Skip to main content

The Security and Defense Aspect of Brexit: Altering the Third Country Balance?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of EU Crises

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics ((PSEUP))

Abstract

What room is there for inclusion of third countries in EU security and defence initiatives and how does Brexit alter the politics of such inclusion? This chapter turns to the emergent power politics of third country participation in EU security and defence and makes a comparison between past EU practices toward Norway and the emerging question of the UK’s future status as a third country. It argues that whereas the EU internally heads forward on security and defence, how it deals with like-minded third country partners will be characterized by a continuation of the existing modus operandi, or muddling through. The argument is made with a specific focus on (1) the domestic level of politicization and (2) EU affordances.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Because non-members are not formal members of CSDP, Schimmelfennig et al. (2015) argues that there is no external differentiation, yet I treat opt-ins as political processes towards a differentiated relationship with the EU for third countries.

  2. 2.

    Or as Sjursen (2015) describes the Norwegian foreign policy consensus: A consensus in name only due to the lack of real (Habermasian) deliberation on these issues. Whatever nature of the consensus, Norway has been a close partner to the EU in the area of defence and has shown an eagerness to take part both in defence institutions and defence policies.

  3. 3.

    Helene Sjursen was also part of the group that wrote the report for the government.

  4. 4.

    The scholarship on why Norwegians are reluctant to join the EU at all is interesting yet not widely discussed in English writing (for accounts see Archer 2005; Ingebritsen 1998; Neumann 2002b).

  5. 5.

    The Norwegian government also did all it could to have the British not vote for Brexit in the first place (see Haugevik 2017; Helm 2015; Politico 2016).

  6. 6.

    Interview with Head of CSDP Section, 21 September 2018.

  7. 7.

    Interview with PSC Ambassador, 21 September 2018.

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Øyvind Svendsen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Svendsen, Ø. (2021). The Security and Defense Aspect of Brexit: Altering the Third Country Balance?. In: Riddervold, M., Trondal, J., Newsome, A. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of EU Crises. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51791-5_30

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics