Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Managing Crises, Making Peace pp 91–110Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

EU-NATO Relations in Crisis Management Operations: The Practice of Informality

  • Chapter

Part of the Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies book series (RCS)

Abstract

The relationship of the European Union (EU) to the ‘other Brussels-based organisation’, meaning the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), can be characterised as one with many contradictions. Despite the overlap of 21 states that are members of both the EU and NATO, the relationship between the two has been strained. The development of the EU as a security actor possibly trespassing on the prerogative of NATO remains a contentious issue. Ever since the EU gained a defence and security policy of its own, there has been a certain rivalry or ‘beauty contest’ (Varwick, 2006) between the two organisations. Moreover, although NATO and the EU have established arrangements for regular consultation at different levels, the agenda of the joint meetings of the North Atlantic Council (NAC) and the Political and Security Committee (PSC) of the EU are restricted to discussions on the ‘Berlin Plus’ operation in Bosnia only. Particularly in the area of operational cooperation the limitations of official EU-NATO interaction come to the fore. EU-NATO competition over missions is already built in, in the sense that NATO’s non-Article 5 missions overlap to a large extent the EU’s Petersberg tasks. The organisations have taken on similar responsibilities. NATO and the EU are both conducting operations in Macedonia (Allied Harmony, Concordia), Afghanistan (ISAF/NTM-A, EUPOL-A), Kosovo (KFOR, EULEX), Sudan and off the coast of Somalia (Ocean Shield, Atalanta).

Keywords

  • European Union
  • European Union Member State
  • African Union
  • North Atlantic Treaty Organization
  • European Security

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   19.99
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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Agence Europe (2013) European Diplomacy and Defence, 590, 7 March.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ames P. (2010) ‘Rasmussen Seeks to Break Deadlock’, Europolitics, 26 February.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry J. (2012) The US-EU-NATO Relationship — Addressing 21st Century Security Challenges (Washington, DC: The European Institute).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu P. (1990) The Logic of Practice (Stanford: Stanford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cadier D. (2011) ‘EU Mission in Kosovo (EULEX): Constructing Ambiguity or Constructive Disunity?’ Transatlantic Security Paper, 3, June.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornish P. (2006) ‘EU and NATO: Cooperation or Competition’, European Parliament, Briefing Paper, Brussels, October.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of the European Union (2011) Council Decisions on the Common Security and Defence Policy, 1 December.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dempsey J. (2010) ‘Between the European Union and NATO. Many Walls’, New York Times, 24 November.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dursun-Ozkanca O. and Mazzucelli C. (2012) ‘Veto Players Inside and Out: The Future of EU-NATO Security Relations as Explained in a Comparative Foreign Policy Analysis of French and Turkish Grand Strategies’ in Laursen F. (ed.) The EU, Security and Transatlantic Relations (Brussels: Peter Lang Publishers).

    Google Scholar 

  • EU-NATO Declaration on ESDP (2002), http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/crmsUpload/73803%20-%20Solana%20-%20Permanent%20arrangements%20 +%20NATO%20declaration.pdf, date accessed 1 December 2014.

  • Graeger N. and Haugevik K. M. (2011) ‘The EU’s Performance with and within NATO: Assessing Objectives, Outcomes and Organisational Practices’, Journal of European Integration, 33, 6, 743–757.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Greve G. et al. (2009) (eds) European Security and Defence Policy. The First Ten Years (1999–2009) (Paris: EU Institute for Security Studies).

    Google Scholar 

  • Heiduk F. (2011) ‘Policing Mars or Venus? Comparing European and US Approaches to Police Assistance’, European Security, 20, 3, 262–282.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Helly D. (2011) ‘Lessons from Atalanta and EU Counter-piracy Policies’, EUISS Seminar Report, (Brussels: European Union Institute for Security Studies), 17 June.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann S. and Reynolds C. (2007) EU-NATO Relations: Time to Thaw the ‘Frozen Conflict’, SWP Comments 12, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • House of Lords (2011) The EU’s Afghan Police Mission, 8th Report of Session 2010–2011, London, 16 February.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howorth J. (2003) ‘EU-NATO. Wedlock or Deadlock?’, Cooperation and Conflict, 38, 3, 235–254.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Howorth J. (2009) ‘NATO and ESDP: Institutional Complexities and Political Realities’, Politique étrangère, 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes P. (2007) NATO and the EU: Managing the Frozen Conflict. Test Case Afghanistan, ZEI Discussion Paper, 178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irondelle B. and Mérand F. (2010) ‘France’s Return to NATO: The Death Knell for CSDP?’ European Security, 19, 1, 29–43.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • ISIS (2005) ‘Supporting the AU in Darfur. A Test for EU-NATO Cooperation’, ISIS European Security Review, 26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joergensen K. E., Oberthur S. and Shahin J. (2011) ‘Introduction: Assessing the EU’s Performance in International Institutions — Conceptual Framework and Core Findings’, Journal of European Integration, 33, 6, 599–620.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kaye D. D. (2005) ‘Rethinking Track Two Diplomacy: The Middle East and South Asia’, Clingendael Diplomacy Papers, 3 (The Hague: Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken (2012a) ‘Kabinetsreactie op het rapport van de Europese rekenkamer over EU-steun aan Kosovo specifiek gerelateerd aan capaciteitsopbouw rule of law’, Kamerbrief, 14 December.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken (2012b) ‘Verlenging Nederlandse bijdrage missies Atalanta en Ocean shield’, Kamerbrief, 7 December.

    Google Scholar 

  • NATO (2002) ‘EU-NATO Declaration on CSDP’, press release, 16 December, http://www.nato.int/docu/pr/2002/p02–142e.htm, date accessed 2 March 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • NATO’s Joint Analysis and Lessons Learned Centre (2011) External Information Sharing in Support of NATO Counter-Piracy Operations, Non-Classified Extract, NATO Brussels, 15 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • NATO Parliamentary Assembly (2007) NATO-EU Operational Co-Operation, Committee Report, Annual Session, Reykjavik.

    Google Scholar 

  • NATO (n.d.) Operation Althea, website page, http://www.aco.nato.int/page39511625.aspx, date accessed 6 January 2013.

  • Neumann I. B. (2002) ‘Returning Practice to the Linguistic Turn: The Case of Diplomacy’, Millennium: Journal oflnternational Studies, 31, 3, 627–651.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Pouliot V. (2008) ‘The Logic of Practicality: A Theory of Practice of Security Communities’, International Organization, 62, 2, 257–288.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Reckwitz A. (2002) ‘Toward a Theory of Social Practices: A Development in Culturalist Theorizing’, European Journal of Social Theory, 5, 2, 245–246.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Segell G. (2011) ‘NATO’s Policy in Africa. Initiated in Sudan, Continued in Libya’, Strategic Insights, 10, 3, Winter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seibert B. H. (2009) ‘When Great Powers Compete, the Pirates Win’, Foreign Policy, 30 March.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terlikowski M. (2010) ‘EU-NATO Partnership and its Prospects’, Polish Institute of International Affairs, Bulletin No. 105 (181), 19 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toje A. (2008) ‘The EU, NATO and European Defence. A Slow Train Coming’, Occasional Paper, 74 (Paris: EUISS), December.

    Google Scholar 

  • UK Parliament (2011) Government’s Response to the House of Lords Select Committee on the European Union Report on EU’s Police Mission — Afghanistan, http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/lords-select/eu — -foreign-affairs-defence-and-development-policy-sub-committee-c/inquirie s/parlia-ment-2010/the-eus-afghan-police-mission/, date accessed 25 February 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Santen, H. and Molenaar A. (2008) ‘EU-NATO-samenwerking: tijd voor transformatie’, Internationale Spectator, 62, 6, 343–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varwick J. (2006) ‘European Union and NATO. Partnership, Competition or Rivalry?’ Kieler Analysen zur Sicherheitspolitik, 18, ISUK, June.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varwick J. and Koops J. (2009) ‘The European Union and NATO: “Shrewd Interorganizationalism in the Making?”’ in Joergensen K. E. (ed.) The European Union and International Organizations (Milton Park: Routledge), 101–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yost D. S. (2007) NATO and International Organizations (Rome: NATO Defence College).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Margriet Drent
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Unitelma Sapienza, University of Rome, Italy

    Maria Grazia Galantino

  2. University of Coimbra, Portugal

    Maria Raquel Freire

Copyright information

© 2015 Margriet Drent

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Drent, M. (2015). EU-NATO Relations in Crisis Management Operations: The Practice of Informality. In: Galantino, M.G., Freire, M.R. (eds) Managing Crises, Making Peace. Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137442253_5

Download citation

search

Navigation