Marianne Riddervold

Finally flexing its muscles? Atalanta – The European Union's naval military operation against piracy

Abstract What happens to EU (European Union) foreign policy when the EU has military force at its disposal? Will it then still be correct to talk of the EU as a ‘normative’ power, or will military capabilities make the EU more inclined to act as a traditional great power and instead promote its interests on the world scene? This article aims to contribute to an answer by studying why the EU launched its first naval operation, operation Atalanta. The analysis suggests that taking responsibility for the long-term protection of humanitarian aid to Somalia was a mobilizing argument behind Atalanta and that this has been followed up in practice. Opposed to what one would expect of a traditional actor, the EU has not prioritised to protect European ships and has bound itself to global law when using force against pirates. Piracy is defined as criminal acts and pirates have been treated in accordance with their human rights.

From reason-giving to collective action: Argument-based learning and European integration

The aim of this article is to contribute to the further development of deliberative theory—to make it more applicable to research on EU integration—by establishing alternative and more concise micro-mechanisms to those of the rationalist bargaining perspectives. It is suggested that the micro-mechanism through which deliberation has an effect on outcomes is what is termed argument-based learning, which means that an actor accepts the validity of a presented argument so that (s)he acts upon it. Moreover, the article differentiates between three types of argument-based learning considered relevant in the EU context. On this basis, it suggests a two-step analytical approach for studies of EU decision-making processes. In trying out the empirical relevance of the framework, it is applied to a case where one would not expect agreements on common EU policies to have been reached due to argument-based learning, namely EU coordination towards the Maritime Labour Convention (MLC). The framework proved helpful in accounting for agreements that are puzzling from a rationalist perspective.

‘A matter of principle’? EU foreign policy in the International Labour Organization

This article contributes to the debate on the role of norms in European Union (EU) foreign policy by looking at EU policies in the making of a Consolidated Maritime Labour Convention (MLC). Given the economic importance of shipping for many EU members, one would expect the EU to promote its economic interests in the International Labour Organization (ILO). However, the EU was described as a human rights promoter and had positions on the MLC that after common EU implementation will increase costs for both ship-owners and national administrations. How can this be? I answer by examining the arguments that mobilized the actors to agree to the policies conducted, differentiating between three ideal-types: pragmatic; ethical-political; and moral arguments. I conclude that moral arguments, supporting a thesis that a concern for establishing global law for the protection of rights, have been particularly important in mobilizing the EU to promote a convention of high standards.

New threats – different response: EU and NATO and Somali piracy

When the European Union (EU) launched its first military naval mission, EU NAVFOR Somalia, Atalanta, the states who are members of both the EU and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) made a political choice: to prioritize the EU over NATO in their multilateral military efforts to fight piracy and its consequences. Thereby, Atalanta challenges the conventional assumption that EU security cooperation will remain limited. It also challenges the widely held belief that the European states will chose to act through NATO if dealing multilaterally with international security issues. How can we explain this decision? This analysis suggests that it can be explained in two phases where different mechanisms were at work. In the first phase, which can be accounted for from a neo-realist perspective, France, who held the Presidency, used particular favorable geopolitical conditions to put an autonomous EU operation on the agenda. However, agreement on the EU option cannot be explained as a result of strategic bargaining. Instead, in a second phase and in line with an alternative hypothesis building on the theory of communicative action, the EU member states came to support the French suggestion due to legitimacy considerations regarding the legal framework of the two operations.

Trick and treat: how the Commission and the European Parliament exert influence in EU foreign and security policies*

Abstract Studies suggest that the Commission and the European Parliament (EP) influence the Common Foreign and Security policy (CFSP), despite it being formally an intergovernmental instrument. Few systematic attempts have been made to capture how the two institutions exert influence from an analytical perspective. This paper develops and explores a set of hypotheses (strategic coalition building, bargaining, community framing, circumvention and normative argumentation) in two cases: Naval mission Atalanta and the EU’s Maritime Security Strategy (EUMSS). We find that the Commission drew on its bargaining leverage, circumvented the member states and framed the issues at stake in a manner that increased its own competence. It is also in a better position to influence CFSP decisions at an early stage. The EP’s influence is bigger in the post-decision phase. One would, however, expect that the influence of the supranational institutions will increase as the CFSP moves towards a comprehensive approach.

Integrating nascent organisations. On the settlement of the European External Action Service

Abstract This study shows how the EU’s new Common Foreign and Security policy (CFSP) administration – the European External Action Service (EEAS) – experienced early organisational settlement. We find that the EEAS acts relatively independently from member-state governments, suggesting administrative autonomy. It is also relatively integrated into the Commission structure, suggesting inter-institutional integration of sub-units in the two institutions. Important lessons can be learned. For organisation theory: Firstly, nascent organisations are likely to experience some degree of ‘settlement’ after birth by establishing ties towards organisations from which they originate. Secondly, settlement is influenced by pre-existing organisational capacity and recent organisational history. For the CFSP literature: Firstly, the CFSP has indeed developed beyond intergovernmental cooperation; we might be witnessing a ‘normalisation’ or ‘communitarisation’ of CFSP policy- processes. Secondly, cooperation and further institutionalisation of relations between the EEAS and the Commission may be key factors in explaining integration within the CFSP.

Playing into the Hands of the Commission? The Case of EU Coordination in the ILO

In February 2006, after five years of intense work, the International Labour Organization (ILO) succeeded in adopting a consolidated maritime labour convention (MLC). The Convention, a document of over 100 pages, details minimum working standards, as well as health and social rights for seafarers. Promising substantial improvements in the rights and working conditions for this quintessentially globalized workforce through globally enforceable legal measures, it has been heralded as ‘history making’ and ‘innovative’.

Unified in response to rising powers? China, Russia and EU-US relations

ABSTRACT How do the EU and the US respond to rising powers making territorial claims? Are they unified in their approaches, and if not, where do their policies diverge? Transatlantic unity or dissent in response to main geopolitical issues has implications for our understanding of transatlantic security relations and for the future of global power-relations more broadly. We explore EU-US positions and responses to Chinese advances in the South China Sea and Russia’s actions in the Ukraine. Two hypotheses guide our analysis: First, that they cooperate to balance against these powers, hence strengthening transatlantic relations. Secondly, that the EU is developing policies independently of the US, thus weakening EU-US relations. Our findings suggest that despite a general coherence of American and European stance in both cases, the level of coordination varies. Instead, we find signs of weakening EU-US security relations as the EU develops a more autonomous policy vis-à-vis the US.

Transatlantic relations in times of uncertainty: crises and EU-US relations

ABSTRACT Ties between the US and the EU rival those between any other pair of international actors. This Special Issue makes conceptual progress and empirical contributions in accounting for if and how EU-US relations have been impacted by a context of multiple crises and a parallel change in US policies. All the articles find strong evidence to suggest that EU-US relations are weakening. This is partly a consequence of the EU’s own, internal policies, as it becomes more unified and autonomous of the US in some areas, while fragmenting in others. Most importantly, it is a consequence of the two actors’ increasingly diverging perspectives and positions on international issues, institutions, norms and indeed the value of the transatlantic relationship as such. Although the long-term effects remain to be seen, it is likely that the cracks in the foundation of transatlantic relations will continue into the present and foreseeable future.

A humanitarian mission in line with human rights? Assessing Sophia, the EU’s naval response to the migration crisis

ABSTRACT This article adds to our understanding of the role of norms in the European Union’s (EU) response to the migration crisis by conducting a critical assessment of the EU’s anti-smuggling naval mission “Sophia”. Is Sophia in line with the normative standards the EU has set for itself in its foreign policies? Conducting the analysis in two steps in line with the main criteria of a humanitarian foreign policy model – first exploring Sophia’s launch and then assessing Sophia’s in theatre behaviour – findings suggest that although concerns for migrants at sea mobilised the initial launch of the mission, the mission is not conducted in line with key human rights principles. As the operation mandate is amended and updated with new tasks, and as the EU-NATO in theatre cooperation increases, the EU is moving further away from what one would expect of a humanitarian foreign policy actor.