EU-NATO Security Relations in Light of the Treat of Lisbon and NATO Operation in Libya (MA thesis: Chapter 3), 2022
Libya was a perfect storm for the EU. If a clear majority of EU member states do not consider Lib... more Libya was a perfect storm for the EU. If a clear majority of EU member states do not consider Libya a fit subject for discussion as a possible CSDP mission, then what exactly is CSDP for? The failure to promote the EU as an ept political actor in the region sheds light on the missed opportunities that EU and member states could have seized. First, defending the European interests in the region. In 2010, Libya was the sixth major energy provider to the EU, covering 17 percent of Europe’s energy needs. Second, by proactively taking part in addressing the Libyan crisis, the EU could have fostered stability in the region, a task that CSDP could have easily undertaken. Second, the EU could have launched a CSDP operation on the ‘coalition of the willing’ basis, thereby bridging the gap between the member states willing to intervene, and those who were less interested in intervention. Third, the EU would have built on its success in the BiH operation (EUFOR Operation Althea), and established a successful model for CSDP operations, and effective Berlin-Plus-based coordination with NATO.
EU-NATO Security Relations in Light of the Treat of Lisbon and NATO Operation in Libya (MA thesis: Introduction), 2022
Literature Review Literature revolving around the NATO-CSDP relationship, and attempting to analy... more Literature Review Literature revolving around the NATO-CSDP relationship, and attempting to analyze its evolution after the Lisbon Treaty, is so abundant and full of nuances. To come up with clear-cut, unequivocal and undisputed trajectories for this relationship, as such, is by no means an easy task. That said, however, three broad trends, representing three trajectories for the said relationship, could be discerned in the reviewed literature. These trajectories are: stagnation, disintegration, and consolidation.
EU-NATO Security Relations in Light of the Treaty of Lisbon and NATO Operation In Libya (MA thesis: Chapter 3.4), 2022
A present-day analysis of the EU-NATO security relationship cannot be relevant and current if it ... more A present-day analysis of the EU-NATO security relationship cannot be relevant and current if it fails to touch on the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian conflict. The invasion of Ukraine has unleashed the biggest conflict in Europe since WWII, according to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. Indeed, all the parties involved are well aware that the crisis is about much more than Ukraine. In its declared objectives of the attack, Moscow made clear that it sought to “demilitarize Ukraine, rid it of dangerous nationalists, and defend Russia against the transatlantic alliance (NATO)”. True, NATO’s Secretary General had formerly been quoted as saying that “this is Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, and we are supporting Ukraine defend itself”, indicating that NATO is not party to the conflict. One could get a different view from NATO’s 2022 Strategic Concept, though. It identifies Russia as the most significant threat to allied security, and recognizes the invasion of Ukraine as the biggest overhaul of the allied collective defense and deterrence since the Cold War. So, for many, “[t]he fighting may be in Ukraine, but the underlying strategic battle is about the fate of the Western alliance.” When and why the Ukrainian crisis broke out are two highly controversial questions. For some, it started on the 24th of February 2022, when the invasion started. Others would argue the tragedy had been unfolding for over eight years, since Russia annexed Crimea in 2014. Still others hold the view that the war drums started beating in Budapest in 2008, when NATO started to enlarge towards and beyond the borders of the former USSR – a step which has inflamed Russia ever since. More important is the ‘why’ question. At least three explanations for the invasion are found in literature: a) Russia’s political opportunism; b) defending Russia against the West; c) geopolitical inevitability.
EU-NATO Security Relations in Light of the Treaty of Lisbon and NATO Operation In Libya (MA thesis: Chapter 3), 2022
When probing the transatlantic security relations, the NATO operation in Libya in 2011, dubbed “O... more When probing the transatlantic security relations, the NATO operation in Libya in 2011, dubbed “Operation Unified Protector”, stands out as being amongst the most relevant EU-NATO encounters. Not only did the operation put the Lisbon Treaty to test, but also bore far-reaching implications casting shadow on the transatlantic security relationship at large. As such, it came as no surprise that Jolyon Howorth, for one, was of the viewpoint that “the Libyan crisis has produced a decisive turning point in […] the transatlantic relationship. This could amount to a paradigm shift.” Going beyond the direct results of the operation, which remain largely controversial, there is barely any controversy when it comes to the failure of CSDP in Libya. Nowhere is this to be more discernible than in the fact that, in the “the most serious crisis in the [EU’s] neighborhood since the Balkan wars of the 1990s,” and “certainly the most complex foreign policy challenge to face the EU since Lisbon,” no one even thought of the CSDP as a serious option for enforcing the Libyan no-fly-zone. As Howorth put it, “[t]he fact that the Libyan operation became a NATO mission at all is worth pondering. We have seen that the most likely ‘alternative’ to NATO (CSDP) was simply not an option.” If anything is to be inferred, it is that the Lisbon Treaty has brought about only a minimal difference (if any) in practice, and that, “[s]o far, Europe has struggled to stand the test.” Before examining the NATO Operation in Libya, it is useful to touch on two former military operations: EU Operation in Chad and CAR 2008, and EU Operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina 2004; the former usually dismissed as a failed operation, and the latter hailed as a success. By juxtaposing these three operations with one another, through an MDSD comparison model, this chapter seeks to identify the factors causing success or failure of CSDP operations. Though the Libya operation is the main case study, and the most important for advancing the analysis of this dissertation, it will be addressed third, after the Chad and Bosnia case studies, so as to incorporate insights from these two operations in the assessment of the Libya operation. The fourth and last case study is an attempt to understand the EU-NATO security relations in light of the ongoing war in Ukraine.
EU-NATO Security Relations in Light of the Treaty of Lisbon and NATO Operation In Libya (MA thesis: Chapter 2), 2022
To understand the present-day EU-NATO security relationship, and pinpoint the factors shaping it,... more To understand the present-day EU-NATO security relationship, and pinpoint the factors shaping it, it is important to go back in history, to put the investigated phenomenon in context, and get a clearer vision of its past. This chapter provides an analytical account of a few moments in the transatlantic journey, seen to be significant milestones, with far-reaching implications. From the Cold War, when NATO was recognized as the sole protector of Europe against the Soviet threat; to the collapse of the USSR, when NATO was thrown into uncertainty as its ‘raison d'être’ (reason for existence) no longer existed; to the Balkan conflict that brought about an ostensibly paradoxical impact: revived NATO, and catalyzed CSDP; to the St. Malo Summit, where the EU’s dream of military autonomy first took shape; to the Lisbon Treaty, where the CSDP was significantly reinforced, the transatlantic relationship went a long way. And exploring this way is indispensable for identifying the interaction mechanisms that have been at work between NATO and the EU, and deriving analytical insights that would help get a better understanding of the investigated phenomenon.
Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Cairo University, 2022
The Libyan crisis that broke out in 2011 is widely recognized as a turning point in the security ... more The Libyan crisis that broke out in 2011 is widely recognized as a turning point in the security relations between the European Union (EU) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The EU had been striving for achieving military (and, hence, political) autonomy since the end of the Cold War, especially after its failure to address a purely European crisis in the early 1990s: the Balkan wars. From St. Malo Declaration, in 1998, to the Treaty of Lisbon, in 2009, the Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP) evolved in the direction of a more autonomous EU; in the hope of enabling it to act independently from NATO. After the EU’s setback in Chad, in 2008, the Lisbon Treaty introduced several innovations meant to address the EU’s absence of political coherence, and shortfall of capabilities. Then came the Libyan crisis, less than two years later, to put to test the CSDP, the Lisbon Treaty, and the EU at large. Eventually, the EU was incapable of intervening in Libya within the CSDP framework. This thesis examines the underlying reasons why the EU failed to handle a crisis the CSDP is arguably designed for. To that end, a synthesis of theories is utilized with a view to looking at the EU, and the EU-NATO relationship, from diverse theoretical standpoints, to cover as many aspects of this complex phenomenon as possible. These theories are: neorealism, neoliberal institutionalism, social constructivism, and the economic theory of alliances. The propositions derived from this theoretical analysis are applied, through a deductive approach, to a case study on the NATO Libya operation 2011, alongside three smaller case studies on the EU Chad operation (2008), the EU operation in BiH (since 2004), and the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. The Libyan crisis shows that the Lisbon Treaty did little (if at all) to solve the EU’s perennial problems of political incoherence and capabilities shortfall. It also suggests that the EU, structurally, lacks some of the elements deemed to be essential for acting as an effective military alliance; most notably, identity harmony, strong leadership, size parity, and alliance asymmetry. And the failure of the EU to address large security threats makes cooperation with NATO indispensable. An institutional merger between CSDP and NATO can ensure the EU a higher degree of autonomy, not independently from NATO, but within it.
EU-NATO Security Relations in Light of the Treat of Lisbon and NATO Operation in Libya (MA thesis: Chapter 3), 2022
Libya was a perfect storm for the EU. If a clear majority of EU member states do not consider Lib... more Libya was a perfect storm for the EU. If a clear majority of EU member states do not consider Libya a fit subject for discussion as a possible CSDP mission, then what exactly is CSDP for? The failure to promote the EU as an ept political actor in the region sheds light on the missed opportunities that EU and member states could have seized. First, defending the European interests in the region. In 2010, Libya was the sixth major energy provider to the EU, covering 17 percent of Europe’s energy needs. Second, by proactively taking part in addressing the Libyan crisis, the EU could have fostered stability in the region, a task that CSDP could have easily undertaken. Second, the EU could have launched a CSDP operation on the ‘coalition of the willing’ basis, thereby bridging the gap between the member states willing to intervene, and those who were less interested in intervention. Third, the EU would have built on its success in the BiH operation (EUFOR Operation Althea), and established a successful model for CSDP operations, and effective Berlin-Plus-based coordination with NATO.
EU-NATO Security Relations in Light of the Treat of Lisbon and NATO Operation in Libya (MA thesis: Introduction), 2022
Literature Review Literature revolving around the NATO-CSDP relationship, and attempting to analy... more Literature Review Literature revolving around the NATO-CSDP relationship, and attempting to analyze its evolution after the Lisbon Treaty, is so abundant and full of nuances. To come up with clear-cut, unequivocal and undisputed trajectories for this relationship, as such, is by no means an easy task. That said, however, three broad trends, representing three trajectories for the said relationship, could be discerned in the reviewed literature. These trajectories are: stagnation, disintegration, and consolidation.
EU-NATO Security Relations in Light of the Treaty of Lisbon and NATO Operation In Libya (MA thesis: Chapter 3.4), 2022
A present-day analysis of the EU-NATO security relationship cannot be relevant and current if it ... more A present-day analysis of the EU-NATO security relationship cannot be relevant and current if it fails to touch on the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian conflict. The invasion of Ukraine has unleashed the biggest conflict in Europe since WWII, according to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. Indeed, all the parties involved are well aware that the crisis is about much more than Ukraine. In its declared objectives of the attack, Moscow made clear that it sought to “demilitarize Ukraine, rid it of dangerous nationalists, and defend Russia against the transatlantic alliance (NATO)”. True, NATO’s Secretary General had formerly been quoted as saying that “this is Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, and we are supporting Ukraine defend itself”, indicating that NATO is not party to the conflict. One could get a different view from NATO’s 2022 Strategic Concept, though. It identifies Russia as the most significant threat to allied security, and recognizes the invasion of Ukraine as the biggest overhaul of the allied collective defense and deterrence since the Cold War. So, for many, “[t]he fighting may be in Ukraine, but the underlying strategic battle is about the fate of the Western alliance.” When and why the Ukrainian crisis broke out are two highly controversial questions. For some, it started on the 24th of February 2022, when the invasion started. Others would argue the tragedy had been unfolding for over eight years, since Russia annexed Crimea in 2014. Still others hold the view that the war drums started beating in Budapest in 2008, when NATO started to enlarge towards and beyond the borders of the former USSR – a step which has inflamed Russia ever since. More important is the ‘why’ question. At least three explanations for the invasion are found in literature: a) Russia’s political opportunism; b) defending Russia against the West; c) geopolitical inevitability.
EU-NATO Security Relations in Light of the Treaty of Lisbon and NATO Operation In Libya (MA thesis: Chapter 3), 2022
When probing the transatlantic security relations, the NATO operation in Libya in 2011, dubbed “O... more When probing the transatlantic security relations, the NATO operation in Libya in 2011, dubbed “Operation Unified Protector”, stands out as being amongst the most relevant EU-NATO encounters. Not only did the operation put the Lisbon Treaty to test, but also bore far-reaching implications casting shadow on the transatlantic security relationship at large. As such, it came as no surprise that Jolyon Howorth, for one, was of the viewpoint that “the Libyan crisis has produced a decisive turning point in […] the transatlantic relationship. This could amount to a paradigm shift.” Going beyond the direct results of the operation, which remain largely controversial, there is barely any controversy when it comes to the failure of CSDP in Libya. Nowhere is this to be more discernible than in the fact that, in the “the most serious crisis in the [EU’s] neighborhood since the Balkan wars of the 1990s,” and “certainly the most complex foreign policy challenge to face the EU since Lisbon,” no one even thought of the CSDP as a serious option for enforcing the Libyan no-fly-zone. As Howorth put it, “[t]he fact that the Libyan operation became a NATO mission at all is worth pondering. We have seen that the most likely ‘alternative’ to NATO (CSDP) was simply not an option.” If anything is to be inferred, it is that the Lisbon Treaty has brought about only a minimal difference (if any) in practice, and that, “[s]o far, Europe has struggled to stand the test.” Before examining the NATO Operation in Libya, it is useful to touch on two former military operations: EU Operation in Chad and CAR 2008, and EU Operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina 2004; the former usually dismissed as a failed operation, and the latter hailed as a success. By juxtaposing these three operations with one another, through an MDSD comparison model, this chapter seeks to identify the factors causing success or failure of CSDP operations. Though the Libya operation is the main case study, and the most important for advancing the analysis of this dissertation, it will be addressed third, after the Chad and Bosnia case studies, so as to incorporate insights from these two operations in the assessment of the Libya operation. The fourth and last case study is an attempt to understand the EU-NATO security relations in light of the ongoing war in Ukraine.
EU-NATO Security Relations in Light of the Treaty of Lisbon and NATO Operation In Libya (MA thesis: Chapter 2), 2022
To understand the present-day EU-NATO security relationship, and pinpoint the factors shaping it,... more To understand the present-day EU-NATO security relationship, and pinpoint the factors shaping it, it is important to go back in history, to put the investigated phenomenon in context, and get a clearer vision of its past. This chapter provides an analytical account of a few moments in the transatlantic journey, seen to be significant milestones, with far-reaching implications. From the Cold War, when NATO was recognized as the sole protector of Europe against the Soviet threat; to the collapse of the USSR, when NATO was thrown into uncertainty as its ‘raison d'être’ (reason for existence) no longer existed; to the Balkan conflict that brought about an ostensibly paradoxical impact: revived NATO, and catalyzed CSDP; to the St. Malo Summit, where the EU’s dream of military autonomy first took shape; to the Lisbon Treaty, where the CSDP was significantly reinforced, the transatlantic relationship went a long way. And exploring this way is indispensable for identifying the interaction mechanisms that have been at work between NATO and the EU, and deriving analytical insights that would help get a better understanding of the investigated phenomenon.
Faculty of Economics and Political Science, Cairo University, 2022
The Libyan crisis that broke out in 2011 is widely recognized as a turning point in the security ... more The Libyan crisis that broke out in 2011 is widely recognized as a turning point in the security relations between the European Union (EU) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The EU had been striving for achieving military (and, hence, political) autonomy since the end of the Cold War, especially after its failure to address a purely European crisis in the early 1990s: the Balkan wars. From St. Malo Declaration, in 1998, to the Treaty of Lisbon, in 2009, the Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP) evolved in the direction of a more autonomous EU; in the hope of enabling it to act independently from NATO. After the EU’s setback in Chad, in 2008, the Lisbon Treaty introduced several innovations meant to address the EU’s absence of political coherence, and shortfall of capabilities. Then came the Libyan crisis, less than two years later, to put to test the CSDP, the Lisbon Treaty, and the EU at large. Eventually, the EU was incapable of intervening in Libya within the CSDP framework. This thesis examines the underlying reasons why the EU failed to handle a crisis the CSDP is arguably designed for. To that end, a synthesis of theories is utilized with a view to looking at the EU, and the EU-NATO relationship, from diverse theoretical standpoints, to cover as many aspects of this complex phenomenon as possible. These theories are: neorealism, neoliberal institutionalism, social constructivism, and the economic theory of alliances. The propositions derived from this theoretical analysis are applied, through a deductive approach, to a case study on the NATO Libya operation 2011, alongside three smaller case studies on the EU Chad operation (2008), the EU operation in BiH (since 2004), and the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. The Libyan crisis shows that the Lisbon Treaty did little (if at all) to solve the EU’s perennial problems of political incoherence and capabilities shortfall. It also suggests that the EU, structurally, lacks some of the elements deemed to be essential for acting as an effective military alliance; most notably, identity harmony, strong leadership, size parity, and alliance asymmetry. And the failure of the EU to address large security threats makes cooperation with NATO indispensable. An institutional merger between CSDP and NATO can ensure the EU a higher degree of autonomy, not independently from NATO, but within it.
Uploads