The Quest For A European Strategic Culture

The Quest for a European Strategic Culture investigates whether strategic norms and beliefs held in different countries have become more similar since 1989 and explores the implications for the viability of a common European Security and Defence Policy. The empirical evidence emerging from various sources shows some significant changes.

European countries work together in crisis management, conflict prevention and many other aspects of security and defence policy. Closer cooperation in this policy arena seems to be the only viable way forward to address contemporary security challenges. Yet, despite the repeated interaction, fundamental assumptions about security and defence remain remarkably distinct across European nations. This book offers a comparative analysis of the security and defence policies of all 27 EU member states and Turkey, drawing on the concept of ‘strategic culture’, in order to examine the chances and obstacles for closer security and defence cooperation across the continent. Along the lines of a consistent analytical framework, international experts provide case studies of the current security and defence policies in Europe as well as their historical and cultural roots. ​

This thesis sets out to examine the European strategic culture that is being carried by political elites around two themes: continuity-change and convergence-divergence. It empirically studies how the European Union and its member states perceive the important dimensions in the area of foreign, security, and defense policy. Although ideational factors have played an increasing role in building theory and analyzing foreign policy behavior since the “cultural turn” in International Relations and Foreign Policy Analysis, two decades of research into European strategic culture still have some conceptual and methodological problems. To disentangle these problems, the main question for the research is: Is there a European strategic culture emerging? This thesis first analyzed the three member states’ strategic cultures (Germany, Ireland, and Poland) at the national level because they represent different groups with a view to the most important dimensions in characterizing the national strategic cultures within the EU. It then analyzed the EU strategic culture at the supranational level by focusing on official discourses of the EU institutions (e.g., European Commission, Council of the European Union, and European External Action Service) and their leaders (e.g., European Commission President and EU High Representative). In order to structure the comparison for a specific actor or between the member states or between them and the EU, the research period is divided into three consecutive sub-periods: 2000–2009, 2010–June 2016, and July 2016–2020. This periodization was based on the two strategic shocks crucial to Europe: the eurozone crisis and the UK’s Brexit Referendum.

Essay from the year 2018 in the subject Politics - Topic: Peace and Conflict, Security, grade: 8,2, Leiden University, language: English, abstract: The essay deals with the question whether the EU has established a strategic culture regarding its foreign and security policy. It begins with a discussion of the concept of strategic culture, to then dive into the sources of strategic culture and the extent to which the member states of the EU have similarities within those sources, namely geography and history, and political structure and institutions. Afterwards, the European Security Strategy of 2003 is considered as a potential manifestation of EU strategic culture, followed by developments after 2008. The essay concludes that the EU is growing closer to having a common strategic culture, but that it has not happened yet. Due to significant changes with regard to the security situation after the end of the Cold War, caused by conflicts in former Yugoslavia, the attacks on September 11, 2001, and the differences regarding the Iraq war for instance, the necessity for a coordinated European foreign and security policy became evident. Therefore, on December 12, 2003, the European Council agreed to the European Security Strategy (ESS), whose development was seen as an important step in defining common interests and goals of the EU regarding foreign and security policy.

The central aim of this thesis is to analyse the distinct elements of a potential Europeanstrategic culture and their representation in the rhetoric and strategic actions of the Union, with special emphasis in the years of ESDP existence (1998-2005). The discussion rests on the proposition that a common European Strategic culture exists, albeit it is restricted in scope and depth. It is argued that as such, it is associated with three main pillars: humanitarian intervention, outward orientation and the pursuit of the largest possible consensus, i.e. multilateralism. The final objective of the discussion is to test these pillarsagainst the proposition for the existence of a specific, albeit limited European strategicculture. It has been deemed that the most productive way to determine whether the threepillars of European strategic culture can be considered realistically relevant is to assess them against the rhetoric and strategic actions of the European Union that took place within the period 1998-2005, which is the set timeframe for this thesis. Following an up-to-date literature review on the subject (Chapter II), this thesis makes use of a modified framework by Booth and Macmillan in order to explore those parameters that influence the development of strategic culture, such as geography, history and political structures. Themodified framework is outlined and discussed in Chapter III. Chapter IV serves to put theconcept of a European strategic culture in its historical context. Important milestones in EEC/EU defence history since the need for a common defence was articulated in the 1950sare analysed. The emphasis lays not so much on the origins of common defence and foreignpolicy initiatives but on recent developments. Chapter V introduces facets of strategic culture as these can be revealed through the rhetoric of the EU. The focus is on those documents that best describe the strategic concept of the EU after the introduction of the ESDP and more specifically, the European Security Strategy (ESS). Chapter VI focuses on EU actionsof strategic importance. In this respect, the three EU military operations that took place between the introduction of the ESDP in 1998 and the year 2005, (Operation Concordia, Artemis and Althea are examined). In conclusion, this thesis demonstrates the existence of a European strategic culture, but also confirms the initial proposition regarding the current nature of this strategic culture, which is limited in scope and in depth. As such, it is shown that it is based on the three pillars outlined in the proposition, i.e. humanitarian intervention, outward orientation and multilateralism.

With the Lisbon Treaty in place and the European Union increasingly involved in international crisis management and stabilization operations in places near and far, this volume revisits the trajectory of a European strategic culture. Specifically, it studies the usefulness of its application in a variety of circumstances, including the EU’s operations in Africa and the Balkans as well as joint operations with NATO and the United Nations. The contributors find that strategic culture is a useful tool to explain and understand the EU's civilian and military operations, not in the sense of a ‘cause’, but as a European normative framework of preferences and constraints. Accordingly, classical notions of strategic culture in the field of international security must be adapted to highlight the specific character of Europe's strategic culture, especially by taking the interaction with the United Nations and NATO into account. Though at variance over the extent to which security and defence missions have demonstrated or promoted a shared strategic culture in Europe, the authors reveal a growing sense that a cohesive strategic culture is critical in the EU’s ambition of being a global actor. Should Europe fail to nurture a shared strategic culture, its actions will be based much more on flexibility than on cohesion. This book was published as a special issue of Contemporary Security Policy.

This handbook offers a collection of cutting-edge essays on all aspects of strategic culture by a mix of international scholars, consultants, military officers, and policymakers. The volume explicitly addresses the analytical conundrums faced by scholars who wish to employ or generate strategic cultural insights, with substantive commentary on defining and scoping strategic culture, analytic frameworks and approaches, levels of analysis, sources of strategic culture, and modalities of change in strategic culture. The chapters engage strategic culture at the civilizational, regional, supra-national, national, non-state actor, and organizational levels. The volume is divided into five thematic parts, which will appeal to both students who are new to the subject and scholars who wish to incorporate strategic culture into their toolbox of analytical techniques. Part I assesses the evolving theoretical strengths and weaknesses of the field. Part II lays out elements of the theoretical and methodological foundations of the field, including sources and components of strategic culture. Part III presents a number of national strategic cultural profiles, representing the state of contemporary strategic culture scholarship. Part IV addresses the utility of strategic culture for practitioners and scholars. Part V summarizes the key theoretical and practical insights offered by the volume’s contributors. This handbook will be of much interest to students of strategic studies, defense studies, security studies, and international relations in general, as well as to professional practitioners.

This book shows how one of the most powerful tools of security studies—strategic culture—illuminates the origins and implications of the Asia-Pacific region’s difficult issues, from the rise of China and the American pivot, to the shifting calculations of many other actors. Strategic culture sometimes challenges and always enriches prevailing neo-realist presumptions about the region. It provides a bridge between material and ideational explanations of state behavior and helps capture the tension between neoclassical realist and constructivist approaches. The case studies in this book survey the role of strategic culture in the behaviors of Australia, China, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea and the United States. They show the contrast between structural expectations and cultural predispositions, as realist geopolitical security threats and opportunities interact with domestic elite and popular interpretation of historical narratives and distinctive political-military cultures to influence security policies. The concluding chapter devotes special attention to methodological issues at the heart of strategic cultural studies, as well as how culture may impact the potential for future conflict or cooperation in the region. The result is a body of work that helps deepen our understanding of strategic cultures in the Asia-Pacific in comparative perspective and enrich security studies. This bookw as published as a special issue of Contemporary Security Policy.