Frédéric Mérand

Governance and State Power: A Network Analysis of European Security

A growing number of scholars argue that the development of the common security and defence policy (CSDP) should be analysed as the institutionalization of a system of security governance. Although governance approaches carry the promise of a sophisticated, empirically grounded picture of CSDP, they have been criticized for their lack of attention to power. This is because governance approaches focus on institutional rules and ideas rather than the social structure that underpins them. To refine the notion of security governance, this article analyses co-operation patterns through social network analysis. Confirming the governance image, it maps out a complex constellation of CSDP actors that features cross-border and cross-level ties between different national and EU policy actors. It is also found, however, that CSDP is dominated by a handful of traditional state actors in particular, Brussels-based national ambassadors who retain strategic positions vis-a-vis weaker supranational and non-state actors. These actors are not giving up on state power, but reconstituting it at the supranational level.

Social Representations in the European Security and Defence Policy

Why are international institutions designed in one way and not another? Using the European security and defence policy (ESDP) as a case study, this article suggests that the social representations dominating the national and organizational world of institution-makers are key to our understanding the shape and content of an emerging institution of international security cooperation.A focus on social representations, which are the product of institutional practices, helps to break the interest/idea dichotomy that underpins most theories of preference formation when they try to explain institutional designs.This article shows that foreign and defence policy-makers from France, Germany and the United Kingdom have shaped ESDP by projecting their respective social representations, notably with regard to the role of the state, the nature of security challenges and the purpose of their organization.

Constructive Ambiguity: Comparing the EU’s Energy and Defence Policies

This article explores the paradox of constructive ambiguity. Based on a focused, longitudinal comparison of the European Union’s energy and defence policies, it analyses the role played by strategies of ambiguity in European integration. Ambiguity is found to be an attractive strategy for political entrepreneurs when member state preferences are heterogeneous and the EU’s legal basis is weak. It is likely to be effective, however, only if it is embedded in an institutional opportunity structure – that is, a formal-legal context – that entrepreneurs can fold into their strategic repertoire of ideas. While ambiguity can be strategic in circumstances where clarity would create strong opposition, it is not sufficient to entrench a European policy if it does not rest on an institutional basis. This suggests that European political entrepreneurs should be wary of relying on coalition building by ambiguity only.

France's return to NATO: the death knell for ESDP?

Abstract Our article focuses on the likely impact of Frances return to NATOs integrated military command on the future of the European security and defense policy (ESDP). First, we describe the triangular relationship between Frances defense, NATO and European defense policies that dominated the era of the Gaullist–Mitterrandist consensus (1958–95) and its gradual erosion under Jacques Chiracs tenure (1995–2007). Second, we explain the context in which President Sarkozy made the decision in 2007 to rejoin the Allied military command. Relying on interviews with French foreign and defense policy-makers, we address the extent to which ESDP considerations really played a role. Finally, we develop four scenarios for the future of European defense: (1) ESDP gets a new lease of life; (2) France becomes a normal player in a NATO-dominated Europe; (3) NATO and ESDP work out of a division of labor; and (4) France becomes the Trojan horse of European cooperation inside NATO. To develop each scenario, we rely on rationalist and constructivist mechanisms drawn from International Relations theory.

Transgovernmental Networks in European Security and Defence Policy

An increasing number of authors describe the European Union as an advanced form of transgovernmentalism. Whether called Europeanization, supranational intergovernmentalism, multilevel governance, administrative fusion or Brusselisation, the transgovernmentalist thesis states that European politics is shaped by the growing interaction of national government officials at every level of the decision-making process. This paper tests the transgovernmentalist thesis by looking at patterns of formal and informal cooperation in the framework of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). The data is based on a questionnaire circulated among 73 defence officials in France, Germany, the United Kingdom and Brussels-based institutions. The results are analyzed through social network analysis. We find that the governance of ESDP is characterized by a weak form of transgovernmentalism, in which cross-border links do exist but formal state actors occupy strategic positions. In particular, two groups display transgovernmental features: a core policy group of crisis management and capability development officials in and around the Council, and a Franco-German group of capital-based defence actors.

The practice of burden sharing in European crisis management operations

ABSTRACT If a European organisation decides to deploy a military force in Mali or a police mission in Afghanistan, member states probably believe that collective security is a public good that benefits them all. But who will lead the mission? Who will staff it? Who will pay for it? Who will risk casualties? While rational-choice theorists expect little burden sharing, constructivists expect a great deal more insofar as normative pressures are brought to bear on governments. The problem is that it is hard to find countries that systematically eschew their responsibilities or, contrariwise, systematically contribute their fair share out of a sense of moral obligation. In this article, we analyse burden sharing as an anchoring practice, shedding light on the social logic of burden sharing rather than abstract interests or norms. Established after the end of the Second World War, the field of European security has given birth to a “community of security practice” around the more or less routine task of determining national contributions to crisis management operations. Based on interviews with practitioners from the UK, France, Germany, Norway and Ireland, we analyse the impact of intersubjectivity, power and strategic culture on the practice of burden sharing.

What do ESDP actors want? An exploratory analysis

Abstract This paper analyzes the preferences of European defense actors vis-à-vis the European security and defense policy (ESDP) with a view to identifying the main ideational points of convergence and fault lines that structure this policy domain. In an exploratory analysis that relies on an original data-set compiled from systematic interviews conducted with 73 ESDP actors in France, the UK, Germany, and Brussels, we address two research questions. First, what do ESDP actors think about ESDP? Second, can we classify their preferences according to sociological factors that underpin the ESDP domain? To conceptualize the belief system of ESDP actors, we propose a typology that distinguishes (1) the social context in which ESDP actors are embedded and (2) the specific ESDP aspects about which preferences are shaped. Our results suggest that both national and occupational variables play an important role in explaining the preferences of ESDP actors.

Public support for European defence: Does strategic culture matter?

This article identifies previously ignored determinants of public support for the European Union’s security and defence ambitions. In contrast to public opinion vis-a-vis the EU in general, the literature on attitudes towards a putative European army or the existing Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) suggests that the explanatory power of sociodemographic and economic variables is weak, and focuses instead on national identity as the main determinant of one’s support.This article explores the possible impact of strategic culture, and argues that preferences vis-a-vis the EU’s security and defence ambitions are formed in part through pre-existing social representations of security.To test this proposition, ‘national’ strategic cultures are disaggregated and a typology is produced that contains four strategic postures: pacifism, traditionalism, humanitarianism and globalism. Applying regression analysis on individual-level Eurobarometer survey data, it is found that strategic postures help explain both the general level of support for CSDP and support for specific Petersberg tasks.

Buying a fighter jet: European lessons for Canada

Abstract The procurement of Canada’s next fighter jet is a hot potato for the next government. While it was contested on strategic and economic grounds, few observers had doubted before the election of Justin Trudeau that Canada would end up buying the F-35 made by Lockheed Martin. In this paper, we analyze three European programs (the Eurofighter, Saab’s Gripen, Dassault’s Rafale) covering eight European countries (France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Sweden, Austria, Switzerland, Czech Republic and Hungary) in order to draw lessons for Canada. We analyze the procurement of fighter jets through three overlapping but distinct phases: strategic, commercial and political. Looking at the protracted acquisition process, we argue that the governments of non-aircraft-producing nations almost always confirm their initial strategic decision but end up significantly reducing the number of aircraft purchased. Using the European experience as a point of comparison, the Canadian story becomes predictable. It is not only about the F-35. It is about the procurement of fighter jets in general.