Advertisement

Channel Trouble? Challenges to UK-EU Security Collaboration After Brexit

  • Monika Sus
  • Benjamin MartillEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Negotiating the UK’s future security and defence relationship with the EU was never going to be easy, but many argued it would at least be simpler than in other areas. Yet the negotiations have proven more protracted than might have been expected. This chapter examines why this has been the case. Our argument is structured around the five main reasons given as to why security and defence would be an easier domain in which to reach agreement. Not only have a number of aspects relating to Britain’s role in European security been misrepresented, we argue, but also the basis for these arguments in the first place have been changed by the direct and indirect consequences of the Brexit vote itself.

Keywords

CSDP/CFSP NATO Brexit EU-UK cooperation Strategic autonomy 

References

  1. Bakker, A., Drent, M., & Zandee, D. (2017, July). European defence: How to engage the UK after Brexit? Clingendael Report. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://www.clingendael.org/sites/default/files/2017-07/Report_European_defence_after_Brexit.pdf
  2. Balfour, R. (Ed.). (2016). Europe’s troublemakers: The populist challenge to foreign policy. Brussels: European Policy Centre.Google Scholar
  3. Barnier, M. (2017, November). Speech by Michel Barnier at the Berlin security conference, Berlin. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-17-5021_en.pdf
  4. Barnier, M. (2018, May). Speech by Michel Barnier at the EU institute for security studies conference, Brussels. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-18-3785_en.pdf
  5. Besch, S., Bond, I., & Mortera-Martinez, C. (2018, June). Plugging in the British: Completing the circuit. Centre for European Reform. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://www.cer.eu/sites/default/files/report_pluggingin_12.6.18_1.pdf
  6. Biscop, S. (2016). All or nothing? The EU global strategy and defence policy after the Brexit. Contemporary Security Policy, 37(3), 431–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Black, J., Hall, A., Cox, K., Kepe, M., & Silfversen, E. (2017). Defence and security after Brexit: Understanding the possible implications of the UK’s decision to leave the EU. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
  8. Bond, I. (2018, November). Is Trump right to nuke the INF treaty? Centre for European Reform Insight. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://www.cer.eu/sites/default/files/insight_IB_2.11.18_2.pdf
  9. Chryssogelos, A. (2015). Patterns of transnational partisan contestation of European foreign policy. European Foreign Affairs Review, 20(2), 227–246.Google Scholar
  10. Clarke, H. D., Goodwin, M., & Whiteley, P. (2017). Brexit: Why Britain voted to leave the European Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Council of the EU. (2016, November 14). Implementation plan on security and defence. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/eugs_implementation_plan_st14392.en16_0.pdf
  12. Council of the EU. (2017). Council decision 2017/2315 of 11 December establishing permanent structured cooperation (PESCO) and determining the list of participating member states. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32017D2315&from=EN
  13. Cox, M. (2012). Too big to fail? The transatlantic relationship from Bush to Obama. Global Policy, 3(1), 71–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Curtin, D. (2018). The ties that bind: Securing information-sharing after Brexit. In B. Martill & U. Staiger (Eds.), Brexit and beyond: Rethinking the futures of Europe (pp. 148–155). London: UCL Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dennison, J., & Oliver, T. (2018, April 20). Brexit and NATO: Never the twain shall meet? Dahrendorf Forum Blog. Accessed December 6, 2018, from http://www.dahrendorf-forum.eu/brexit-nato-eu-defence/
  16. Dennison, S., & Pardijs, D. (2016). The world according to Europe’s insurgent parties: Putin, migration and people power. Brussels: European Council on Foreign Relations.Google Scholar
  17. Dijkstra, H. (2012). Agenda-setting in the common security and defence policy: An institutionalist perspective. Cooperation and Conflict, 47(4), 454–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dombrowski, P., & Reich, S. (2017). Does Donald Trump have a grand strategy? International Affairs, 93(5), 1013–1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dunn, D. H., & Webber, M. (2016). The UK, the European Union and NATO: Brexit’s unintended consequences. Global Affairs, 2(5), 471–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dwan, R. (2000). Jean Monnet and the European defence community, 1950-54. Cold War History, 1(1), 141–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. European Commission. (2016). Towards a European defence union: Permanent structured cooperation and the European defence fund. European Commission. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/defence-union_en.pdf
  22. European Commission. (2018a, June 13). EU budget: Stepping up the EU’s role as a security and defence provider. European Commission. Accessed December 6, 2018, from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-4121_en.htm
  23. European Commission. (2018b, November 14). Outline of the political declaration setting out the framework for the future relationship between the European Union and the United Kingdom. European Commission. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/outline_of_the_political_declaration.pdf
  24. European Commission. (2018c, May 2). EU budget: Commission proposes a modern budget for a union that protects, empowers and defends. European Commission. Accessed December 6, 2018, from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-3570_en.htm
  25. European External Action Service. (2018, November 19). Factsheet: The military planning and conduct capability. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage/54031/factsheet-military-planning-and-conduct-capability_en
  26. European Parliament. (2018, May 2018). CSDP after Brexit: The way forward. Study prepared by the DG for External Policies of the European Parliament’s Policy Department.Google Scholar
  27. Giegerich, B., & Mölling, C. (2018, February 18). The United Kingdom’s contribution to European security and defence. London: International Institute for Strategic Studies Report.Google Scholar
  28. Hadfield, A. (2018). Britain against the world? Foreign and security policy in the ‘age of Brexit’. In B. Martill & U. Staiger (Eds.), Brexit and beyond: Rethinking the futures of Europe (pp. 174–182). London: UCL Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Heisbourg, F. (2016). Brexit and European security. Survival, 58(3), 13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hill, C. (2018). Turning back the clock: The illusion of a global political role for Britain. In B. Martill & U. Staiger (Eds.), Brexit and beyond: Rethinking the futures of Europe (pp. 183–192). London: UCL Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hix, S. (2018). Brexit: Where is the EU-UK relationship heading? Journal of Common Market Studies, 56(S1), 11–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. HM Government. (2017). Foreign policy, defence and development: A future partnership paper. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office.Google Scholar
  33. HM Government. (2018). Framework for the UK-EU security partnership. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office.Google Scholar
  34. Hofmann, S. C. (2018, October) Brexit will weigh heavily on European security. Here’s why. Washington Post. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2018/10/18/brexit-will-weigh-heavily-on-european-security-heres-why/?utm_term=.e432ed471192
  35. Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2009). A postfunctionalist theory of European integration: From permissive consensus to constraining dissensus. British Journal of Political Science, 39(1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. House of Commons. (2018). Global Britain: Sixth report of session 2017–19. Report of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee. London: House of Commons Printing Office.Google Scholar
  37. Howorth, J. (2012). Decision-making in security and defence policy: Towards supranational intergovernmentalism. Cooperation and Conflict, 47(4), 433–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hyde-Price, A. G. V. (2015). The “sleep-walking giant” awakes: Resetting German foreign and security policy. European Security, 24(4), 600–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Juncker, J. C (2017, September). State of the union 2017, 13.Google Scholar
  40. Kahn, L. (2018, July 11). Putin’s cheerleaders: Why the Russian leader’s growing support in Europe makes a worrying amount of sense. Dahrendorf Forum Blog. Accessed December 6, 2018, from http://www.dahrendorf-forum.eu/putins-cheerleaders-why-the-russian-leaders-growing-support-in-europe-makes-a-worrying-amount-of-sense/
  41. Keating, D. (2015, September 3). Juncker calls for an EU army. European Voice.Google Scholar
  42. Keohane, D. (2018, March 22). EU-NATO alignment after Brexit. Carnegie Europe. Accessed December 6, 2018, from http://carnegieeurope.eu/strategiceurope/75861
  43. Major, C., & Mölling, C. (2017). France moves from EU defence to European defence. Carnegie Europe Briefing. Accessed December 6, 2018, from http://carnegieeurope.eu/strategiceurope/74944
  44. Major, C., & von Ondarza, N. (2018, June). No “Global Britain” after Brexit. SWP Comment, No 24.Google Scholar
  45. Martill, B. (2017, November 8). Brexit and UK foreign policy: ‘Keeping Britain Great’ or ‘Putting the Great back into Great Britain’? Dahrendorf Forum Blog. Accessed December 6, 2018, from http://www.dahrendorf-forum.eu/brexit-and-uk-foreign-policy-keeping-britain-great-or-putting-the-great-back-into-great-britain/
  46. Martill, B., & Staiger, U. (2018, September 14) Cultures of negotiation: Explaining Britain’s hard bargaining in the Brexit negotiations. Dahrendorf Forum Working Paper. Accessed December 6, 2018, from http://www.dahrendorf-forum.eu/publications/cultures-of-negotiation-explaining-britains-hard-bargaining-in-the-brexit-negotiations/
  47. Menon, A. (2011). Power, institutions and the CSDP: The promise of institutionalist theory. Journal of Common Market Studies, 49(1), 83–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Merkel, A. (2018). Rede von Bundeskanzlerin Merkel vor dem Europäischen Parlament am 13. November 2018 in Straßburg. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/bkin-de/aktuelles/rede-von-bundeskanzlerin-merkel-vor-dem-europaeischen-parlament-am-13-november-2018-in-strassburg-1549538
  49. Ruane, K. (2000). The rise and fall of the European defence community: Anglo-American relations and the crisis of European defence, 1950–55. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Schofield, K. (2017, September 29). Theresa May: I want a ‘bold, new security partnership with the EU’ after Brexit. PoliticsHome. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/foreign-affairs/brexit/news/89391/theresa-may-i-want-bold-new-security-partnership-eu-after
  51. Sternberg, C. S. (2013). The struggle for EU legitimacy: Public contestation, 1950–2005. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sus, M. (2017). Towards the European Union’s foreign policy 2025: Taking stock of the Dahrendorf Foresight project. Global Policy, 8(4), 115–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tardy, T. (2018). What third-country role is open to the UK in defence? CEPS Policy Briefing. Accessed April 24, 2018, from https://www.ceps.eu/publications/what-third-country-role-open-uk-defence
  54. The Economist. (2018, June 7). A Brexit row over Galileo could damage broader co-operation on defence. The Economist online. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://www.economist.com/britain/2018/06/07/a-brexit-row-over-galileo-could-damage-broader-co-operation-on-defence
  55. The Express. (2018a, July 10). UK could be DRAGGED into EU ARMY – even AFTER Brexit. The Express. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/986828/uk-eu-army-brexit-news-france-germany
  56. The Express. (2018b, March 16). Rees-Mogg demands inquiry over civil servants ‘hoodwinking’ voters with ‘KitKat’ Brexit. The Express. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/932731/Brexit-latest-news-Jacob-Rees-Mogg-civil-servants-kitkat-tapes
  57. The Sun. (2018, March 15). Bombshell tapes reveal how top Whitehall officials compared Brexit to a KitKat with chocolate layer hiding UK ties to Brussels. The Sun. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5822727/whitehall-brexit-brussels-secret-tapes/
  58. Tocci, N. (2018). Towards a European security and defence union: Was 2017 a watershed? Journal of Common Market Studies, 56(S1), 131–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Tocci, N., & Alcaro, R. (2014). Rethinking transatlantic relations in a multipolar era. International Politics, 51(3), 366–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tolhurst, A. (2017, September 14). Jacob Rees-Mogg destroys Jean-Claude Juncker’s ‘nightmare’ plan for an EU super state as he blasts Brussels’ demand for a Brexit ‘divorce bill’. The Sun. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4463323/jacob-rees-mogg-destroys-jean-claude-junckers-nightmare-plan-for-an-eu-super-state-as-he-blasts-brussels-demand-for-a-brexit-divorce-bill/
  61. Turpin, L. (2018, August). The future of UK-EU defence cooperation post-Brexit: A neoclassical realist approach. Paper presented at the ECPR General Conference, Hamburg. Accessed December 6, 2018, from https://ecpr.eu/Filestore/PaperProposal/8036257f-7807-43aa-9ab8-497c18d34f41.pdf
  62. Veterans for Britain. (2018, June 25). Did you know there are serious risks arising from UK involvement in EU defence union? Veterans for Britain Leaflet. Accessed December 6, 2018, from http://veteransforbritain.uk/risksleaflet/
  63. Whitman, R. (2016). The UK and EU foreign and security policy: An optional extra. The Political Quarterly, 87(2), 254–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Zaborowski, M. (2018, January). Poland and European defence integration. ECFR Policy Brief.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hertie School of GovernanceBerlinGermany
  2. 2.London School of EconomicsLondonUK

Personalised recommendations