8/9/2019 The Foreign Policy of the European Union: Assessing Results, Ushering in a New Era

1/1

The Brookings Institution hosted a panel with co-authors of the new book The Foreign Policyof the European Union--Assessing Europe's Role in the World. Federiga Bindi, BrookingSenior Fellow, who edited the book, moderated the panel. Joining her were Giuliano Amato,former Prime Minister of Italy and Vice President of the European Constitutional Convention,Daniel Hamilton, Director of the Center for Transatlantic Relations at Johns Hopkins SAIS,Andrew Moravcsik, Director of the European Union Program at Princeton University, and

Pierre Vimont, French Ambassador to the United States.

Amato remarked on the difficulties Europe had in figuring out what role it wanted to play onthe world stage, and what the European Union ought to be. Europeans tended to be moreunsatisfied than their accomplishments might warrant, and observed that he often heardmore positive things about the EU when he came to the US than he did at home. One powerthat the European Union definitely has is the transformative power of attraction. Thedemocracy and prosperity enjoyed by member countries had encouraged others in itsneighborhood, like the former communist bloc, to develop their own democracies in thehope of joining, as many have done. But could that regional power translate into making theEU a major global actor? In order to do so effectively, Amato said, Europe needed tomaintain strong transatlantic ties with the United States.

Dan Hamilton set out his view that the European Union does not have a traditional foreignpolicy, and is not likely to have one anytime soon. In areas of "non-traditional foreignpolicy," it did have an impact, even more so after the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty. Many ofthe changes dealt with justice and home affairs, which, although domestic in nature, wouldhave impacts for foreign relations in terrorism-related cases and the like. Also significant isthe Charter of Fundamental Rights, which guaranteed a number of positive social rights toEU citizens, and would create legal precedents that are likely to slip over borders. While anincreased EU foreign policy capability is not likely to be seen in Washington, in thirdcountries, especially in Europe's neighborhood, there could soon be EU ambassadors withmore resources than their counterparts from the individual member states.

Moravcsik presented himself as the most optimistic of the group, asserting that Europe is,after the US, the second superpower of the 21st century and isn't going to lose that status.Despite all the talk of rising India and China, Europe dwarfs all of Asia in military spendingand deployment capability. In civilian power, such as humanitarian and development work,Europe is even more dominant than the U.S. And per capita income--which Moravcsik said ismore important than aggregate income for projecting power--Europe is far ahead ofpotential challengers. Projecting power did not require Europe to always be unified, he said.Informal coalitions of like-minded countries could be effective without the federal structurethat many used to think the EU would move toward. In the last generation, the centralizedfederal institutions, like the European Commission, had been curtailed, and more powerabsorbed by the European Council and the Council of Ministers, which are run by thenational governments. This, in Moravcsik's words, is "coordination, not centralization," and itworks well. Those who think the European project is losing ground need to adjust to this newnarrative.

Ambassador Vimont counted himself as cautiously optimistic. Having expanded to 27

members, the EU had difficulty in day-to-day management, trying to get everyone to agree.Debates that leaders had left aside in the past when they couldn't agree are coming back tobite them now; the weight on the euro from the Greek financial crisis was a good example.But he remained optimistic, he said, because most Europeans understood that they had toseize the opportunity to stay relevant in the world now.