The Lisbon Treaty provides for the establishment of a European External Action Service (EEAS), which has tremendous potential for making European foreign policy both more coherent and more effective.

A mong the most notable events that feature on the calendar of the presidencies of the European Union are the EU summits, similar to those long held by the EU with the United States, involving the so-called strategic partners- Brazil, Canada, China, India, Japan, Russia and, from the 2008 French Presidency onwards, South Africa.

Chatham House is pleased to have the opportunity to publish this report on the European External Action Service. Brian Crowe brings to the topic his considerable first-hand experience of the inner workings of the European Union’s foreign policy-making process, as do members of the Senior Experts Group with whom he developed the ideas contained in this report. Most importantly, the broad subject of improving the capacity of the EU to act beyond its borders is a pressing one.

Just as the European Union (EU) poses questions regarding the nature of political organisation "beyond the state" similarly it raises issues as to the changing character of diplomacy where this is determined by developments at several interrelated levels, from the global to the subnational.

This Policy Brief describes the macro institutional set up of the EU's neighbourhood policies in a comparative way. It deals with the relations with those states that do not want to join the EU or that have not been offered the prospect of membership.

This paper is the first in a series that will investigate “Who is a normative foreign policy actor?” It forms part of a new project intended to explore fundamental aspects of foreign policy at the global level, against the backdrop of a proliferation of global actors in the 21st century, following half a century with only one undisputed global hegemon: the US. The European Union is itself a new or emerging foreign policy actor, driven by self-declared normative principles. But Russia, China and India are also increasingly assertive actors on the global stage and similarly claim to be driven by a normative agenda. The question is how will these various global actors define their foreign policy priorities, and how they will interact, especially if their ideas of normative behaviour differ? This first paper sets out a conceptual framework for exploring these issues and defines ‘normative’ as being strongly based on international law and institutions, and thus the most ‘universalisable’ basis upon which to assess foreign policy. The foreign policy actor nevertheless has to be assessed not only on its declared goals, but also on the means it employs and the results it obtains. The truly normative foreign policy actor should score consistently on all three counts and in many different contexts, which will condition the extent to which normative policies are chosen, viable and effective. Subsequent papers in the series will apply this conceptual framework to five case studies on China, the EU, India, Russia and the US.

In the multipolar world that is starting to shape the 21st century, the EU’s role and influence will depend, to a large degree, on its relations with the rising powers. After the US, Russia and China will be the countries that matter most to the EU. Its ties with Russia will be crucial for the continent’s security and energy supply. The EU-China relationship promises great wealth for both parties but, if mishandled, could tilt the world towards greater protectionism. A third rising power, India, currently trades less with the EU than Russia or China do, but that could change in the long run.

This brief is the outcome of Marcin Zaborowski’s mission to Washington DC between 20-26 March 2006. During his trip Marcin attended a conference on ‘NATO and the EU: Improving Practical Cooperation’ at the National Defence University, visited the Office of European Union and Regional Affairs, the Office of Arabian Peninsula & Iran Affairs and the Office of Chinese and Mongolian Affairs at the State Department. Marcin also met some staff members from the two Houses of Congress and the Library of Congress as well as from some leading think-tanks.

This note assesses the impact of the political crisis affecting the EU in the wake of the constitutional referenda, specifically with reference to the image and performance of the Union in the wider international world. The basic assumption is that the viability of CFSP and of EC external relations largely depends on the political cohesion of the EU. This is even more the case for a unique, rule-based and supposedly value-driven international actor like the EU. First, the note addresses some of the defining characteristics of the European project, highlights its distinctiveness and explores its shortcomings in a turbulent international environment. Second, the note touches upon the root causes of the rejection of the Constitutional Treaty in the French and Dutch national referenda, in order to explore the political implications of the crisis for the EU's external posture. The note concludes that renewed internal political cohesion is a necessary pre-condition for the Union to stand up to its reputation of global norm-setter and to perform effectively as a strategic international actor in foreign and security policy.

Although the EU faces a wide array of challenges from beyond its borders, it is ill-equipped to deal with them. The Union seldom takes a strategic approach to foreign policy. Its institutions and member-states often fail to co-ordinate their various policies and instruments – including trade, aid, defence, policing and diplomacy – in the pursuit of common objectives. The institutions of the ‘rotating presidency’ and the ‘troika’ (the representation of the EU by the presidency’s foreign minister, the High Representative and the commissioner for external relations) limit the EU’s effectiveness. The loss of the constitutional treaty has deprived the EU of some sensible reforms to the way it makes and manages foreign policy. However, even with the current treaties, the EU could do plenty to strengthen its foreign policy. This policy brief suggests ways of encouraging the EU to take a more strategic approach to foreign policy; of diminishing the role of the rotating presidency; of ensuring that the memberstates and EU institutions feel a sense of shared ownership of external policies; and of achieving more coherence between the policies of the member-states and the institutions.

In December 2005, the EU-25 adopted the new Strategy for Africa, based on the Millennium Development Goals. Keeping the commitments requires the new member states and re-emerging donors to adapt their development tools and policies. They are rediscovering the African continent, which has not been part of their foreign policy priorities since 1989. Indeed, the older member states have long experiences in development assistance to Africa: how can they transfer their expertise to the new member states within the European framework? Having learnt from their recent democratic and economic transitions, to what extent can the new member states contribute to Africa’s development?

Para la UE, la apertura de China al mundo supone un reto. Bruselas se encuentra actualmente en proceso de diseñar una política exterior ambiciosa y global hacia Beijing. Sin embargo, existen razones internas y externas –como la falta de cohesión en política exterior de los diferentes países de la UE y la influencia de los EEUU– que hacen que sea difícil su plena puesta en práctica. Si bien una fuerte relación UE-China no se opone necesariamente al tradicional y esencial vínculo transatlántico, para que se llegara a una articulación efectiva de la relación entre las tres partes (UE, EEUU y China) sería imprescindible contar con una Unión Europea políticamente unida y dispuesta a desempeñar un papel estratégico en los asuntos internacionales. En este sentido, el hecho de que el 20% de la población mundial se pueda integrar en lo que conocemos como el sistema de comercio internacional, supone para la primera potencia comercial del mundo no solo un reto sino también un impulso para una mayor integración política. A Europa se le pide que asuma su responsabilidad histórica, y esta iniciativa política podría ayudar a la UE a encauzar correctamente sus esfuerzos y desviar su atención de otros asuntos, quizá más urgentes, pero seguramente de menor importancia.

Las elecciones legislativas celebradas en Portugal abren un nuevo ciclo político, tanto desde el punto de vista interno como externo. Pese a la ausencia, en términos generales, de la política exterior en la campaña electoral, lo cierto es que el país deberá afrontar importantes retos en el frente exterior, ahora con una mayor legitimidad interna.

Predecir que harán las sociedades es imposible. Sin embargo, es posible identificar ciertas tendencias, como acaba de escribir el historiador Eric Hobsbawm. Por ejemplo, más síntomas de deterioro medio ambiental, y tirantez entre Estados y organizaciones que defienden la protección del planeta.