend Itself , 2020 .

[4]  N. Winn,et al.  EU security and defence cooperation in times of dissent: analysing PESCO, the European Defence Fund and the European Intervention Initiative (EI2) in the shadow of Brexit , 2020 .

[5]  Robert Pahre,et al.  European Union Politics , 2019 .

[6]  S. Biscop.  From Global Strategy to Strategic Compass: where is the EU heading? , 2019 .

[7]  P. Grosvenor.  Heroic Failure: Brexit and the Politics of Pain. Fintan O’Toole. London: Apollo, UK, 2018. 217 pages. ISBN: 978–1789540987. , 2019 .

[8]  R. Whitman.  The UK and EU Foreign, Security and Defence Policy after Brexit: Integrated, Associated or Detached? , 2016, National Institute Economic Review.

[9]  Helen Wallace,et al.  An Institutional Anatomy and Five Policy Modes , 2014 .

[10]  Michael E. Smith.  Institutionalizing the ‘Comprehensive Approach’ to EU Security , 2013, European Foreign Affairs Review.

[11]  Michael Smith,et al.  Developing a ‘Comprehensive Approach’ to International Security: Institutional Learning and the ESDP , 2012 .

[12]  Graeme P. Herd,et al.  Characterizing the European Union's Strategic Culture: An Analytical Framework , 2011 .

[13]  K. Raube.  Europe’s foreign and security policy. The institutionalization of cooperation , 2006 .

[14]  Javier Solana,et al.  A Secure Europe in A Better World , 2004 .

[15]  A. Shepherd.  The European Union's Security and Defence Policy: a policy without substance? , 2003 .

[16]  Christopher Hill.  The Capability-Expectations Gap, or Conceptualizing Europe's International Role , 1993 .

[17]  B. Burrows.  European defence cooperation , 1985 .