Search results
project. As the outer shield of the AFSJ, the EU’s external borders are of crucial importance for at least two of the major functions of the AFSJ: to provide citizens with a ‘high level of safety’ 1 and to allow for a ‘more efficient management of migration flows’. 2 Border security also continues to be seen as an important internal security issue in some member states. Regardless of how
The European Commission had become one of the more contentious actors during both Irish referenda on the Lisbon Treaty. This book discusses the role of the European Commission and institutions more generally, as well as the policy area of justice and home affairs. It argues that it is important to evaluate the role of EU institutions for the process of European integration. The book suggests a reconceptualisation of the framework of supranational policy entrepreneurs (SPEs), which is often referred to by the academic literature that discusses the role of agency in European integration. It focuses on the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) at the policy and treaty levels; primarily on four grounds: academic literature, SPE behaviour, EU's policymaking, and the interplay between treaty negotiations and policy-making. To analyse the role of the European institutions, the book combines an analysis of the Lisbon Treaty in relation to the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice with an analysis of the policy-making in the same area. The public policy model by John Kingdon with constructivist international relations literature is also outlined. The external dimension of counter-terrorism in the EU; the role of the EU institutions in EU asylum and migration; and the role of he Common European Asylum System (CEAS) is discussed. The book also analyses the role of the EU institutions in the communitarisation of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, in the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, and thus subsequently in the Lisbon Treaty.
This book examines the underlying foundations on which the European Union's counter-terrorism and police co-operation policies have been built since the inception of the Treaty on European Union, questioning both the effectiveness and legitimacy of the EU's efforts in these two security areas. Given the importance of such developments to the wider credibility of the EU as a security actor, it adopts a more structured analysis of key stages of the implementation process. These include the establishment of objectives, both at the wider level of internal security co-operation and in terms of both counter-terrorism and policing, particularly in relation to the European Police Office, the nature of information exchange and the ‘value added’ by legislative and operational developments at the European level. The book also offers a more accurate appraisal of the official characterisation of the terrorist threat within the EU as a ‘matter of common concern’. In doing so, not only does it raise important questions about the utility of the European level for organising internal security co-operation, but it also provides a more comprehensive assessment of the EU's activities throughout the lifetime of the Third Pillar, placing in a wide and realistic context the EU's reaction to the events of 11 September 2001 and the greater prominence of Islamist terrorism.
The European Union (EU) has emerged as an important security actor qua actor, not only in the non-traditional areas of security, but increasingly as an entity with force projection capabilities. This book investigates how the concept of security relates to or deals with different categories of threat, explores the relationship between forms of coordination among states, international institutions, and the provision of European security and the execution of security governance. It also investigates whether the EU has been effective in realising its stated security objectives and those of its member states. The book commences with a discussion on the changing nature of the European state, the changing nature and broadening of the security agenda, and the problem of security governance in the European political space. There are four functional challenges facing the EU as a security actor: the resolution of interstate conflicts, the management of intrastate conflicts, state-building endeavours, and building the institutions of civil society. The book then examines policies of prevention, particularly the pre-emption of conflict within Europe and its neighbourhood. It moves on to examine policies of assurance, particularly the problem of peace-building in south-eastern Europe. EU's peace-building or sustaining role where there has been a violent interstate or intrastate conflict, especially the origins and performance of the Stability Pact, is discussed. Finally, the book looks at the policies of protection which capture the challenge of internal security.
the same way: headed by two people, a man and a woman, in charge of different committees (internal security, medical, ‘mill and oven’ for food management, NGOs, etc.). MSF always focused on developing relations with the medical committees. In addition to the Kobani Health Authority and the civil councils, there was also a regional administration based in Ain Issa that reported to the Syrian Democratic Council (SDC), the political branch of the SDF. Any international NGOs
3 Creating a ‘climate of victory’: Eisenhower and the Overseas Internal Security Program A note on the two Eisenhower chapters As codified in NSC 68, the role of military power in containment during the Truman era was to contain the forces of the ‘ideological enemy’ and deter them from acts of aggression, while economic and social institutions of the ‘free world’ were being strengthened to the point where their compelling example would overwhelm the communist states ideologically and undermine them politically. The power of this example would be combined with a
’s geographical scope and deepening internal security co-operation – have proceeded along much the same time-line. For example, the Third Pillar was created as part of the 1991 TEU, while the initial membership requirements – the so-called Copenhagen criteria – were presented only two years later, in June 1993. 2 Over a decade later, as applicants became members in May 2004, the EU
7 Looking back, looking forward Although referring to a different area of EU security co-operation, namely the CFSP, Richard Whitman, in concluding that ‘all the bricks are added together, but they are not structured in a way that bears much weight’,1 has raised similar concerns to those highlighted in this volume. In considering in a structured fashion the first fifteen years of internal security co-operation, both within the Third Pillar more widely and more specifically in terms of developments in police co-operation and counter terrorism, it is difficult to
external and internal security. Europe’s evolution towards post-Westphalianism, in conjunction with the rise of malevolent sovereign-free actors operating outside and targeting Europe, no longer warrants or suffers the conceptual disassociation of internal and external security requirements. European states, particularly the member states of the European Union (EU), have experienced a progressive loss of
’ primary mission was to assist in defence against invasion, they continued to serve in a variety of internal security tasks, ranging from suppressing radical secret societies and religious sects, to protecting Manila’s Chinese from Filipino mobs. Since throughout their existence the Scouts seldom numbered more than 7,000 soldiers, the army and the civil government also emphasized the recruitment of local