Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Heading Forward in Response to Crisis: How the Ukraine Crisis Affected EU Maritime Foreign and Security Policy Integration

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

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

Abstract

This chapter discusses the impact of the Ukraine crisis on EU foreign and security policy integration. It finds that the EU has responded to Russia’s aggression by deepening cooperation in areas not directly linked to Ukraine. Two least likely cases are analyzed: The EU’s Maritime Security Strategy and the EU’s Arctic policies. In both of these cases, agreement among the EU member states to adopt a common EU policy was driven mainly by Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014. This crisis functioned as a critical juncture, moving EU security policies to the top of the EU agenda and affecting reluctant member states’ positions in favor of forming common policies. In the foreign policy domain, crisis triggers more integration as the EU member states reactively seek to address common challenges.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
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.

    Interviews (2010), (2013),(2014)— see below. Also see A. Frontini, ‘The European Union Maritime Security Strategy: sailing uncharted waters?’, 26 June (2014), http://www.epc.eu/pub_details.php?pub_id=4569; Germond (2015).

References

  • Baev, P. K. (2015). Russia’s Arctic aspirations. In J. Jokela (Ed.), Arctic Security Matters ISS Report Arctic Matters (pp. 24, 35–42). Paris: The European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Capoccia, G., & Kelemen, R. D. (2007). The Study of Critical Junctures: Theory, Narrative, and Counterfactuals in Historical Institutionalism. World Politics, 59, 341–369. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887100020852.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Commission. (2016‚ April 27). A New Integrated EU Policy for the Arctic Adopted. Press release. Brussels. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_16_1539.

  • Commission and EEAS. (2012‚ June 26). Joint communication to the european parliament and the Council Developing a European Union Policy Towards the Arctic Region: Progress Since 2008 and Next Steps, (JOIN/2012/19 final). Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission and EEAS. (2014). Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council. For an Open and Secure Global Maritime Domain: Elements for a European Union Maritime Security Strategy (JOIN/2014/09 final). Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission and the EEAS. (2016, April). Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council: An integrated European Union policy for the Arctic. Brussels. Accessed 25 October 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council. (2009). Council Conclusions on Arctic issues. 2985th Foreign Affairs Council. Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council. (2014a, May 12). Council conclusions on developing a European Union Policy towards the Arctic Region. Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council. (2014b, December 16). European Union Maritime Security Strategy (EUMSS). Action plan, (OR. en), 17002/14. Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council. (2014c). European Union Maritime Security Strategy (11205/14). Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council. (2016). Conclusions on the Arctic as Adopted by the Council on 20 June 2016 (10400/16 COEST 166). Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council. (2010, April 26). Council Conclusions on a Maritime security strategy. 309th Foreign Affairs Council Meeting, Luxembourg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cram, L. (1994). The European Commission as a Multi-Organization: Social Policy and IT Policy in the EU. Journal of European Public Policy, 1, 195–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Depledge, D. (2015a). Hard Security Developments. In J. Jokela (Ed.), Arctic Security Matters Iss Report Arctic Matters (pp. 24, 59–68). Paris: The European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Depledge, D. (2015b, April 25). The EU and the Arctic Council: Commentary. European Council on Foreign Relations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra, H. (2014). Approaches to Delegation in EU Foreign Policy: The Case of the Commission. In M. Wilga & I. P. Karolewski (Eds.), New Approaches to EU Foreign Policy (pp. 38–56, Routledge Advances in European Politics). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elgström, O., & Smith, M. (2008). The European Union’s Roles in International Politics: Concepts and Analysis (Routledge ECPR studies in European Political Science, vol. 45). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Council. (2013). European Council Conclusions. EUCO 217/13, 19/20 December 2013. Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falkner, R. (2007). The Political Economy of ‘Normative Power’ Europe: EU Environmental Leadership in International Biotechnology Regulation. Journal of European Public Policy, 14, 507–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frontini, A. (2014). The European Union Maritime Security Strategy: Sailing Uncharted Waters? EPC Commentary, 26 June 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gautier, D. L. et al. (2009). Assessment of Undiscovered Oil and Gas in the Arctic. Science, 324, 1175–1179. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1169467.

  • German Federal Ministry for the Enviroment, Nature Conversation and Nucelar Safety. (2017). German Arctic Policy Guidelines. Berlin: Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB).

    Google Scholar 

  • Germond, B. (2015). The Maritime Dimension of European Security: Seapower and the European Union (Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haftendorn, H. (2011). NATO and the Arctic: Is the Atlantic Alliance a Cold War Relic in a Peaceful Region Now Faced with Non-Military challenges? European Security, 20, 337–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2011.608352.

  • Jokela, J. (Ed.). (2015). Arctic Security Matters (ISS Report Arctic Matters (24)). Paris: The European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Manners, I. (2002). Normative Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms? JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 40, 235–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merket, H. (2012). The European External Action Service and the Nexus between CFSP/CSDP and Development Cooperation. European Foreign Affairs Review, 17(4), 625–651.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meunier, S., & Nicolaïdis, K. (2006). The European Union as a Conflicted Trade Power. Journal of European Public Policy, 13, 906–925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Missiroli, A. (2015). Forword. In J. Jokela (Ed.), Arctic Security Matters ISS Report Arctic Matters (24). Paris: The European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, A. (1998). The choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht (Cornell Studies in Political Economy). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, A., & Schimmelfennig, F. (2009). Liberal lntergovernmentalism. In A. Wiener & T. Diez (Eds.), European Integration Theory (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Offerdal, K. (2011). The EU in the Arctic: In Pursuit of Legitimacy and Influence. The Arctic is Hot, Part II. International Journal, 66, 861–877.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollack, M. A. (1997). Delegation, Agency, and Agenda Setting in the European Community. International Organization, 51, 99–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raspotnik, A., & Stępień, A. (2017). The European Parliament Heading Towards Icy Waters—Again. ArCticles, Arctic Centre, University of Lapland, Finland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riddervold, M. (2018). The Maritime Turn in EU Foreign and Security Policies. Cham: Springer International Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Riddervold, M., & Cross, M. K. (2019). Reactive Power EU: Russian Aggression and the Development of an EU Arctic Policy. European Foreign Affairs Review, 24(1), 43–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riddervold, M., & Rosén, G. (2015). Beyond Intergovernmental Cooperation: The Influence of the European Parliament and the Commission on EU Foreign and Security Policies. European Foreign Affairs Review, 20(3), 399–417.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riddervold, M., & Trondal, J. (2020). The Commission’s Informal Agenda-setting in the CFSP. Agenda Leadership, Coalition-building, and Community Framing. Comparative European Politics. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-020-00218-1.

  • Soini, T. (2016, January 28). Minister Soini’s Opening Speech. The EU’s Strategic Vision for Relations with Russia and the Eastern Neighbourhood. Finland: The Finnish Institute of International Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tallberg, J. (2003). European Governance and Supranational Institutions. Abingdon, UK: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thym, D. (2011). Holding Europe’s CFSP-CSDP Executive to Account in the Age of the Lisbon Treaty. Serie Union Europea, 53, 1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Boston, London: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegge, N. (2011). The EU and the Arctic: European Foreign Policy in the Making Arctic. Review on Law and Politics, 3(1), 6–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, S., & Romanyshyn, I. (2011). Breaking the Ice: The European Unionand the Arctic. International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis, 66, 849–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Inland School of Business and Social Sciences, Inland University, Rena and Lillehammer, Norway

    Marianne Riddervold

  2. The Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI), Oslo, Norway

    Marianne Riddervold

  3. Institute of European Studies, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA

    Marianne Riddervold

Authors
  1. Marianne Riddervold
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marianne Riddervold .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Inland School of Business and Social Sciences, Inland University, Rena and Lillehammer, Norway

    Marianne Riddervold

  2. Inland School of Business and Social Sciences, Inland University, Rena and Lillehammer, Norway

    Jarle Trondal

  3. Department of Political Science and Management, University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway

    Akasemi Newsome

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

Riddervold, M. (2021). Heading Forward in Response to Crisis: How the Ukraine Crisis Affected EU Maritime Foreign and Security Policy Integration. 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_33

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation