Writing a PhD requires one to think a lot about definitions and typologyies. One of the more interesting topics in that respect is a definition of “EU foreign policy”. At the same time, there seems to be quite a gap between academic debate and public debate , although one can of course argue that this is quite normal in general. However, social science operates with concepts that are somehow connected to the real world (ok, no ontological/epistemological debates now…) Let’s get back to “EU foreign policy” What are your first thoughts when you hear the term?
(1) Everything that relates to the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP)? (second pillar for EU geeks)
(2) “External relations” which include the Common Commercial Policy, trade relations as well as development issues? (first pillar for EU geeks)
(3) Something else? (Please specify)
(4) What about the individual foreign policies of the member states? Are they part of EU foreign policy? EU foreign policy could be seen as an aggregation of different national foreign policies. Do people outside the EU make the difference between the French/German/British … approach or do they think it is part of the European approach. and ultimately a EU foreign policy?
(5) It does not exist!
(6) A mixture of all the issues above?
Technically alternative 1 applies (CFSP & CSDP), but because it is dysfunctionally based on intergovernmental cooperation and the unanimity rule, 4, 5 and 6 apply in practice.
Perhaps an emerging giant on clay feet would be the best description.
Through the Lisbon Treaty the (European) Council would control the rest of external relations more directly than today, with the High Representative as their work or Trojan horse.
Face the truth:
(5) It does not exist!