SpringerLink
Log in

Problematising the Obvious: Towards a Geopolitical European Commission?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Researching European Security Integration

Part of the book series: The European Union in International Affairs ((EUIA))

  • 83 Accesses

Abstract

The idea of the ‘geopolitical European Commission’, as put forward by President Ursula von der Leyen, raises fundamental questions about the future direction of this international bureaucracy and the impact of current political choices on its international authority. Specifically, this chapter argues that the European Union’s most unique institution risks undermining its own core strengths, which lay in a problem-driven, nominally depoliticised and human development-oriented approach to international security. There are established principles guiding the Commission’s approach to security, well-defined methods and even distinct policy instruments, which have allowed this institution to advance its unique identity and authority as a provider of security assistance. As such, the European Union should embrace the principle of diversity (of the Union’s approaches to security) in unity, represented by the Union’s shared overarching vision.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
EUR 29.95
Price includes VAT (France)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
EUR 85.59
Price includes VAT (France)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
EUR 105.49
Price includes VAT (France)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This research interview was conducted on June 10, 2009, in Brussels as part of a series of semi-structured elite interviews on the EU’s comprehensive approach to international security. These interviews were generously supported by the UACES Scholarship.

  2. 2.

    This research interview was conducted on September 1, 2009, in Brussels as part of a series of semi-structured elite interviews on the EU’s comprehensive approach to international security. These interviews were generously supported by the UACES Scholarship.

  3. 3.

    This original figure of 13 billion (2,200 percent increase) for the European Defence Fund in the 2008 Commission proposal was reduced to 9 billion in the revised budget proposal published in May 2020 in response to the COVID-19 crisis.

  4. 4.

    The original figure allocated for NDICI for MFF 2021–27 was 89.5 billion. In the revised budget proposal, this figure was reduced to 84.9 billion, but additional 11.5 billion was allocated to NDICI as part of the COVID-19-related European Recovery Instrument (‘Next Generation EU’).

References

  • Barnett, M., & Finnemore, M. (2004). Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global Politics. Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayer, L. (2019). Meet von der Leyen’s ‘Geopolitical Commission. https://www.politico.eu/article/meet-ursula-von-der-leyen-geopolitical-commission/ (accessed 5 July 2023).

  • Beck, U. (1999). World Risk Society. Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, A. (2006). ‘Conference on greening foreign and security policy: The role of Europe. Final Report’, 6–7 December. Brussels: European Parliament. Available at: https://static.s123-cdn-staticd. com/uploads/2385729/normal_5d402005d0a11.pdf (accessed on 3 February 2024).

  • Berger, C. (2008). Bridging the Gap, Ricci, A. (Ed.), From Early Warning to Early Action? (pp. 117–120). European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bialasiewicz, L. (2016). Introduction: Europe in the World. In L. Bialasiewicz (Ed.), Europe in the World: EU Geopolitics and the Making of European Space (pp. 1–18). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Biscop, S. (2016). The EU Global Strategy: Realpolitik with European Characteristics. In Woischnik, J. (Ed.), Might and Right in World Politics. Rio de Janeiro: Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, pp. 91–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christiansen, T. (1997). Tensions of European Governance: Politicized Bureaucracy and Multiple Accountability in the European Commission. Journal of European Public Policy, 4(1), 71–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Consortium. (2017). External Evaluation of the Instrument Contributing to Stability and Peace (2014—mid 2017) final report. European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/fpi/sites/fpi/files/documents/icsp-mte-final-report.pdf.

  • Copsey, N., & Pomorska, K. (2014). The Influence of Newer Member States in the European Union: The Case of Poland and Eastern Partnership. Europe-Asia Studies, 66(3), 421–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dodds, K. (2007). Geopolitics: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duchêne, F. (1972). Europe’s Role in World Peace. In R. Mayne (Ed.), Europe Tomorrow: Sixteen Europeans Look Ahead (pp. 32–47). Fontana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelstein, D. and Krebs, R. (2015). ‘Delusions of Grand Strategy: The Problem with Washington's Planning Obsession’, Foreign Affairs, 94(6), 109–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2007). The Instrument for Stability Strategy Paper 2007–2011. European Commission. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/sede/dv/sede120710ifsstrategy_/sede120710ifsstrategy_en.pdf (accessed 5 July 2023).

  • European Commission. (2008). From Early Warning to Early Action? The Debate on the Enhancement of the EU's Crisis Response Capability Continues. European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2009a). Making the Difference? What Works in Response to Crises and Security Threats—The Debate Continues. European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2009b). Making the difference: Reportage on the EU’s Instrument for Stability—Volume II. European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2018a). State of the Union 2018: The Hour of European Sovereignty. European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2018b). FPI Manual on FPI Strategic Plan, Project Management Monitoring & Evaluation Reporting, FPI.1, 2 20/07/2018. European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2018c). Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument, COM(2018) 460 final. European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2019a). The working methods of the European Commission, P(2019) 2. European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2019b). Speech by President-elect Ursula von der Leyen at the 2019 Paris Peace Forum, SPEECH/19/6270. European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2022). NDICI- Global Europe—Thematic Programme on Peace, Stability and Conflict Prevention 2021–2027. European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faleg, G. (2018). The EU: From Comprehensive to Integrated Approach. Global Affairs, 4(2–3), 171–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrero-Waldner, B. (2009). Foreword. In Friedl, H. and Ricci, A. (Eds.), Making the Difference: Reportage on the EU’s Instrument for Stability (Vol 2) (p. 7). European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furness, M., & Gänzle, S. (2017). The Security–development Nexus in European Union Foreign Relations after Lisbon: Policy Coherence at Last? Development Policy Review, 35(4), 475–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gänzle, S. (2009). Co** with the ‘Security-development nexus: The European Community’s Instrument for Stability—Rationale and Potential. Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1990). The Consequences of Modernity. Polity in association with Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauck, V., Sherriff, A., & Sherlock, K. (2016). Final report: Evaluation of the Instrument for Stability—Crisis Response Component (2007–2013). European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooghe, L. (2002). The European Commission and the Integration of Europe: Images of governance. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • House of Lords. (2005). Preventing Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction: The EU contribution, House of Lords Paper 96, 13th Report of Session 2004–2005. Stationery Office Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A., & Clark, J. (2008). Europeanisation and Discourse Building: The European Commission, European Narratives and European Neighbourhood Policy. Geopolitics, 13(3), 545–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kagan, R. (2007). Of Paradise and Power: America and Europe in the New World Order. Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaunert, C. and Zwolski, K. (2013). The EU as a Global Security Actor: A Comprehensive Analysis beyond CFSP and JHA. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keukeleire, S., & Delreux, T. (2014). The Foreign Policy of the European Union. Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keukeleire, S., & Raube, K. (2013). The Security-development Nexus and Securitization in the EU’s Policies towards Develo** Countries. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 26(3), 556–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiss, G. (1942). Political Geography into Geopolitics: Recent Trends in Germany. Geographical Review, 32(4), 632–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuus, M. (2017). Critical Geopolitics, in Oxford Research Encyclopaedia of International Studies. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manners, I. (2002). Normative power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms? Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(2), 235–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, M. (2000). Identities in the European Commission, in Nugent, N. (Ed.), At the Heart of the Union: Studies of the European Commission (pp. 51–72). St Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monnet, J. (1978). Memoirs. Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monzani, B. (2018). Kee** Peace at the Heart of the EU: A Political Challenge, Agency for Peacebuilding. https://www.peaceagency.org/kee**-peace-at-the-heart-of-the-eu-a-political-challenge/ (accessed 5 July 2023).

  • Müller-Hennig, M. (2019, December 4). A Truly Geopolitical EU Commission? International Politics and Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Natorski, M. (2011). The European Union Peacebuilding Approach: Governance and Practices of the Instrument of Stability. PRIF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nugent, N., & Rhinard, M. (2019). The “Political” Roles of the European Commission. Journal of European Integration, 41(2), 203–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. (1960). Structure and Process in Modern Societies. Collier Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratzel, F. (1923). Politische Geographie, 3rd edit., revised and enlarged by Eugen Oberhummer. München und Leipzig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raube, K., & Tonra, B. (2018). From Internal-input to External-output: A Multi-tiered Understanding of Legitimacy in EU Foreign Policy. Global Affairs, 4(2–3), 241–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risse, T., & Börzel, T. A. (2004). One Size Fits All! EU Policies for the Promotion of Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law, Workshop on Democracy Promotion, Oct. 4–5, 2004, Center for Development, Democracy, and the Rule of Law, Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, J. (2009). From “Civilian Power” to “Global Power”: Explicating the European Union’s “Grand Strategy” through the Articulation of Discourse Theory, JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 47(4), 831–862.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, F. (1999). Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (2008). Institutions and Organizations: Ideas and Interests. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. E. (2013). The European External Action Service and the Security-development Nexus: Organizing for Effectiveness or Incoherence? Journal of European Public Policy, 20(9), 1299–1315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, W. (1980). Frederich Ratzel and the Origins of Lebensraum. German Studies Review, 3(1), 51–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, E. (2011). Mind the Normative Gap? The EU in the South Caucasus. In R. Whitman (Ed.), Normative Power Europe: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives (pp. 65–82). Palgrave.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tallberg, J., & Zürn, M. (2019). The Legitimacy and Legitimation of International Organizations: Introduction and Framework. Review of International Organizations, 14(4), 581–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomassen, J., & Schmitt, H. (2004). Democracy and Legitimacy in the European Union. In H. M. Narud & A. Krogstad (Eds.), Elections, Parties and Political Representation (pp. 375–408). Universitetforslaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tocci, N. (2017). Framing the EU Global strategy: A Stronger Europe in a Fragile World. Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuathail, G. Ó. (1996). Critical Geopolitics: The Politics of Writing Global Space. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von der Leyen, U. (2019a). Mission letter to Josep Borrell. European Commission. https://commissioners.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-11/mission-letter-josep-borrell-2019_en.pdf (accessed 5 July 2023).

  • Von der Leyen, U. (2019b). Mission letter to László Trócsányi. European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/mission-letter-laszlo-trocsanyi_en.pdf (no longer available).

  • Von der Leyen. (2020). Keynote Speech by President von der Leyen at the World Economic Forum, SPEECH/20/102. European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/speech_20_102 (accessed 5 July 2023).

  • Waever, O. (1996). European Security Identities. Journal of Common Market Studies, 34(1), 103–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society. University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wille, A. (2013). The Normalization of the European Commission: Politics and Bureaucracy in the EU Executive. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwolski, K. (2014). How to Explain the Transnational Security Governance of the European Union? Journal of Common Market Studies, 52(4), 942–958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Social Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK

    kamil Zwolski

Authors
  1. kamil Zwolski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to kamil Zwolski .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Zwolski, k. (2024). Problematising the Obvious: Towards a Geopolitical European Commission?. In: Researching European Security Integration. The European Union in International Affairs. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-49822-0_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation