Ben Tonra - The Europeanisation of National Foreign Policy: Dutch, Danish and Irish Foreign Policy in the European Union

Dutch, Danish and Irish Foreign Policy in the European Union

Ben Tonra
Dublin European Institute
University College Dublin

First published 2001 by Ashgate Publishing

Reissued 2018 by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

Copyright Ben Tonra 2001

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

Notice:
Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

Publisher's Note
The publisher has gone to great lengths to ensure the quality of this reprint but points out that some imperfections in the original copies may be apparent.

Disclaimer
The publisher has made every effort to trace copyright holders and welcomes correspondence from those they have been unable to contact.

A Library of Congress record exists under LC control number: 00111417

ISBN 13: 978-1-138-71788-6 (hbk)

ISBN 13: 978-1-315-19615-2 (ebk)

The question posed at the outset of this study is whether the development of foreign and security policy cooperation within the European Union (EU) has constrained or empowered Danish, Dutch and Irish foreign policy. This entails an examination of the relationship between national foreign policy and the framework(s) developed for foreign policy cooperation in the EU. These include the establishment of European Political Cooperation (EPC) in 1970 and its replacement under the Maastricht Treaty by the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) of the European Union as subsequently amended by the Amsterdam Treaty.

Three sets of conclusions may be drawn from this study. On the theoretical foundations of international relations it is argued that traditional paradigms fail to give sufficient weight to the domestic factors that underpin national foreign policy formulation and which have had a significant impact upon attempts to construct common European foreign policy positions. Furthermore, it is also necessary to consider the roles, beliefs and language of national and EU-based policy actors. Their capacity to shape debates, to delimit options and to construct a particular mind-set behind foreign policy is considerable and is frequently undervalued or ignored in traditional analyses. Second, it is argued that the relationship between national foreign policies and an evolving common European foreign and security policy is a reciprocal one in which each is simultaneously constrained and empowered by the other. Finally, two practical conclusions emerge. The first is that Europe's foreign policy capacity has grown considerably but that it lacks a necessary foundation in democratic consent and accountability. The second practical conclusion is that the evolution of the European Union's foreign policy is developing to a point at which, for some member states, a common European foreign and security policy has become a foreign policy objective in its own right. The Europeanisation of national foreign policy involves not a shift of loyalties from the interests of the nation state towards a new European interest, but a reappraisal of national interests in a new European context.

First and foremost, sincere thanks to Patrick Keatinge as teacher, mentor and colleague.

Many thanks also to the dozens of Ministers, diplomats, government officials, journalists, party officials, political campaigners and lobbyists in Denmark, Ireland and The Netherlands who shared with me their time, experience and analyses. The insight is theirs; the errors are mine.

To former colleagues and current friends at the Department of International Politics, the University of Wales, Aberystwyth, a tremendous debt of gratitude is owed for their personal, professional and intellectual encouragement.

To John Beare, who was there at the start.

To Dermot and Nuala Loftus for the loan of Knockroe, Bunmconlon, Co. Mayo.

Finally, to my parents Jack and Linda Tonra and my brother Michael, for their ever-lasting encouragement and support.

The 1970 Luxembourg Report marked the start of a process in which European Community (EC) member states sought to consult one another on foreign policy issues and, where possible, to co-ordinate respective national positions. As established in 1970, European Political Cooperation (EPC) was a framework within which foreign policy cooperation could take place.

Member states were unwilling to associate an area of such national sensitivity as foreign policy formulation with the legal obligations of EC membership. As a result, EPC was consciously segregated from the agenda and institutions of the EC. It soon became evident that this distinction was extraordinarily difficult to maintain. The agendas of what had been intended to be parallel and complementary processes overlapped to a considerable degree and a working relationship had to be established between them.

This early period in foreign policy co-operation must be seen in the broader context of European integration. From a very early stage in the development of the European Communities, the ambition to establish a political identity existed. The early design of European integration was based upon the assumption that political integration would follow economic integration. The European Defence Community (EDC) of 1954 and the Fouchet proposals of the early 1960s were early attempts, based upon very different models, to supplement economic integration with a stronger political identity. In 1970, co-operation in the field of foreign policy, established in parallel with the existing EC structures, was the means chosen to create this identity.

Over time, foreign policy co-operation was drawn towards the institutional and political penumbra of integration. The ever-closer relationship between foreign policy co-operation and EC institutions illustrates this evolution. There was an initial determination, for example, that the process of foreign policy co-operation would have little if any relationship with the EC Commission. As early as 1973, however, it was recognised that the agenda of foreign policy co-operation would inevitably impinge upon that of the Commission. The 1973 Copenhagen Report on the operation of EPC noted that, where there were matters that affected Community activities, close contact would be maintained with the Commission. With the London Report of 1981, this position was extended to the point where the Commission was fully associated with all policy areas that encroached on Community responsibilities. This position was then formalised when the 1987 Single European Act codified EPC procedures. For its part, the 1993 Maastricht Treaty gave the Commission a right of initiative, alongside that of the member states, within the newly established Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union. The Commission is now a full partner of the member states, although it had no formal role in decision-making.