1\. Introduction 5 2\. What Does the Literature Tell Us about Decision-Shaping
and Decision-Taking in CSDP? 8 3\. The Role of the PSC in CSDP Policy-Shaping
17 4\. Conclusions 23 Literature 25
For scholars and practitioners of European politics alike, the distinction
between supranationalism and intergovernmentalism has always been fundamental.
This distinction has underpinned the various schools of European integration
theory, just as it has remained crucial for European governments keen to
demonstrate that the member states remain in charge of key policy areas.
Nowhere is this considered to be more central than in the area of foreign and
security policy, which has consciously been set within the rigid
intergovernmental framework of Pillar Two of the Maastricht Treaty and, under
the Lisbon Treaty, remains subject to the unanimity rule. And yet, scholarship
on the major decision-making agencies of the foreign and security policy of
the EU suggests that the distinction is not only blurred but increasingly
meaningless. This paper demonstrates that, in virtually every case, decisions
are shaped and even taken by small groups of relatively well-socialized
officials in the key committees acting in a mode which is as close to
supranational as it is to intergovernmental. The political control of foreign
and security policy, which is considered sacrosanct by member state
governments, is only rarely exercised by politicians at the level of the
European Council or Council of Ministers.
Decision-making in security and defence policy
towards supranational intergovernmentalism?
Politik- und Sozialwissenschaften
Kolleg-Forschergruppe "The Transformative Power of Europe"
KFG working paper