Abstract
The entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009 is not likely to revolutionise the financing of the European Union’s (EU’s) Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). Article 41 TEU takes over the general principles on financing the CFSP enshrined in Arts. 28.2 and 28.3 TEU-Nice without significant amendments. Accordingly, as a rule, administrative expenditure and operational expenditure without military and defence implications continue to be financed out of the CFSP budget as a part of the EU’s budget. In contrast, expenditure with military and defence implications continue to be financed from other sources. Consequently, established practice in the financing of the CFSP will continue to a large extent under the new Treaty.1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
- 2.
Cf. Avery (2008), p. 40.
- 3.
Council Joint Action No. 709/2009/CFSP on the European Union mission to provide advice and assistance for security sector reform in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (EUSEC RD Congo), O.J. L 246/33 (2009).
- 4.
The CONCORDIA operation in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia launched in 2003 was one exception to this rule. In this case, the Council agreed on an ad hoc basis to define certain expenses as common costs.
- 5.
The Athena mechanism was last revised under the French Presidency in 2008. Cf. Council Decision No. 975/2008/CFSP establishing a mechanism to administer the financing of the common costs of European Union operations having military or defence implications (ATHENA), O.J. L 345/96 (2008). Concerning the application of the Athena mechanism, cf. e.g. Council Decision No. 96/2010/CFSP on a European Union military mission to contribute to the training of Somali security forces (EUTM Somalia), O.J. L 44/16 (2010). On the functioning of the Athena mechanism, cf. Scannell (2004), p. 534 et seqq.
- 6.
Protocol on the position of Denmark annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty establishing the European Communities, O.J. C 340/101 (1997).
- 7.
Cf. Schwarze (2009), pp. 155–158.
- 8.
Cases C-402/05 P and C-415/05 P Kadi and al Barakaat v Council and Commission (ECJ 3 September 2008), Case C-91/05 Commission v Council (ECJ 20 May 2008).
- 9.
Cf. Inter-Institutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management, O.J. C 139/1 (2006), para 43.
- 10.
Cf. Inter-Institutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management, O.J. C 139/1 (2006), para 43.
- 11.
Cf. Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council No. 1717/2006 establishing an Instrument for Stability, O.J. L 327/1 (2006).
- 12.
For further reading on the evolution of the CFSP budget, cf. Grevi et al. (2009), p. 92 ff. The exceptionally high amount in 2008 is related to the launching of the EU’s biggest civilian CSDP mission to date, EULEX Kosovo.
- 13.
Cf. Wessels and Bopp (2008), p. 11.
- 14.
Cf. Council Joint Action No 736/2008/CFSP on the European Union Monitoring Mission in Georgia (EUMM Georgia), O.J. L 248/26 (2008).
- 15.
Cf. Council Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No. 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities, as last amended by Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No. 1525/2007, O.J. L 343 (2007). Cf. also Commission Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No. 2342/2002 as amended by Commission Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No. 1261/2005, O.J. L 201 (2005), Commission Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No. 1248/2006, O.J. L 227 (2006) and Commission Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No. 478/2007, O.J. L 111 (2007).
- 16.
For an overview of the key procedural steps in the establishment of a CSDP mission, cf. Heise (2009), p. 12. Cf. also Council Decision No. 975/2008/CFSP establishing a mechanism to administer the financing of the common costs of European Union operations having military or defence implications (ATHENA), O.J. L 345/96 (2008). For an introduction to the Athena mechanism, cf. Terpan (2008).
- 17.
Cf. European Convention CONV 461/02 Final Report of Working Group VIII – Defence, p. 18.
- 18.
Cf. Council Decision No 427/2010/ CSFP establishing the organisation and functioning of the EEAS, O.J. L 201/30 (2010).
- 19.
Cf. Council Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No. 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities, as last amended by Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No. 1525/2007, O.J. L 343 (2007). Cf. also Commission Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No. 2342/2002 as amended by Commission Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No. 1261/2005, O.J. L 201 (2005), Commission Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No. 1248/2006, O.J. L 227 (2006) and Commission Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No. 478/2007, O.J. L 111 (2007). The future of the Special Adviser construction is currently being discussed in Brussels; in this debate, some argue that it would be preferable to endow civilian CSDP missions with a “limited legal personality”.
- 20.
Cf. Drent and Zandee (2010).
References
Avery G (2008) Europe’s future foreign service. Int Spectator 43(1):29–41
Drent M, Zandee D (2010) Breaking pillars. Towards a civil-military security approach for the European Union. Clingendael, The Hague
Grevi G, Helly D, Keohane D (2009) European Security and Defence Policy. The first 10 Years. European Union Institute for Security Studies, Paris
Heise V (2009) Zehn Jahre Europäische Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik. Entwicklung, Stand und Probleme. SWP Studie 25:1–39
Major C (2010) Außen-, Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik der EU nach Lissabon. SWP Aktuell 7:1–4
Scannell D (2004) Financing ESDP military operations. Eur Foreign Aff Rev 9:529–549
Schwarze J (2009) EU-Kommentar. Nomos, Baden-Baden
Terpan F (2008) Les bases de financement des opérations militaires de l’Union européenne. ARES 60:71–78
von Ondarza N (2008) Die EU-Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik im Schatten der Ungewissheit. SWP Studie 27:1–29
Wessels W, Bopp F (2008). The institutional architecture of CFSP after the Lisbon Treaty – constitutional breakthrough or challenges ahead? Challenge – The Changing Landscape of European Liberty and Security 10, pp 1–31
Whitman R, Juncos A (2009) The Lisbon Treaty and the foreign, security and defence policy: reforms, implementation and the consequences of (non-)ratification. Eur Foreign Aff Rev 14:25–46
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sautter, G. (2012). The Financing of Common Foreign and Security Policy – on Continuity and Change. In: Blanke, HJ., Mangiameli, S. (eds) The European Union after Lisbon. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19507-5_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19507-5_24
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-19506-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-19507-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)