To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Global Strategy for EU Foreign and Security Policy.
Journal articles on the topic 'Global Strategy for EU Foreign and Security Policy'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Global Strategy for EU Foreign and Security Policy.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Talijan, Miroslav, Dragan Jevtić, Miroslav Terzić, and Mišo Planojević. "Contemporary security strategies : The EU Global Strategy for Foreign and Security Policy." Vojno delo 69, no. 8 (2017): 72–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.5937/vojdelo1708072t.
Full text
2
Lonardo, Luigi. "Common Foreign and Security Policy and the EU’s external action objectives: an analysis of Article 21 of the Treaty on the European Union." European Constitutional Law Review 14, no. 3 (2018): 584–608. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1574019618000329.
Full textAbstract:
Boundaries within EU policies – Common Foreign and Security Policy – EU external relations – Management of boundaries – Institutional interpretation – External action objectives – Linking policies to objectives – Restrictive measures – Area of Freedom Security and Justice – Securitisation of migration – Energy policy – Development – Multilateral diplomacy – Global strategy
3
Guseinov, Kamran, and Aleksandr S. Burnasov. "Strategic Shift: from the Global Strategy 2016 to the Strategic Compass 2022." Koinon 3, no. 3-4 (2022): 165–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.15826/koinon.2022.03.3.4.040.
Full textAbstract:
In this article the author examines the dynamic of the European Union Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) after the adoption of the two strategic documents — Global Strategy on EU Foreign and Security Policy “Shared Vision, Common Action: Stronger Europe” and the Strategic Compass on Security and Defence. Both documents were adopted during the period of transformation of the European Union Common Security and Defence Policy institutions, and influence on the further dynamic of the EU security and defence. The article evaluates the practical changes in the sphere of EU Security and Defence policy after the adoption of the strategic documents. The author studies the preconditions and causes of the adoption of these strategic documents and conducting a comparative analysis of the Global Strategy and the Strategic Compass by studying the official texts. The research on EU Common Security and Defence Policy is based on the neorealism theory of international relations. Particularly, the article is based on the “structural realism” theory by John J. Mearsheimer. The author applies the model of collective securitization for the examination of the common security and defence, and for the explanation of the modern trends in EU CSDP transformation. The research attempts to provide the results of the examination of the realization of the Global Strategy 2016, that lead to the adoption of the new document — Strategic Compass. The article notes the features of the EU Strategic autonomy and examines the factors affecting the Strategic autonomy.
4
Węc, Janusz J. "Perspektywy reformy Wspólnej Polityki Bezpieczeństwa i Obrony Unii Europejskiej do 2025 roku. Autonomia strategiczna UE?" Politeja 19, no. 3(78) (2022): 211–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.12797/politeja.19.2022.78.12.
Full textAbstract:
PROSPECTS FOR REFORM OF THE EUROPEAN UNION’S COMMON SECURITY AND DEFENCE POLICY TO 2025: EU STRATEGIC AUTONOMY?
 The research objective of the paper is to highlight the prospects for the implementation of the main directions of the reform of the Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP) of the European Union until 2025. The caesuras of the work are marked by two events: the adoption of the Global Strategy for the Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union by the European Council on 28 June 2016 and the decision of the European Council of 24 March 2022 on the adoption of the Strategic Compass for Security and Defense. First of all, the research hypothesis should be established that the full implementation of CSDP reform, which was initiated with the adoption of the Global Strategy for the Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union, and the resulting projects can significantly strengthen the position of the EU in the international arena. This will lead to the establishment of the European Security and Defense Union and the EU Rapid Reaction Force (5,000 troops) by the end of 2025. However, since many of the planned reform elements have not yet been completed or initiated, much will depend on the political will of individual member state governments, the level of spending on reform implementation by member states and the EU, and the progress of other reforms already underway (including addressing the economic and social consequences of the pandemic crisis and implementing eurozone systemic reform). The following research questions should then be asked: (1) How has the implementation process of the Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy gone so far? (2) How has the implementation of new projects (including the European Defense Fund, PESCO, and the Strategic Compass) affected EU-NATO relations? (3) How do selected EU member states assess these projects? (4) To what extent can the project to establish a European Security Council with the participation of Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Poland compete with and usefully complement the EU Strategic Compass project? The first part of the analysis presents the implementation process of the Global Strategy for the Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union until 2022. The second part analyzes the goals, priorities, and assumptions of the Strategic Compass, the implementation of which is intended to lead the EU to strategic autonomy by 2030.
5
Ananieva, E. V. "RUSSIA IN THE UK NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY." Вестник Удмуртского университета. Социология. Политология. Международные отношения 5, no. 4 (2021): 453–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.35634/2587-9030-2021-5-4-453-459.
Full textAbstract:
The unsatisfactory state of Russian-UK relations should be considered not so much in a bilateral format as in the context of global change in the balance of power. It is necessary to take into account not only the factor of Britain's exit from the EU and Britain's search for its place in the world, but also the traditions and principles of the United Kingdom's foreign policy throughout history. The new National Security Strategy of Britain (March 2021) is integrated, for the first time including in a single concept traditional areas of defense and security, as well as aid to development and foreign policy. The author analyzes the evolution of approaches to the content and the implementation of London's foreign policy strategy after Brexit in the light of its significance for Russian-UK relations.
6
Sus, Monika. "Supranational entrepreneurs: the High Representative and the EU global strategy." International Affairs 97, no. 3 (2021): 823–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiab037.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract By applying the Multiple Streams Approach (MSA) developed by Kingdon and adapted to EU policy-making, this article explores a new analytical lens that provides a more substantiated insight into the role of the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR) in the policy-making process. According to the MSA, policy change happens when policy entrepreneurs successfully explore a window of opportunity that opens in the problems or policies stream. Applying a single case-study approach, this article argues that it was the entrepreneurship of HR Federica Mogherini that coupled problems, politics and policies streams which presented themselves between 2014 and 2015, made use of the window of opportunity, and pushed for policy change in EU's foreign and security policy. By finding observable evidence for the HR's deployment of entrepreneurial strategies during the drafting and implementation of the European Union's Global Strategy, this contribution unpacks Mogherini's footprint in the recent progress. The conceptualization of the HR office-holder as a policy entrepreneur lets us systematically investigate their agency and impact on the policy change within the existing formal constraints, and thus it paves a way towards a more fruitful research direction regarding the HR's role than the concept of the constrained agent that is dominant in the literature. More broadly, since the office-holder can be perceived as a supranational agent that is dependent upon an intergovernmental system for its mandate, by examining its entrepreneurial strategies this article offers insights on the role of supranational agents beyond the EU context, i.e. within UN and NATO.
7
Dr. Muhammad Tariq, Amjad Ali Khan, and Ejaz Khan. "An overview of the Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union." sjesr 3, no. 4 (2020): 394–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.36902/sjesr-vol3-iss4-2020(394-399).
Full textAbstract:
The European Union comprises 27 countries that aim at carving out a separate foreign and security policy for their unification and singleness. The whole union is a symbol of unity and cohesiveness for which the theory of bargain provides the basic framework. This article focuses on the elements of the European Union's external policy, the principles and policy of the European Union, the foreign policy, security strategy, and the common foreign and security policy coupled with the defense strategy of the European Union. It also aims at describing the coherence and consensus of the EU on all important measures with particular reference to foreign and security policy and importance in the world as a global actor.
8
Węc, Janusz J. "Reforma wspólnej polityki bezpieczeństwa i obrony Unii Europejskiej w latach 2016-2017." Politeja 15, no. 54 (2019): 45–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.12797/politeja.15.2018.54.03.
Full textAbstract:
The Reform of the Common Security and Defence Policy of the European Union in 2016‑2017The subject of the article is the reform of the Common Security and Defence Policy in 2016‑2017 following the adoption of the new EU External Security Strategy by the European Council in June 2016. The first part of the article analyzes the European Union’s Global Strategy on Foreign and Security Policy. However, the second part of the article reconstructs the process of implementing the global strategy and describes the successes and failures of the reform.
9
Iryna, Grushko. "EU security policy: new challenges and priorities." Political Science and Security Studies Journal 2, no. 3 (2021): 31–38. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5544191.
Full textAbstract:
The article is devoted to the study of a set of problems of European security policy, in particular the analysis of the new challenges to the priority directions of its development. It is noted that the current institutional system of European security policy is undergoing serious challenges associated with profound changes in international relations. The systematization of various aspects of EU security policy according to the following methodological approaches is proposed: the theory of behaviorism, the theory of political realism, liberal-idealist paradigm, postmodernist theory, alternative theoretical models. The conceptual substantiation of the development of European integration in the field of security and defense policy is the EU strategies, which are developed in accordance with current challenges and threats. It is proved that the real institutional changes in the EU foreign policy occurred after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and the establishment of the European External Action Service. The European Security Strategy (2003), the Global Strategy of the European Union (2016), the Security Union Strategy (2020) were analyzed, in particular, new challenges for the European security system and priority areas of EU security policy were identified. Based on the analysis, the most pressing challenges, risks and threats are identified, the probability of which is considered high for the EU until 2025.
10
Delphin, Hervé. "Above the Fog and the Fury: EU Strategic Policy Planning and the EU’s Future in Times of Global Uncertainty." European Foreign Affairs Review 26, Issue 1 (2021): 35–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/eerr2021005.
Full textAbstract:
Foreign policy is often dominated by the short term and dealing with urgencies at the expense of strategic planning. EU foreign policy is not immune to this risk. This begs the question of the EU’s ability to articulate strategic thinking and longer-term policy action in times of great uncertainty as caused by the Covid-19. Put simply, strategic planning and strategic foresight are disciplines that aim at identifying possible futures, mapping options and charting possible responses and strategic goals and as such support informed and sound policy-making. On that account, the EU has developed over time strategic policy frameworks for its foreign policy, such as the European Security Strategy in 2003 and the Global Strategy in 2016, that have served the Union rather well in navigating the global environment. The Covid-19 has come at a defining moment. Fraught with geopolitical stakes and global challenges, the EU’s ability to act strategically is being stress-tested on an unprecedented scale. Strengthening European strategic autonomy has emerged from policy planning work as the compass that can guide EU action through this period of geopolitical and global reshuffling. At the same time strengthening the Union’s strategic policy planning function and means has become a necessity to secure the effectiveness of external action. Foreign policy, Strategic planning, Climate changes, Covid-19, Strategic autonomy
11
Larik, Joris. "The EUs Global Strategy, Brexit and America First." European Foreign Affairs Review 23, Issue 3 (2018): 343–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/eerr2018030.
Full textAbstract:
In less unusual times, the European Union’s Global Strategy for Foreign and Security Policy would have been received as merely the latest iteration of the main tenets and ambitions of EU external action – this time with an enhanced dose of pragmatism to respond to a more challenging international environment. However, with ‘Brexit’ looming large and one and a half years into the Trump Presidency in the United States, the Global Strategy has acquired a new level of significance. This article argues that while meant to express a largely uncontroversial ‘Western’ consensus, it now needs to be re-contextualized as a distinctive vision in the face of trends of antiglobalism and Euroscepticism. This concerns in particular the Strategy’s emphasis on rules-based global governance. Challenged by both President Trump’s ‘America First’ policy and the British government’s course for a ‘hard Brexit’, the Global Strategy now represents a contested blueprint and rallying point for a continued pursuit of a liberal world order based on the rule of law.
12
Wessel, Ramses A., and Steven Blockmans. "The EEAS at Ten: Reason for a Celebration?" European Foreign Affairs Review 26, Issue 1 (2021): 5–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/eerr2021002.
Full textAbstract:
The tenth anniversary of the creation of the European External Action Service provides an opportune moment to take stock of the role which the Service has played in forging a more coherent, visible and effective EU foreign and security policy. At the same time, it offers a chance to field ideas on how the Union’s foreign policy actors might chart a course to guide the European External Action Service (EEAS) to what could be tumultuous teenage years. This article contextualizes the contributions to this first European Foreign Affairs Review (EFAR) Issue of 2021, which is devoted entirely to an assessment of where the EEAS’ strengths and opportunities lie, and which weaknesses need to be addressed to fit the Service for future purpose. European External Action Service, Common Foreign and Security Policy, esprit de corps, European Commission, Foreign Affairs Council, representation, EU Global Strategy
13
Tomat, Stefano. "EU Foreign Policy Coherence in Times of Crises: The Integrated Approach." European Foreign Affairs Review 26, Issue 1 (2021): 149–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/eerr2021012.
Full textAbstract:
With the number of multi-facetted crises on the rise, with an international governance system deteriorating, how is the EU performing in putting its acts together to respond to these challenging times? In building up its foreign policy over the last two decades, the European Union has gone a long way from seeking ‘coherence’ between Members States to an ‘integrated approach to conflicts and crises’ embedded into the 2016 Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy. Whilst still at an infant stage, the ‘integrated approach’ has led to institutional changes within the European External Action Service (EEAS), in particular the creation of a dedicated Integrated Approach for Security and Peace Directorate. Its aims for a given crisis are promoting a comprehensive political and strategic plan shared by theEUand itsMember States, acting in a unified manner and leading to synchronized actions. To be successful, including in the Union’s neighbourhood, the integrated approach will need to be based on strong, clear and common EU foreign affairs objectives aiming at securing sustainable peace. EU Integrated Approach, EEAS, PSC, ISP, Central African Republic, PESCO, European Peace Facility, Coordinated Maritime Presences
14
Poshedin, Oleh. "THE COMMON FOREIGN AND SECURITY POLICY OF THE EUROPEAN UNION IN THE CONTEXT OF UKRAINE’S EU MEMBERSHIP PROSPECTS." European Historical Studies, no. 26 (2023): 18–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/2524-048x.2023.26.2.
Full textAbstract:
The article examines Ukraine’s Answers to the EU Questionnaire on the Application for Membership in the Chapter Foreign Security and Defense Policy and the European Commission’s Opinion on Ukraine’s application for membership in the European Union. It was found that to understand all the obligations arising for Ukraine in the field of the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the EU, knowledge of the documents defining this policy is necessary, in particular the Treaty on European Union, Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy 2016, as well as the Strategic Compass for Security and Defence of 2022. In the context of Russia’s war against Ukraine, sanctions policy is gaining particular importance. In this context, it is underway to update sanctions legislation to bring it closer to EU practices. Additional work is needed on preventing and combatting illicit trafficking in weapons, ammunition, and explosives. The ratification of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and its related instruments remains an outstanding issue. These issues require increased attention because they will be directly considered during negotiations on Ukraine’s membership in the EU. It is proposed to analyze the new Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) projects, which were established in 2023, and primarily take into account the experience of the war that Russia is waging against Ukraine. Joining the PESCO projects will contribute to the interoperability of the Ukrainian defense forces with similar structures of the EU member states and increase the defense capability of Ukraine. It is proposed to increase the awareness of the citizens of Ukraine regarding the goals and tasks of the European Union in the foreign policy arena, in particular by expanding the study of the problems of the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the EU in higher education institutions of Ukraine.
15
Tolstov, Serhii. "The EU’s Foreign Policy Towards African Countries." European Historical Studies, no. 7 (2017): 17–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/2524-048x.2017.07.17-44.
Full textAbstract:
The article presents a review of the EU policy towards the African states in the early 21st century. It covers the main aspects and priorities of the EU’s relations with the countries of the region, including enhanced political dialogue, development assistance, migration control, negotiations on the new type of economic agreements. The goals and principles of the EU-AU cooperation were outlined in the Joint Strategy signed in Lisbon in December 2007. The strategic partnership relations envisage the EU’s assistance to the African states aimed at the development, security cooperation, the prevention and settlement of conflicts, migration management, promotion of trans-regional projects etc. The joint EU-AU documents strengthen upon bilateral cooperation in addressing global issues, distributing burdens, mutual accountability, solidarity and mutual trust, equality and justice, respect for international law and agreements, gender equality and non-discrimination. However, the actual results of interaction in the priority areas such as peace and security, democracy, good governance and human rights, sustainable and inclusive development, economic growth, human development and continental integration remain rather low. The essential factor influencing the EU’s policy in Africa is the conflict of interests of the fluent intra-regional actors. The contradictions between the EU, China and the U.S. intensify the economic competition and political rivalry. The gradual reduction of the EU’s share in trade with Africa is marked on the background of the growing economic presence of China and expanding trade of the African states with Asia.
16
Ferreira-Pereira, Laura C. "As presidências portuguesas do Conselho da União Europeia: promovendo a "Europa global" em busca de relevância internacional." Relações Internacionais, no. 68 (December 2020): 39–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.23906/ri2020.68a04.
Full textAbstract:
This article examines the legacy of the three Portuguese Presidencies of the Council of the European Union (1992, 2000 and 2007) in the framework of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). It places particular emphasis on the efforts undertaken by the national authorities to promote the EU’s global actorness as part of a strategy aimed at enhancing the country’s European credentials and international relevance. The study confirms the incremental prioritization of the CFSP/ESDP-related issues in the Portuguese EU presidencies’ agendas while concluding that, as a result of such tendency, one has witnessed the growing projection of Portugal’s vision of the European foreign policy.
17
SHMONOVA , ULJANA, and NADEZHDA BOGDANOVA. "THE GLOBAL STRATEGY OF THE EUROPEAN UNION IN FOREIGN AND SECURITY POLICY FOR THE PERIOD 2000-2010 YEARS." Sociopolitical Sciences 12, no. 5 (2022): 104–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.33693/2223-0092-2022-12-5-104-110.
Full textAbstract:
The purpose of the research. This article analyzes the key directions of the EU’s global strategy in foreign and security policy as the most important and developing aspects of the EU’s international cooperation at the beginning of the XXI century. The authors attempt to study the most significant documents and trends in the framework of the formation of foreign policy in the field of security and defense of the European Union, which to a large extent had a decisive impact on the activities and main priorities of the development of the European Union in the following years. The article focuses on the key methods and methods of implementing the EU’s global external strategy, its effectiveness and significance in ensuring regional security and stability in the first decade of the XXI century. Conclusions. The described trends and contradictions within the EU within the framework of the designated topic point to the still undefined ways and tools to ensure a coherent security policy of the 2010s, which could satisfy the interests and correspond to the individual priorities of each state within the European Community.
18
Khylko, Olena. "Resilience-building in grey security zone countries." InterConf, no. 34(159) (June 20, 2023): 37–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.51582/interconf.19-20.06.2023.004.
Full textAbstract:
EU Global Strategy of 2016 assesses vulnerabilities and fragility in the eastern and southern neighbourhoods as a threat to the security of the Union and addresses them with a relatively new concept of resilience building. Given undertheorizing of the concept as well as the EU’s intention to employ the resilience as a tool of its foreign and security policy to its neighbourhoods, the author aims to show the particularities of the Eastern and Central European states’ approach to resilience. This could provide some corrections to the EU tailored-made to each region policies and measuring of resilience building to ensure peaceful transformations in its eastern borderlands.
19
Devine, Karen. "Neutrality and the development of the European Union’s common security and defence policy." Cooperation and Conflict 46, no. 3 (2011): 334–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0010836711416958.
Full textAbstract:
This article examines the content of concepts of neutrality articulated in elite and public discourses in the context of the development of the European Union’s (EU) Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). In parallel with security and defence policy developments in successive EU treaties, many argue that the meaning of neutrality has been re-conceptualized by elites in EU ‘neutral’ member states (specifically, Austria, Finland, Ireland and Sweden) to the point of irrelevance and inevitable demise. Others argue that the concept of ‘military’ neutrality, as it is termed by elites in Ireland, or ‘military non-alignment’, as it is termed by elites in Austria, Sweden and Finland, meaning non-membership of military alliances, is compatible with the CSDP in the Lisbon Treaty. An investigation of these paradoxical discursive claims as to the status of neutrality yields findings of a divergence in public ‘active’ and elite ‘military’ concepts of neutrality that embodies competing foreign policy agendas. These competing, value-laden, concepts reflect tensions between, on the one hand, the cultural influences of a domestic constituency holding strong national identities and role-conceptions informed by a postcolonial or anti-imperialist legacy and, on the other hand, elite socialization influences of ‘global actor’ and common defence-supported identity ambitions encountered at the EU level that can induce discursively subtle yet materially significant shifts in neutral state foreign policy. The article concludes with an analysis of the compatibility of both ‘military’ neutrality and the ‘active’ concept of neutrality with the CSDP in the Lisbon Treaty and draws conclusions on the future role of neutrality both inside and outside the EU framework.
20
Kovacevic, Maja. "Limits of the EU’s transformative power and the Western Balkans." Medjunarodni problemi 71, no. 1 (2019): 26–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/medjp1901026k.
Full textAbstract:
The European Union (EU) is a unique player in the Western Balkans, where it has employed a wide array of foreign policy instruments since the 1990s such as diplomacy, trade, financial assistance, civilian missions, military missions, and enlargement, which is the EU?s most successful foreign policy tool. The region is an inspiring case for studying the EU?s transformative power. The undeniable success of the EU?s Enlargement Policy in influencing transitions of Central and Eastern Europe countries has inspired research of the Europeanization, or the EU?s transformative power in relation to candidate countries, and its impact on their political and economic reforms during the accession process. Since then, the EU?s global transformative power has been in crisis. The European Neighbourhood Policy was reviewed in 2015, aiming not any more towards the transformation of neighbouring states, but rather at fostering their resilience. Similarly, the 2016 Global Strategy for the European Union?s Foreign and Security Policy set the principled pragmatism as a guideline. Moreover, the EU?s transformative power towards member states is questioned after two initiatives to trigger Article 7 TEU procedures against Poland and Hungary. What about the Europeanization of the Western Balkans? Despite the fact that the EU has been the main driver of change, the Europeanization of this post-conflict region has been slow. According to Freedom House, after substantial progress from 2004 to 2010, the Western Balkans has declined six years in a row, and its average Democracy Score in 2016 is the same as it was in 2004. With the exception of Albania, the scores of all countries are declining, not improving. The EU?s security-democratisation dilemma strongly affects its transformative power in the Western Balkans. By prioritising effective government rather than democratic governance, the EU has helped stabilise non-democratic and corrupt regimes rather than transforming them, legitimising Balkan "stabilitocrats".
21
Tereszkiewicz, Filip. "Globalna strategia Unii Europejskiej: refleksja konstruktywistyczna." Politeja 15, no. 55 (2019): 129–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.12797/politeja.15.2018.55.07.
Full textAbstract:
European Union Global Strategy: a Constructivist ReflectionThis paper examines the potential of a constructivist approach in analysing the European Union’s security strategy area. It focuses on the new EU Global Strategy (EUGS), which was adopted by the Council at the end of June 2016. First, the methodology is explained, followed by discussing the consequence of using the document’s language for EU identity. The paper then focuses on the new title of the strategy that shows a new approach to security strategies within the European External Action Service’s staff. The consequences of building a narrative about the “threatened” but also “needed” and “influential” European Union are underlined here. Furthermore, the new role of the EU in the international scene is described, focusing on the shift from the EU as a civilian power to the EU as a normal power, with an emphasis on the importance of the preservation of the EU as a normative power. The conclusions from using a constructivist approach to examine the EUGS are then presented, which show that mechanisms of the logics of appropriateness, consequence, and persuasion are observed within the document. Moreover, the language of the EUGS could have an influence on EU identity and role on the global stage. The constructivist approach proves that the EU external actions are continuously under construction, and the EUGS is the next step in achieving a more coherent and effective European foreign and security policy.
22
Shcherbak, Igor. "Strategic Autonomy of the EU and Problems of Formation of the Foreign Policy Agenda in the Time of the Pandemic." Contemporary Europe 99, no. 6 (2020): 29–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.15211/soveurope620202940.
Full textAbstract:
The article explores the evolution of the EU Strategic Autonomy concept in the context of COVID-19 and the search by the EU for its global role in the modern system of changing international relations. The author underlines that the coronavirus pandemic accelerated transformation of Strategic Autonomy into a complex and flexible instrument, which covers practically all the EU foreign and internal policy priorities, starting from overcoming negative socio-economic impact of COVID-19 and securing the EU “health sovereignty”, achieving autonomy in development of a new generation of IT technologies and artificial intelligence to effective defence, resolution of ecological and migration issues, modern crisis management in global and regional aspects. It is argued that the Strategic Autonomy is used by the EU as a powerful driver for strengthening political unity and solidarity of the EU, increasing effectiveness of political decision-making process and harmonization of coordination management inside the EU. Special attention is paid to the priorities and goals of the EU foreign policy’s agenda for short-term and long-term perspectives. Some for cast is given concerning the strategic relations of the EU with China, Russia, USA and the UN system. Key aspects of the EU strategy on crisis regulation and international security are also described. The author envisages that in the long-term perspectives the EU continues to deepen strategic partnership with the UN in order to increase its influence on the UN system's institutional reforms in the spheres of international security, prevention of conflicts, economic resilience, development of democracy and human rights, protection of environment. The article also outlines the issue of the EU’s international partner selection in light of the Strategic Autonomy and the volatile conditions of the modern system of international relations and rising competition for global influence among key world powers.
23
Baumann, Florian. "Europe’s Way to Energy Security: The Outer Dimension of Energy Security: From Power Politics to Energy Governance." European Foreign Affairs Review 15, Issue 1 (2010): 77–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/eerr2010005.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract. European integration with its common markets for coal and nuclear fuels and, nowadays, ambitions of a comprehensive energy policy makes Europe one of the most interesting regions with regard to energy security. However, not only the European Union (EU) but also the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) are or will be relevant actors in the global struggle for affordable, sustainable, and sufficient supplies of energy. All three have developed more or less distinctive instruments to secure their members access to energy. Nevertheless, there are three problems that prohibit the Europeans from being important players in global energy politics. First, the EU Member States do not have sufficient indigenous reserves of energy and thus are dependent on foreign suppliers. Second, Europe and its partners lack, as of yet, a comprehensive strategy for dealing with the external aspects of energy politics, including supply security as well as the political and economic challenges of import dependency and energy cut-offs. Third, only if inner-EU coherence can be established – and later on, regional and global energy governance – will the problem of energy security be resolvable. Finally, a coherent, internal EU position will be necessary to establish regional and global energy governance – the key to stabilizing future energy relations.
24
Sharikov, Pavel. "THE ROLE OF THE EU IN THE US NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY." Scientific and Analytical Herald of IE RAS 30, no. 6 (2022): 15–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.15211/vestnikieran620221523.
Full textAbstract:
The article addresses the priorities of US relations with European Union. The victory of Joseph Biden and Democratic Party on the elections of 2020 signified quite radical twist in US foreign policy. The election slogan «America is back» which won the White House for the Democratic Party and Congress, means restoration of transatlantic relationship, damaged by the previous administration. Growing cooperation between the U.S. and E.U. is defined by a long term trend towards global competitiveness between Western democracies led by the United States against Asian autocracies headed by China. Besides, another impetus towards transatlantic relations was given by Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine. The institutions of bilateral relations established by the Biden and Obama administration were used for coordinating the measures to support Ukraine, adopt new sanctions against Russia and general cooperation tracks between Western countries
25
Greenstock, Jeremy. "Reorienting Foreign Policy." National Institute Economic Review 250 (November 2019): R34—R39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002795011925000115.
Full textAbstract:
Executive SummaryAfter Brexit, the UK must show that it has a voice. It will need to re-earn international respect, and in particular establish the concept of a ‘global Britain’ on the basis of performance, not rhetoric. That means re-establishing a strong network of relationships around the world in support of its security and economic health, but also continuing to play a leading role in support of the international rules-based order. For example, it should make the most of its continuing status as a Permanent Member of the UN Security Council to act as a problem-solver and system-enhancer in the collective interest.An early, first-order priority will be establishing a new, mutually beneficial partnership with the European Union, which continues to form our economic and political neighbourhood. Reconstructing a modern relationship with the United States is not secondary to that, but cannot substitute for it and must be undertaken in recognition of the differing interests and instincts of the two sides. A further challenge is building the right relationship with China based on mutual interest in trade, peace, and international respect and on confronting expansionist or opportunistic practices. With Russia, too, it is possible to design a predictable set of behaviours on either side, and with both countries good communication channels will need to be maintained.Brexit gives the UK the scope to construct a more deliberate diplomatic approach to the rest of the English-speaking world than was explicitly possible as an EU member – notably in working with Canada, Australia and New Zealand to promote the international rules-based order. But this should be complemented by more effective outreach to non-English-speaking countries, notably in support of trade and investment opportunities with emerging nations. But with them as with all the UK's interlocutors, the need to earn its place, and to show that it realises that, will be vital.In defence and security, the UK will continue in its commitment to the strength of NATO as its essential alliance under US leadership, while also liaising carefully with EU Member States as they seek to improve their own capacities to contribute to European security. But it cannot simply rely on old institutional structures. It needs to lead, for example by playing a stronger role in the control of non-military forms of aggression, such as cyber warfare, economic sanctions, rivalry in space, and commercial espionage.A strategy for realising the UK's interests in the international arena will require the Prime Minister's constant attention, but also a specific mandate for a very senior minister to supervise the interlinked policy areas of foreign affairs, international development, and international trade within a single government department.
26
Cherkashina, T. N. "The Conceptual Basis of British Post-Brexit Foreign Policy: the Idea of “Global Britain”." Herald of Omsk University. Series: Historical studies 9, no. 1 (33) (2022): 160–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.24147/2312-1300.2022.9(1).160-165.
Full textAbstract:
This article is devoted to the problem of the formation of the conceptual framework of Great Britain's foreign policy after leaving the EU, the main essence of which boils down to the idea of “Global Britain”. Its purpose is to trace the transformation of this idea, which substantiates the United Kingdom's claim to be a global player in the modern world from the moment it appeared in the country's political discourse shortly before Brexit to the conceptualization of the country's foreign policy after leaving the EU. It is stated that the problem of determining further priorities of the foreign policy of the United Kingdom arises after the unexpected results of the 2016 referendum on Britain's membership in the European Union. Brexit and the outbreak of the coronavirus crisis in 2020 accelerated the development of the country's foreign policy strategy. There has been a major overhaul of the country's strategy since the end of the Cold War, conceptualized on March 16, 2021 with the emergence of the government document “Global Britain in an Age of Competition: A Comprehensive Security, Defense, Development and Foreign Policy Review”. This concept is based on the idea of “Global Britain” as a new superpower, which has all the prerequisites to secure its status as a global player in the world arena. It is noted that the positioning of Great Britain as a global player on the world stage in government documents and speeches of conservatives could be found even before Brexit. The very appearance of the term is not the merit of the Conservative Party. Thus, G. Brown, who was a member of T. Blair's Labor government, back in 2005, in his speech, mentioned the special role of his country in European unification. The concept of “Global Britain” was further developed on the eve of the country's withdrawal from the European family, when the Tories began to develop a conceptual basis for a new foreign policy course for the United Kingdom. They proposed this concept as an alternative to EU membership, focusing on the geopolitical and geo-economic prospects that opened up for the UK after the “divorce” from the EU. Based on the analysis of the strategic documents of the United Kingdom after Brexit, it is shown how the idea of “Global Britain” from part of the political discourse of the government of the Conservative Party appears as a concept. The apogee in its development is the publication of a strategic document on March 16, 2021. Its analysis allows us to determine the main directions of British foreign policy after leaving the EU based on the idea of “Global Britain”. Among the main directions, it is worth noting the turn towards engineering and the preservation of a close alliance with the United States. It is concluded that the UK has the potential to realize the ambitions of a global player: the country is a nuclear power, a permanent member of the UN Security Council, a member of the G7, G20, the world's leading economy, has the largest defense budget.
27
Mikhaylenko. "The European Union in Search of a New Global Strategy: Critical Analytics." Contemporary Europe 105, no. 5 (2021): 172–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.15211/soveurope52021172181.
Full textAbstract:
With the use of the analytical works of the prominent Belgian researcher Sven Biscop, the article examines the main topics of discussion regarding changes in the global strategy of the European Union. EU foreign policy has been associated with the concept of “normative power”, which is seen as a kind of European “soft power”. Due to the influence of the global governance crisis, the COVID pandemic, the shift of USA geopolitical interests from Europe to Asia, China's great-power policy, Russia's geopolitical ambitions and other challenges, EU researchers and politicians are raising questions aimed at changing the strategic culture in order to ensure the primacy of EU vital interests. S. Biscop believes that while developing a new global strategy, it is necessary to turn to the traditions of geopolitics to be ready to protect interests and democratic values with the use of “hard power” both internally and externally. Strategic autonomy is a promising task for the further building of the EU. Under the instruction of the European Commission, the work has begun on the creation of a new political and strategic document “Strategic Compass”, its goals include defining the EU targets in the field of security, defense, and identification of threats. The discussion of a new global strategy outlines a trajectory for the transformation of the European Union into a global “Third Pole”. Sven Biscop's recommendations show that shaping a new global strategy will require a revision of the concept of "normative power" and turning closer to geopolitical realism.
28
Kyrydon, Alla, and Serhiy Troyan. "Strategic Compass of the EU political and Security Sphere." European Historical Studies, no. 22 (2022): 6–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/2524-048x.2022.22.1.
Full textAbstract:
The dynamics of international processes show the growth of the security factor, and hence the importance of regional security systems and the interdependence of regional and global organizations of collective security and defense. The creation and development of the Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP) of the European Union, aimed at achieving the common strategic goals of the Member States in the field of security cooperation, has undergone a path of dynamic and contradictory transformations, reconciling the interests of the Member States with the supranational institutional nature of the EU and its strategic goal. The common security and defense policy is a conceptual component and the core of the EU’s common foreign and security policy. On March 21, 2022, at a meeting in Brussels, the foreign and defense ministers of the 27 EU member states approved a decision to adopt the first-ever joint EU security and defense strategy – the Strategic Security and Defense Compass for the European Union, which protects its citizens. values and interests and promotes international peace and security ”(hereinafter referred to as the Strategic Compass). Structurally, the Strategic Compass is divided into a summary, an introduction, five blocks (modern world, actions, security, investment, partnership), conclusions. The document notes that humanity is living in an era of strategic competition and complex threats to international security, both in the form of hybrid challenges and acts of direct aggression. Particular emphasis is placed on the return of the war in Europe with Russia’s unjustified and unprovoked aggression against Ukraine. The EU is committed to protecting the European security order, sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of states within internationally recognized borders. Ukraine’s support in resisting Russia’s military aggression is aimed at restoring peace in Europe. In the long run, the Strategic Compass can be one of the important impulses to increase the level and content of cooperation between the European Community and Ukraine as a candidate country for EU membership. At the same time, a stronger and more effective EU as a powerful international player in security and defense will help strengthen global and transatlantic security.
29
Guseinov, K. "Features of Collective Securitization in the European Union (The example of the EU Common Security and Defence Policy dynamics)." World Economy and International Relations 69, no. 2 (2025): 25–33. https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2025-69-2-25-33.
Full textAbstract:
The European Union Common Security and Defence Policy (EU CSDP) is currently undergoing the institutional transformation. The CSDP is the crucial component of the EU’s organizational structure, designed for the promotion of European integration in the spheres of security and defence. The EU security and defence is often regarded as an inalienable part of NATO security and defence. However, the current trends, such as the evolving of the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), implementation of the Strategic Compass, or the plan for achieving strategic autonomy, promote the position of the European Union as one of hard power centers on the international stage. The shift from normative to military power in the EU’s foreign policy signifies a completely new era in the regional security complex. The article explores the dynamic of the CSDP marked by the adoption of “Shared Vision, Common Action: A Stronger Europe” – the global strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy, – and of the Strategic Compass for Security and Defence. The author examines the current trends in the EU CSDP, such as the creation and evolution of the Military Planning and Conduct Capability (MPCC) and a possibility of its turn into a fully operated EU military headquarter, the development of the PESCO as a contribution to the European military-industrial complex, and the recent adoption of the Civilian CSDP Compact. The trends are regarded through the methodology of “collective securitization”. The author provides the analysis of its applicability for the examination of the CSDP, highlighting the key steps and factors influencing the process, such as effective security governance and common identity in the sphere of security and defence.
30
Prokhorenko, I. L. "The strategy of Spain in the United Nations." Cuadernos Iberoamericanos, no. 2 (January 9, 2021): 9–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.46272/2409-3416-2020-2-9-18.
Full textAbstract:
The article explores potential, resources and strategy of Spain in the United Nations from the moment when the resolution of the socalled Spanish question was adopted and Spain joined this influential intergovernmental international organization in 1955 to the present date. The author focuses on key problems which directly deal with national interests of Spain, including: a dispute with the United Kingdom about the ownership of Gibraltar, perennial problem of the Western (Spanish) Sahara conflict management, the initiative and the UN programme Alliance of Civilizations, co-sponsored by Spain, Kosovo issue and the danger of internationalization of the political and institutional conflict in Catalonia, efforts by the Spanish central government to achieve sustainable development goals. By analyzing foreign policy resources of Spain, initiatives and activities of the country in the United Nations and its various specialized agencies over the years using the UN information materials, the author suggests that successful democratic transition and the country’s accession to the European Economic Community in 1986 strengthened the profile of Spain in the United Nations. However, the political and institutional transformations in the European Union, creation of political union of the Member-States and establishment and development of the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy mean that Spain may carry out its foreign policy in a ‘truncated’ form, taking into account the EU position as a special strategic partner of the UN and its expanded Observer status. The economic and foreign policy potential of this country weakening its competitive advantages under the influence of negative consequences of the global financial and economic crisis do not raise an issue about permanent membership of Spain in the UN Security Council. However, the ‘soft power’ resources based on its postimperial identity allow for a fairly high appreciation of possibilities of Spain with regard to monitoring, prevention and management of conflicts and crisis situations in developing countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America, providing international assistance for development and facilitating intercultural dialogue of the Western and non-Western civilazations.
31
Prokhorenko, I. L. "The strategy of Spain in the United Nations." Cuadernos Iberoamericanos 8, no. 2 (2021): 9–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.46272/2409-3416-2020-8-2-9-18.
Full textAbstract:
The article explores potential, resources and strategy of Spain in the United Nations from the moment when the resolution of the socalled Spanish question was adopted and Spain joined this influential intergovernmental international organization in 1955 to the present date. The author focuses on key problems which directly deal with national interests of Spain, including: a dispute with the United Kingdom about the ownership of Gibraltar, perennial problem of the Western (Spanish) Sahara conflict management, the initiative and the UN programme Alliance of Civilizations, co-sponsored by Spain, Kosovo issue and the danger of internationalization of the political and institutional conflict in Catalonia, efforts by the Spanish central government to achieve sustainable development goals. By analyzing foreign policy resources of Spain, initiatives and activities of the country in the United Nations and its various specialized agencies over the years using the UN information materials, the author suggests that successful democratic transition and the country’s accession to the European Economic Community in 1986 strengthened the profile of Spain in the United Nations. However, the political and institutional transformations in the European Union, creation of political union of the Member-States and establishment and development of the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy mean that Spain may carry out its foreign policy in a ‘truncated’ form, taking into account the EU position as a special strategic partner of the UN and its expanded Observer status. The economic and foreign policy potential of this country weakening its competitive advantages under the influence of negative consequences of the global financial and economic crisis do not raise an issue about permanent membership of Spain in the UN Security Council. However, the ‘soft power’ resources based on its postimperial identity allow for a fairly high appreciation of possibilities of Spain with regard to monitoring, prevention and management of conflicts and crisis situations in developing countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America, providing international assistance for development and facilitating intercultural dialogue of the Western and non-Western civilazations.
32
Prokhorenko, I. L. "The strategy of Spain in the United Nations." Cuadernos Iberoamericanos, no. 2 (January 9, 2021): 9–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.46272/2409-3416-2020-2-9-18.
Full textAbstract:
The article explores potential, resources and strategy of Spain in the United Nations from the moment when the resolution of the socalled Spanish question was adopted and Spain joined this influential intergovernmental international organization in 1955 to the present date. The author focuses on key problems which directly deal with national interests of Spain, including: a dispute with the United Kingdom about the ownership of Gibraltar, perennial problem of the Western (Spanish) Sahara conflict management, the initiative and the UN programme Alliance of Civilizations, co-sponsored by Spain, Kosovo issue and the danger of internationalization of the political and institutional conflict in Catalonia, efforts by the Spanish central government to achieve sustainable development goals. By analyzing foreign policy resources of Spain, initiatives and activities of the country in the United Nations and its various specialized agencies over the years using the UN information materials, the author suggests that successful democratic transition and the country’s accession to the European Economic Community in 1986 strengthened the profile of Spain in the United Nations. However, the political and institutional transformations in the European Union, creation of political union of the Member-States and establishment and development of the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy mean that Spain may carry out its foreign policy in a ‘truncated’ form, taking into account the EU position as a special strategic partner of the UN and its expanded Observer status. The economic and foreign policy potential of this country weakening its competitive advantages under the influence of negative consequences of the global financial and economic crisis do not raise an issue about permanent membership of Spain in the UN Security Council. However, the ‘soft power’ resources based on its postimperial identity allow for a fairly high appreciation of possibilities of Spain with regard to monitoring, prevention and management of conflicts and crisis situations in developing countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America, providing international assistance for development and facilitating intercultural dialogue of the Western and non-Western civilazations.
33
Strezhneva, M. "Beyond Brexit: on the Occasion of Reinvention of Britain’s Global Role." World Economy and International Relations 65, no. 10 (2021): 64–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2021-65-10-64-72.
Full textAbstract:
In the middle of March, 2021, the UK prime minister presented to Parliament the integrated review of security, defence, development and foreign policy of Britain. The vision it pictures amounts to the final renunciation of the famous Churchill’s three circles doctrine. To better explain this thoroughgoing paradigmatic change, it might be useful to consider the meanings assigned of it by those immediately involved. In this article, it is argued that Brexit was in no small part the result of the UK being unable to turn round the development of the regional integration process on the European continent in directions, corresponding to British preference. With the withdrawal of the country from the EU having been accomplished, the reappraisal of its global role became an existential problem for London. In particular, conspicuous divergence between the foreign policy courses of Britain and the EU appears unavoidable in the observable future. Paradoxical, seemingly irrational nature of this experience, inter alia, prompts its interpretivist analytical treatment. Thus, in the article, rationale and reflection delivered by British key politicians and foreign policy experts, as concerns the ideas of “Global Britain”, “Anglosphere” and “Indo-Pacific tilt”, are contemplated not as direct assertions of intent, but as important reference points for timely modification of national foreign policy strategy. Talking about “Anglosphere” comes across like searching for a substitution to the European Union to serve as a framework for British foreign policy, while the “Indo-Pacific tilt” narrative comes laden with hopes for making Brexit a true story of success. The Conservative government perceives the country as a liberal and cosmopolitan middleranking power with exceptional foreign policy potential, soaring to new global heights amidst multilateral networks and bilateral partnerships it is precast to further cultivate.
34
Mironova, Margarita. "THE EU’S APPROACH TO CONFLICT RESOLUTION: IMPLICATIONS FOR EASTERN PARTNERSHIP COUNTRIES." European Historical Studies, no. 20 (2021): 16–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/2524-048x.2021.20.2.
Full textAbstract:
The article deals with examining the EU main approaches on crisis management and conflict prevention on the example of the Eastern Partnership countries, internal and external factors that affect implementation of the EU activities in Eastern Europe and South Caucasus, implications for the EU and the region. The EU has a unique experience of activities in all crisis phases: early warning, mediation, deployment of EU missions and operations in conflict areas, post-conflict peacebuilding (stabilisation, reconstruction and reconciliation). The EU’s comprehensive and integrated approach towards crisis management includes a package of mixed political-military measures with focus on civilian component of the Common Foreign and Security Policy. The strategic autonomy outlined as the guideline in the EU Global Strategy 2016 is an impetus for the EU more active and distinct role as a security actor, for enhancing its institutional and operational capabilities in the area of crisis regulation. Though there is a lack of EU capacity as a security provider in case of protracted conflicts in Eastern partner countries. The EU has sought to avoid direct involvement in conflict settlement: there aren’t any efficient mechanisms of it within the European Neighborhood Policy and Eastern Partnership initiative. The determining factors of the EU’s approach to conflict resolution in Easter Europe are: absence of direct military threats and less challenges comparing to Southern and Eastern Mediterranean region; lack of political will and unity, multi-vector member-states’ policy; external influence of other actors, mainly Russia, unwillingness of the EU member-states to be engaged in geopolitical tensions with it. The regional security deficit requires more active and efficient EU engagement as a security provider in settling the protracted conflicts. The relevant measures should be: establishment of security compact within the Eastern Partnership initiative, deployment of additional missions in the region, coordination of activities with the OSCE, US and NATO.
35
Baciu, Cornelia-Adriana, and Alexandra M. Friede. "The EU’s CFSP/CSDP in 2030: Towards an alternative vision of power?" New Perspectives 28, no. 3 (2020): 398–412. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2336825x20935245.
Full textAbstract:
This article argues that the lack of an effective, coherent and progressive EU grand strategy that is able to streamline efforts and produce collective goods, both at home and in the world, is culpable for the EU’s gradual decline until 2030. The lack of European-wide strategic thinking creates the conditions for an existential crisis of the EU. The EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy/Common Security and Defence Policy is the most striking example: it fails to manage the EU27 expectations, build up sufficient military and civilian capabilities, deliver tangible results and, consequently, lacks credibility. This has repercussions for the EU’s level of ambition. Until 2030, more and more states drop out of EU initiatives and search for alternative fora to make their voices heard in international politics. The powerlessness of the EU also weakens its most important allies: the United States and NATO. This creates a power vacuum to be filled by more ambitious players, such as China or Russia, which seek to diffuse their view of global (dis)order. To avoid this future, we argue that the EU should (1) embrace an alternative vision of power, (2) strengthen the legitimacy of its internal and external policymaking and (3) engage strategically in global affairs on the basis of a firm commitment to NATO-EU cooperation.
36
Okhoshin, Oleg. "Transformation of British Policy in the Middle East." Scientific and Analytical Herald of IE RAS, no. 18 (December 1, 2020): 45–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.15211/vestnikieran620204551.
Full textAbstract:
The Middle East region is of particular importance to the United Kingdom, because control over it ensures international and energy security, reduces the threat of a migration crisis and meets the country’s geopolitical objectives, which are reflected in the concept of «Global Britain». B. Johnson’s government in the Middle East policy faced the problems of peaceful settlement of ethno-confessional contradictions and the socio-economic consequences of the «Arab Spring» and the terrorist activities of ISIS. Under these conditions, British diplomacy has developed a strategy that includes maneuvering between the foreign policy interests of the US and the EU in the Middle East and adapting to the transformation of regional socio-political systems
37
Siriski, Sofija. "European Union and NATO: Transforming the transatlantic partnership." Medjunarodni problemi 55, no. 2 (2003): 186–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/medjp0302186s.
Full textAbstract:
Constructive and cooperative European Union and NATO relations are very important for global stability. But today transatlantic relation are in crisis and there is some evidence that the growing number of the disputes, including over Iraq, the Israel-Palestine conflict, dealing with "rogue states" and terrorism, are having a major impact on European foreign and security policy, and even the process of European integration. NATO adapted well after the end of the Cold War but since September 11th, however, NATO has faced something of an existential crisis. The US chose to fight the Afghan and Iraq war largely on its own, alongside European allies. Many American are stressing that NATO can only remain relevant if it is prepared and able to tackle pressing international terrorism and the spread of weapons of mass destruction. To safeguard NATO's future role the US has proposed that the European allies should help to develop a Rapid Response Force inside NATO. It wants the EU to provide troops that would be able to operate alongside America's forces. European, meanwhile, have their own set of concerns. The EU has no concept of how to deal with the world's only superpower. Too often there is a preference for bilateral as opposed to EU channels, and because of that the EU urgently needs a security strategy. The lack of a coherent EU foreign policy also inhibits the ability of the EU and if the Europeans can build a more coherent foreign policy, the US will have a greater interest in listening to what they say. EU leaders also need to assess the suitability of the EU's military doctrine and institutions for the challenges it faces. The transformation of transatlantic co-operation requires changes on both sides. Differences between the US and Europe exist but they should not be exaggerated. What is needed is to broaden the transatlantic dialogue to include the critical security challenges for both sides.
38
Zemzyulina, Natalia, and Viktoriia Kirieieva. "European Security and Defense Policy: Strategic Aspects of Ukraine's Cooperation with the EU." International Relations: Theory and Practical Aspects, no. 13 (June 26, 2024): 19–33. https://doi.org/10.31866/2616-745X.13.2024.306853.
Full textAbstract:
The main objective of the study is to analyze the experience of the countries of the European Union in the implementation of defense and strategic management and the mechanisms of Ukraine’s integration into the European military system, which is extremely relevant at the current stage of the European integration of our country. The methodological tools of the research are the following ones: a systematic approach, which made it possible to gain a deeper understanding of the essence of interstate military communication; an interactional approach, which helped to analyze the interaction of the countries of the region through the prism of interests and expectations of interested structures. A normative-value method contributed to the understanding of the positive perception of the EU residents of military integration, and the formation of political values, as well as a structural-functional method showed the tools of informational support of European integration processes in the field of defense, as a single security system in the region. The methodological basis of the research formed works of domestic and foreign experts on the security situation in Europe, official EU documents, websites, and analytical notes of experts. The article examines the peculiarities of building and functioning of the regional security complex that has developed in Europe. The basis of this complex is strategic defense management. Particular attention is paid to the features of the internal self-organization of this security space, as well as to the factors of environmental influence on the dynamics of processes that ensure the security of the region. The current security situation, the influence of global players on the security of the region during the period of open military aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine are analyzed. The authors emphasize various aspects of security that are characteristic of the modern global world. These include economic, information, social, and security in its classical military and political sense. The research focuses on the regional security complex as an analytical unit, which is a group of actors in international relations whose processes are so interconnected that they cannot be properly analyzed and studied separately from each other. The mechanisms of Ukraine’s integration into the EU security environment are analyzed. The reasons for the containment of Ukraine’s military integration are pointed out, and theoretical miscalculations of the European security system of the late 20th century are revealed. The analysis of the relations of the European regional security complex with third states and other security complexes allows us to identify the links between the security strategy and the issues of practical policy that dominate today.
39
Kirfi, I.M.I, S. Dauda, M.M Kirfi, et al. "Nigeria's Foreign Policy Pre and Post Independence." ISIR Journal of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences (ISIRJAHSS) 2, no. 1 (2025): 01–05. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14755795.
Full textAbstract:
<em>This paper seeks to present an evaluation of Nigeria’s Foreign Policy pre and post independence Nigeria’s foreign policy refers to the country’s ways of interactions with other nations, international organizations, and global institutions to promote its national interests, security, and economic well-being.Nigeria’s existing foreign policy is guided by the country’s Constitution, national interests, and regional and global realities. The policy aims to promote Nigeria’s sovereignty, unity, and economic well-being. Nigeria’s foreign policy before and after independence has been shaped by its colonial history, regional dynamics, and global shifts. The country has made significant strides in regional leadership, economic development, and international cooperation</em>.<em>Nigeria’s foreign policy before and after independence has undergone significant transformations, reflecting the country’s evolving national interests, regional dynamics, and global shifts. As Africa’s most populous nation and a major oil producer, Nigeria has played a pivotal role in regional and international affairs , with the primary objectives of promoting and protecting national interests, fostering African integration and unity, and enhancing international cooperation. Initially, Nigeria’s foreign policy focused on decolonization, pan-Africanism, and non-alignment (Akinyemi, 1978). The country was a founding member of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) and actively supported liberation movements in Southern Africa (Ogunbadejo, 1976). Nigeria’s return to democracy in 1999 marked a significant shift in foreign policy, emphasizing good governance, human rights, and international cooperation (Obasanjo, 2002). The country’s role in regional peacekeeping, counter-terrorism, and global health initiatives demonstrates its commitment to international norms (Adebajo, 2014).Nigeria’s return to democracy in 1999 marked a significant shift in foreign policy, emphasizing good governance, human rights, and international cooperation. The country’s role in regional peacekeeping, counter-terrorism, and global health initiatives demonstrates its commitment to international norms. Nigeria’s foreign policy faces numerous challenges, including: Security concerns: Boko Haram insurgency and regional security threats, economic dependence ,vulnerability to global economic shocks ,Corruption is reported to be Undermining foreign policy effectiveness and Foreign interference.Nigeria’s foreign policy requires a nuanced understanding of the country’s challenges and opportunities. By adopting a comprehensive approach, addressing corruption, and diversifying the economy, Nigeria can enhance its regional leadership and global influence .Nigeria should device home grown solutions to her legion of challenges rather than implementing the advice of Western oriented global organizations such as the World Bank and the International Monetary fund. The paper concluded that Nigeria’s foreign policy before and after independence has been shaped by its colonial history, regional dynamics, and global shifts. The country has made significant strides in regional leadership, economic development, and international cooperation. However, challenges persist, including corruption, security concerns, and economic dependence on oil. Recommendations were made as follows Developing a clear and coherent foreign policy strategy ,diversify the economy and reduce dependence on oil exports, address corruption andgovernance issues, diversify the economy through investments in agriculture, manufacturing, and technology, enhance diplomatic engagement with global powers (US, China, EU) ,address corruption and governance issues through institutional reforms and increased investment in human capital (education, healthcare).</em>
40
Violakis, Petros. "Putting the Common Security and Defense Policy in the Eastern Mediterranean under Scrutiny: Türkiye’s Conflicting Role." Social Sciences 12, no. 9 (2023): 481. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/socsci12090481.
Full textAbstract:
The end of the Cold War and the emergence of a new global security and economic environment (Defence budgets’ decline, imminent threats from the Gulf War and NATO’s quest for a new identity), provided a window of opportunity for establishing and designing the EU’s security institution. Thus, what was initially considered farfetched after the 1992 Maastricht Treaty, entered a new phase, which included perception transformation, to be gradually incorporated into daily discourse. Hence, the 2003 “European Security Strategy”, the 2010 “Internal Security Strategy”, and later the 2016 “Global Strategy” reflect Member States’ perception of transformation and their belief that the EU needs a Common Security and Defence Strategy approach. Given these documents that indicate determination for notable integration and institutional restructuring, this analysis delves into the impact of Europeanisation concerning the implementation of institutional reforms and the CSDP. More specifically, this analysis probes the constraints of Europeanisation concerning the EU’s real operational dynamics, especially in light of the Eastern Mediterranean and Aegean Sea security challenges. These challenges are examined in relation to Türkiye’s revisionist public diplomacy, public policies, and the militarization of its foreign policy (including ongoing negotiations centered on migratory flows, assertions, and constructed narratives over Greek and Cypriot islands and seas). The situation has become more pronounced following the identification of gas and oil reserves in the area in 2010. This analysis has a two-fold focus: Firstly, to investigate Europeanisation impact on the operational implementation of CSDP (Common Security and Defence Policy) in time of crisis, and secondly, to evaluate the behavior of Türkiye within the Europeanisation framework, as proposed by Radaelli and Violakis.
41
Elena, Ananieva. "The Imperial Ambitions of a “Middle Power” (from the Concept of “Global Britain” to “Progressive Realism”)." ISTORIYA 15, no. 9 (143) (2024): 0. https://doi.org/10.18254/s207987840032767-2.
Full textAbstract:
On the eve of leaving the EU, the British government began to develop a foreign policy concept, which was called “Global Britain” and formalized in the national security strategy “Global Britain in the Era of Competition” (2021). The United Kingdom positioned itself as a “middle power” with interests almost all over the world and democratic countries as allies in the fight against authoritarian regimes. The need for a new version of the document (2023) arose in London in connection with the intensification of systemic competition, the beginning of Russia&apos;s military operation in Ukraine. Under the influence of Washington, Britain has also toughened its position towards China, retaining the previous wording regarding Russia — “the most acute threat”. The creation and strengthening of alliances in the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific is the task set by the Government of R. Sunak, departing from the principle of interaction exclusively with countries that share democratic values. On the eve of the 2024 parliamentary elections, the Labour Party unveiled its concept of “progressive realism”. The main postulates: the priority security zone is the Euro-Atlantic, preparations for ensuring security by the forces of European countries (to conclude a pact with the EU on security and defense) in the context of the reorientation of Britain&apos;s main ally, the United States, to counter China; the destruction of the alliance of China and Russia; a departure from the priority of the value organizing principle of international relations “democracy vs authoritarianism” to the pragmatic principle of a “rules-based order” in order to attract the countries of the “Global South” by partially satisfying their interests. The victory of the Labour Party in the 2024 general election means that the foundations of the Conservatives&apos; foreign policy course will be preserved with situational adjustments.
42
KULISH, Damir. "STATE AND SUPPORT OF STRATEGIC PLANNING OF FOREIGN ECONOMIC ACTIVITY OF EU ENTERPRISES." Herald of Khmelnytskyi National University. Economic sciences 304, no. 2(2) (2022): 351–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.31891/2307-5740-2022-304-2(2)-55.
Full textAbstract:
The article analyzes the current state and support for strategic planning of foreign economic activity of EU enterprises. It is established that the European Union, or rather its member states, has the competence to harmonize legislation, which it implements in such areas as the free circulation of goods, services, capital, as well as in such sectors as agriculture, fishing, transport and energy. Meanwhile, health, tourism and civil protection are examples of areas where the European Union can only pass laws in support of member states ‘ initiatives. The EU has a relatively open trade regime, which has stimulated the development of relations with a wide range of trading partners. Indeed, the EU is deeply integrated into global markets, and this picture can be expected to continue, as modern transport and communications developments create an additional incentive for producers to exchange goods (and services) around the world. Foreign economic activity is regulated independently or jointly at several levels: national; bilateral and regional; and global. Usually, national state bodies regulate foreign economic activity autonomously, issuing various laws, regulations, regulations, permits, and so on. Regional bodies of competence, such as the EU Council of ministers, the UN Security Council, etc., can also operate independently. Coordinated or joint regulation of foreign economic activity is carried out by issuing joint acts or signing international treaties and agreements, as well as in accordance with various rules and Customs adopted by intergovernmental or non-governmental bodies and organizations. Any regulation is aimed at implementing a particular foreign economic policy (the means of which we will explain in the next topic), and this contributes to economic integration into the world economy. On the other hand, the processes of foreign economic activity, increasingly complex relationships and the desire to quickly solve problems lead to an increase in the number and role of bodies and organizations in regulating foreign economic activity.
43
Yakoviyk, Ivan, Olesia Tragniuk, and Dmytro Boichuk. "Strategic autonomy of the European Union: on the way to «European Sovereignty» in defense?" Problems of Legality, no. 149 (June 16, 2020): 223–42. https://doi.org/10.21564/2414-990x.149.199902.
Full textAbstract:
2019 marked 20 years since EU Member States decided to create a joint EU approach to security and defense. The paper raises the question on finding new approaches to provide security and defense in Europe in the current context, as well as the formation of a new paradigm for research on regional security in Europe. Traditional approaches to the study of European integration (neofunctionalism and intergovernmentalism) are of little use for theorizing the development of European defense in conditions of new challenges and threats to national and regional security, as well as transatlantic solidarity violations. The article studies European Strategic Autonomy (ESA), which refers to the ability of the European Union, in conjunction with Member States, to independently determine its own priorities according to which to take decisions and implement them in the fields of foreign policy, security and defense. ESA is not synonymous with independence, nor does it deny membership in military-political alliances, since a more realistic scenario implies positioning itself as a European pillar of NATO. The implementation of the idea of building a "european sovereignty" in the field of security and defense implies that the European Union should take bigger responsibility for its own security, the security of its neighbors, andshould strengthen its role in transatlantic relations without opposing NATO. In order to move from rhetoric to concrete policy steps, the EU needs to develop a plan of measures for political, institutional and industrial action. It means that achieving real autonomy requires time and joint efforts by EU institutions and Member State governments. However, political and institutional autonomy can be built exclusively within the whole Union, while military-industrial autonomy can be initiated and implemented by a group of the most economically and technologically advanced EU Member States.
44
Glasius, Marlies. "The EU Response to the Tsunami and the Need for a Human Security Approach." European Foreign Affairs Review 11, Issue 3 (2006): 353–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/eerr2006030.
Full textAbstract:
The European Union has in recent years become more ambitious in terms of its global role. Numerous missions &ndash; military, civilian and now also combined &ndash; have been and are being carried out under an EU flag. While the European Security Strategy has given the EU a point of departure for a common vision on security policy, the humanitarian and developmental aspects of EU foreign policy have remained somewhat separate from these developments, and many in the development community have viewed the EU’s new ambitions with some suspicion, considering them as ‘interventionist’ and privileging a security over a development agenda. The European response to the tsunami offers interesting new insights in relation to these developments. This paper focuses on the situations in Aceh and Sri Lanka, and concentrates on the policies towards the people affected by disasters rather than on environmental responses or prevention mechanisms. Using the four themes of response and coordination, the impact of the tsunami and the response on the conflicts in Sri Lanka and Aceh, the sustainability of post-tsunami policies, and the effects of the tsunami in terms of European public opinion, this paper argues that the EU should be less focused on building capabilities, and much more on developing a coherent common vision guiding all its external policies.
45
Shikhov, D. "Post-Brexit Britain's Military Strategy." World Economy and International Relations 65, no. 2 (2021): 37–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2021-65-2-37-44.
Full textAbstract:
Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union raises questions on how UK defence policy will develop. Significant shifts inside the United Kingdom as well as its changing position in the international arena caused by Brexit require new approaches in its military strategy. National Security Strategy 2015 and UK’s International Defence Engagement Strategy 2017 do not fully reflect current geopolitical realities while new strategic documents haven’t been presented so far. UK armed forces modernization is becoming even more relevant, however there are few signs that London has capabilities to increase its defence budget. The latest statistics shows stable decline in UK military expenditure as percentage of GDP. The armed forces have been shrinking in size for several decades and some large modernization projects have come across considerable difficulties. After years of heated debates an ambitious plan to replace all four ballistic missile submarines with the new ones has been approved. However Brexit caused another wave of claims for Scottish independence raising concerns over the future of the Britain’s only Scotland-based naval facility for nuclear forces. Brexit inevitably poses a dilemma of setting UK’s foreign and defence policy priorities. Though leaving the EU doesn’t mean that Britain will fully withdraw from European defence and security initiatives, active cooperation in this sphere between London and Brussels is highly unlikely. Given that, the importance of NATO as well as other multilateral security mechanisms (especially the UK-led Joint Expeditionary Force with Scandinavian and Baltic states) and bilateral defence cooperation (particularly with the US and France) is significantly increasing. Despite numerous challenges for British defence and security policy caused by Brexit these difficulties together with the UK’s traditional strong points such as the special relationship with the US and network of military facilities around the globe may give impetus to a more proactive military strategy aimed at strengthening UK’s global influence.
46
Berger, Alexander. "Why the EU and NATO have failed to manage the Russia-Ukraine Crisis?" Horizon Insights 1, no. 1 (2018): 13–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.31175/hi.2018.01.02.
Full textAbstract:
The world observed a well-developed Russian strategy and military model have had destabilizing consequences and wide-ranging implications for international security, in particular for Europe, and global stability since the Ukraine crisis. Needless to say, most European countries and notably NATO conclude that Russian policy, military strategy, and military practice in the Ukraine crisis challenge the European security and carry significant implications for NATO, therefore the Ukraine crisis force the EU and NATO to concentrate on measures against Russian strategy.[1] In reality, Russia has already given the signals of its intentions via the Military Doctrine 2010 and Defense Strategy 2013 that list destabilization of the near abroad, in other words buffer zone, and NATO or the EU expansion, including deployment of military forces, as most relevant military threats. Both documents highlight that “Russia faced the very real threat of being side-lined in international affairs.” [2] Furthermore MacKinnon suggests that in line with its new regime change strategy, the United States forced the former Soviet Union’s member states to establish their political institutions, provided funds for the opposition, and supported revolutions in Georgia, Ukraine, and Kyrgyzstan. Thus, the revolutions added to the Kremlin’s perception that “Washington’s chief objective might have been to change the regime in Russia as well.”[3] Likewise, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said “NATO’s expansion by pulling more Russia’s neighboring countries into the alliance is unacceptable”.[4] Therefore it could be concluded from Russian point of view that everything should be done to prevent NATO and the EU expansion which can be characterized as the greatest threat to Russian security, and that’s why Russia must restore its status as a great power inside its own sphere of influence. It is the aim of this analytic paper to search why the EU and NATO have failed to manage the crisis emanating from Russian aggression and expansion in Ukraine, and to address the current strategic environment as well. I shall try to analyze the drivers and the reasons of NATO and the EU’s poor reaction against Russia, and finally I will emphasize why and how the roles of NATO and the European Security Strategy should be reconsidered in the light of energy security policy of the EU, and why NATO and the EU needs to improve their responsiveness rather than readiness.
47
Valeeva, R. A. "Development of Сooperation Between Kyrgyzstan and the European Union at the Present Stage". Post-Soviet Issues 6, № 3 (2019): 288–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.24975/2313-8920-2019-6-3-288-296.
Full textAbstract:
After the collapse of the USSR, the West received favorable conditions for promoting its geopolitical interests. Accordingly, the European Union began to establish relations with the countries of Central Asia. The EU policy in Central Asia in the early 90s of the twentieth century is characterized by the fact that Brussels concentrated its efforts on the allocation of economic assistance, the promotion of democracy and market relations. The EU policy in the Central Asian republics was based on cooperation and partnership Agreements signed with the leadership of the countries of the region. These agreements were intended to formalize the political and economic relations of the countries of the region with the EU. The role of the Central Asian countries in EU foreign policy was more clearly defined after the adoption of the European Union Strategy for Central Asia in 2007. The European Union has taken a number of steps to strengthen its position in the region. Several formats of bilateral and regional cooperation have been created, and EU representative offices have been opened in the countries of the region.Over the past decade, the European Union has significantly intensified its foreign policy in Central Asia. It expanded diplomatic ties and successfully implemented mechanisms for developing cooperation with Central Asia. In particular, it has expanded its presence in the region, successfully launching several of its strategic programs in various areas of cooperation.In 2019, the European Union adopted a new Strategy for Central Asia. This is the first radical revision of the document adopted in 2007. This indicates a desire to update the base of interac tion and to build relations with the countries of the region in a new way. The European Union pays special attention to such areas of cooperation as energy issues, global security problems and joint struggle against the threats of terrorism, Islamic fundamentalism and radical extremism, transport and infrastructure. Particular attention is paid to the prospects and problems of the EU’s interaction with the Kyrgyz Republic, which cover various aspects: political, economic, social, trade, cultural. On 19 November 2017, the European Union and the Kyrgyz Republic began negotiations to update the existing bilateral agreement, which is intended to replace the partnership and cooperation Agreement. After the completion of the negotiations, a new agreement on expanded partnership and cooperation between Kyrgyzstan and the European Union was initialed on July 6, 2019. It includes new areas of cooperation and significantly improves the regulatory framework for trade and economic relations in accordance with WTO rules and regional economic agreements. The new agreement provides for cooperation between Kyrgyzstan and the EU in areas such as: policy and reform, enhanced cooperation in foreign policy and security issues, in the areas of justice, security and freedoms, as well as in trade.
48
Ivasechko, Olga, and Kateryna Mazur. "European Union public diplomacy agenda." Bulletin of Mariupol State University. Series: History. Political Studies 10, no. 28-29 (2020): 189–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.34079/2226-2830-2020-10-28-29-189-199.
Full textAbstract:
The article considers the specifics of the agenda of public diplomacy of the European Union, and it is in this dimension that the emphasis is on building a coordinated policy. The documents of both the internal and external dimensions of the Commission, the Parliament, as well as the European External Action Service were also analyzed, namely, Plan D, The Global strategy for the foreign and security policy of the European Union, White Paper, Annual Activity Reports. It was emphasized that the actions carried out in the field of public diplomacy during 2018 were aimed at promoting joint responses to problems, raising awareness-raising measures, as well as building new strategies for the regions. At the same time, strategic communications remained a priority for the EEAS. It is concluded that EU public diplomacy, in line with the Union’s Global Strategy, should aim to improve strategic communications, investment and integration in various fields in order to better integrate foreign policy with citizens and better communicate it to partners. However, today the European Union also faces certain risks, such as changes in the priorities of member states, the economic crisis, the difficulty of assessing the effectiveness of public diplomacy, as well as low interest in new European Union initiatives.
49
Mesquita, Maria José Rangel de. "Where is the EU (going): three perspectives and three Integration issues." UNIO – EU Law Journal 3, no. 1 (2017): 78–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.21814/unio.3.1.10.
Full textAbstract:
The present text, assuming that the option of carrying on the European integration project, as well the option of Portugal to take part in it, are still fully valid, addresses the question “where are going (now)”on the basis of three actual and relevant issues regarding the survival of the EU which concern both the relationship between the EU and International Relations and the relationship between EU legal order and national legal orders, in particular the Portuguese legal order: the new Global Strategy for the EU’s Foreign and Security Policy, the new legal framework to protect EU’s fundamental values, especially the rule of law, and its recent application to a member State, as well as the functioning of the special procedure on excessive budgetary deficit which led to the application of “zero”sanctions to Portugal – enouncing some questions related to such topics as well as with the interrogation on the trend towards a “centralization” at the EU level that such topics may illustrate.
50
Khorishko, Liliia. "POLAND'S ENERGY SECURITY IN THE CONTEXT OF EU ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVES." Baltic Journal of Economic Studies 7, no. 4 (2021): 226–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2021-7-4-226-230.
Full textAbstract:
The current conditions of global development actualize the need for political actors to form a high level of energy security. It expands the state's ability to ensure the sustainability of economic development and the ability to withstand likely threats. The issue of energy security and sovereignty are key on the agenda of the EU, which seeks to implement a strategy of global leadership. The environmental modernization of the EU energy sector and each member state must comply with the main goal of «The European Green Deal», which is to reduce carbon emissions by 55% before 2030. The subject of the study is the substance and peculiarities of the formation of energy security in Poland. The aim of the study is to analyze the mechanisms of energy security of Poland in the context of EU environmental initiatives. Research methodology: systematic approach, method of analysis and comparison. The issue of energy security is recognized as key in achieving sustainable economic development in Poland. The content and basic principles of state energy security are presented in the National Security Strategy and detailed in the Energy Policy. Among the main directions of ecological modernization of the energy sector the following have been identified: efficient consumption of national energy resources; modernization of the energy sector and infrastructure; diversification of natural gas, oil, liquid fuel supplies; optimization of energy market functioning; construction of nuclear power plants; expansion of alternative energy sources; modernization of heating and co-generation energy systems; increasing energy efficiency. Polish officials have emphasized the need for a three-phase energy transition, involving a reduction in the production and use of coal, a gradual increase in the share of natural gas and the expansion of opportunities to use energy from alternative sources. The modernization of Poland's energy sector correlates with the implementation of «The European Green Deal» and other EU environmental initiatives. Energy sovereignty is secured through domestic and foreign financial assistance. The National Fund for Environmental Protection and Water Management of Poland attracts investments in environmental projects related to the development of geothermal energy and improvement of infrastructure energy efficiency. EU special funds (European Regional Development Fund/European Social Fund, Cohesion Fund, Just Transition Fund and Modernization Fund) provide funding for national or regional projects aimed at the comprehensive modernization of the Polish energy sector and the implementation of commitments to achieve climate neutrality. Poland pursues an active policy of cooperation in the energy sphere with other states – Denmark, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. Projects such as "Baltic Pipe" and "The Baltic Synchronisation Project" are in the active implementation phase. The results of the study: energy security is a key factor in the sustainability of economic development of Poland, the implementation of the modernization of the national energy complex correlates with the EU environmental initiatives, which contributes to the attraction of domestic and foreign investment, as well as the resources of public diplomacy.