*** ERWAN LANNON (Editors): The European Neighbourhood Policy's Challenges / Les défis de la politique européenne de voisinage. Presses Interuniversitaires Européennes / Peter Lang (1 av. Maurice, B-1050 Brussels. Tel: (41-32) 3761717 - fax: 3761727 - Email: info@peterlang.com - Internet: http://www.peterlang.com ). "College of Europe Studies / Cahiers du Collège d'Europe" series, No. 14. 2012, 491 pp, €41.50. ISBN 978-90-5201-779-2.
At the very time when some of the EU 27 states consider it electorally opportune to justify the existence of borders, scientists who have no interest in winning votes and are only interested in analysing situations from an objective position, certainly provide a breath of fresh air in this publication. This is indeed the case with those that contributed to this book, following a working seminar in which they participated, organised by the College of Europe of Natolin. These legal experts, economists, political scientists, geographers and experts in geopolitics and geostrategic affairs all agreed that one of the biggest challenges facing us over the next few years would be the European Union finding an appropriate way to establish dialogue and collaborate with countries that are indeed outside of its… borders.
Set up by Javier Solana, Chris Patten and Romano Prodi in summer 2002, European Neighbourhood Policy is quite naturally at the core of this book and is, as indicated by Professor Lannon in his introduction, “now to be considered as a kind of umbrella framework for a growing number of sub-regional initiatives” such as the Eastern Partnership and Union for the Mediterranean. This policy also constitutes one of the first attempts by the Union to develop, “a global geopolitical approach vis-à-vis the majority of its direct neighbours”, which leads it to raising a number of crucial questions: “what will be the definitive frontiers of the European Union?”; does Neighbourhood Policy only attempt to establish a “buffer zone” or should it be considered as, “a (temporary) alternative to accession for European neighbours” or indeed as, “a comprehensive and evolving policy” notably “through the creation of a Neighbourhood Economic Community? The different answers to these questions are provided throughout the three parts of the book. The first set of answers focuses on “ transversal challenges”, namely the complexity of the different instruments developed in the context of this policy, the consequences stemming from the differentiation principle, which is at the core of the Single Market and which is what is in fact at stake with the project for a greater economic community. The second part of the book sees other writers focusing their attention on challenges specific to the southern rim of the Mediterranean and the Middle East. These involve the teething problems of the Union for the Mediterranean and its future, the supranational boost required for the Euro-Mediterranean partnership and the role that should be played a Common Defence and Security Policy in these regions. The third part of the book involves contributions exploring and similarly analysing specific challenges to Eastern partnerships and in a broader sense, Euro-Asian questions.
Obviously, this book covers such a vast realm of subjects that it is difficult to accurately sum it up in just a few sentences. The general conclusions alone, drawn by Erwan Lannon, Sieglinde Gstöhl and Peter Van Elsuwege, are also extremely comprehensive in themselves, without even mentioning the detailed annexes, bibliography and index contained in this book. I am therefore rather eager to draw a number of specific lessons from a rather arbitrary choice of subjects and subsequently concentrate on the Mediterranean region. As a response to those now eulogising the existence of the borders created outside the European Union and within it, the scientific contributions contained in this book point out, for example, that there is absolutely nothing innovative in the current demands now openly expressing, “the fear of Islamism and migratory pressures combined with the specific interests of some Member States or external powers led to the promotion of “strategic interests” over the 'cherished values'”. In the same vein, accusations are levelled at the Union for the Mediterranean as being, “a purely inter-governmental initiative” which has, “contributed to the tensions in Euro-Mediterranean relations” and subsequently, “paralysing the ENP southern multilateral dimension”. Finally, there are also claims that the European Union will subsequently find it difficult to develop a European Neighbourhood Policy on the model of the European Economic Area without, to a certain extent, returning to the “everything but institutions” concept, which ultimately involves a country that will eventually have the opportunity of joining the European Union but without it being able to take part in the decision-making process. This is even more the case given that the European Neighbourhood Policy is based on the, “the assumption that the European model of democracy, market economy and regional integration can and should be exported abroad”. Obviously, but “in terms of legitimacy, (…) such conditionality seems more justifiable in the accession process than in a neighbourhood policy”. These highly scientific contributions, should in no way be considered as having breached any of the rules of political decorum …
Michel Theys
*** JOSEF SCHRÖLF, BAHRAM M. RAJAEE, DIETER MUHR (Editors): Hybrid and Cyber War as Consequences of the Asymmetry. A Comprehensive Approach Answering Hybrid Actors and Activities in Cyberspace. Peter Lang (1 Moosstrasse, Postfach 350, CH-2542 Pieterlen. Tel: (41-32) 3761717 - fax: 3761727 - Email: info@peterlang.com - Internet: http://www.peterlang.com ). 2011, 315 pp. €44.70. ISBN 978-3-631-60285-0.
In this book, senior military personnel, civilian experts and university researchers pool their efforts to identify the many implications resulting from changes to the concept of war, which are occurring under our very eyes. The emergence of new belligerent hybrids, such as Al Qaeda and those waging the cyber war, reflect this fundamental change. These phenomena can cross national borders just as easily as they cross social and economic classes and political ideologies. In this brand-new context there are no longer any clearly defined enemies, just as there are no longer any allies that are absolutely reliable. In an effort to examine this variety of asymmetrical threats emerging from very different situations, in addition to the complexity resulting from them, the authors seek to explore and clarify the modalities and potential involved in a “global approach” that should help guide the action of both military and political leaders. Subsequently, Lt Gen David Leakey explains in his preface that this book is not exclusively aimed at the military but must also, “be understood by the civilian public too”. Nonetheless, the book is, above all, obviously aimed at specialists in military and security issues.
(PBo)
*** LAETITIA SPETSCHINSKY: Russie-EU. La naissance d'un partenariat stratégique. Les transformations de la politique étrangère russe (1991-2000). Presses Interuniversitaires Européennes / Peter Lang (see address attached). “Géopolitique et résolution des conflits” series, No. 12. 2011, 317 pp. €40. ISBN 978-90-5201-788-4.
The research underpinning this book also fills in the missing gaps which have until now separated studies about Soviet Union policy under Gorbatchev with regard to Community Europe from the plethora of studies published after 2000 on the strategic partnership developed between the European Union and Russia. Laetitia Spetschinsky has a Ph.D. in political science and teaches at the Catholic University of Leuven. In the first part of her book, she highlights the theoretical and empirical outlines of Russian transition, as well as the influence of this transition on Moscow's foreign policy. In the second part of the book, she describes the development of this transition with regard to the European Union, in particular, by demonstrating that the debate stoked up within the elite and Russian society over this decade can also be entirely located within Moscow's diplomacy with regard to the Communities and the European Union that followed. The author identifies three different periods: firstly, the endogenous changes that enabled the Soviet Union and the European Communities to overcome their mutual ignorance and reach a founding agreement in December 1989. Moscow subsequently sought to adapt to its European counterpart, which was itself changing very rapidly. Afterwards, we entered the period of negotiations for the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement, which, during its entry into force, sees signs of an effective politico-administrative capacity on the Community dossier developing. Finally, as from summer 1998 we see a period of burgeoning maturity evolving. This book provides extremely useful clarification on this issue.
(MT)
*** NICK WITNEY: How to stop the demilitarisation of Europe. European Council on Foreign Relations (35 Old Queen street, London SW1H 9JA, UK. Email: London@ecfr.eu - Internet: http://www.ecfr.eu ). “Policy Brief” series, No. 40. 2011, 11 pp. ISBN 978-1-906538-39-2.
After Robert Gates and Leon Panetta, speaking in 2010, urged Europeans to invest more in defence, the United States' Defence Strategy Review again confirms the US' gradual disengagement and the growing importance that Asia and the Pacific hold for a country that is no longer so high and mighty although it retains its place as the world's most powerful military nation. This new global context should make Europeans stop and wonder what their place in the world is, where their interests lie and what their role is. Europe as we know it, however, remains incomplete, uncertain, without willingness to hold power, without a spirit of defence. In this budding 21st century, it appears inhibited by an economic and budgetary crisis that is making it weaker, a lack of internal solidarity that is undermining it and weakening its social model and making it more fragile in the eyes of the world, and a creeping demilitarisation that gives one the impression that, now that Europe feels safe, there is a worrying tendency for it to look only inward. “Americans - even particularly smart and perceptive Americans like Gates - tend to see Europe as basically a decadent society, corrupted by state-provided welfare and all too ready to free-ride on the military might of the Unites States”, Nick Witney states in the Policy Brief which aims to set out ways to halt demilitarisation in Europe. The weakening of Europe's defence has gathered pace in two phases - with the end of the Cold War in the nineties and, more recently, with the economic and financial crisis. Also, the attempt to give the Union a common foreign and security policy, despite the promising start and over 20 operations launched in 10 years, has fizzled out. Nonetheless, as the former executive director of the European Defence Agency writes, whether the Europeans like it or not they still find themselves on the “same geostrategic boat” and have no other solution than to proceed to reviewing their defence strategy before it is too late. The interest of the paper lies first and foremost in its proposed analysis of European pacifism and of the incentives to demilitarisation that are included as much in the NATO Strategic Concept as in the EU Security Strategy. The two documents, Nick Witney points out, place emphasis on energy supply security, cyber-security, climate change and pandemics, making us believe that military means are obsolete when it comes to facing 21st century threats. So how can one not be resolved to cut back on military capabilities? All the more as the massive and drawn-out interventions (in Iraq and Afghanistan) have shown their limits, and those in Côte d'Ivoire and Libya seem to indicate that surgically precise, timely action leaving the major role to local fighters can be successful. However, after the fashion of the 2003 security strategy, which is only a catalogue of threats, this discourse, which argues for continued demilitarisation, is based on a major omission - the notion of might. Nick Witney goes on to recall the importance of the military, not only for our protection in the event of strategic surprise but also as a means of influence to the service of the “soft power” so often boasted in Brussels and in a number of other national capitals. Europeans, who are all in the same boat from the budgetary and geostrategic point of view, have no other choice than to move forward towards a more integrated defence, the author concludes, calling for review of the 2003 Security Strategy but with a view to this time availing oneself of a strategy that focuses on defence and armed forces. In order to put the European house in order, he finally recommends applying the “European Semester” method to defence, a method set in place to introduce coherence into the budgetary procedures of eurozone countries.
*** BERTRAND DE MONTLUC: A New International Strategic Context for Space Policies. Nova Science Publishers (400 Oser Ave Suite 1600, Hauppauge NY 11788-3619, USA. Tel: (1-631) b2317269 - fax: 2318175 -Email: nova.main@novapublishers.com - Internet: http://www.novapublishers.com ). 2011, 96 p., 49 $. ISBN 978-1-61761-607-5.
Bertrand de Montluc analyses the geopolitical development of space underlining the emergence of an increasing number of new players (China, India, North and South Korea, Malaysia and up to 27 countries that already have satellite tracking capacity), where only a short while ago the United States, Russia and the European countries grouped within the European Space Agency (ESA) enjoyed almost a technological monopoly. While some key players such as the United States, Russia, China and India perceive space as a fully strategic challenge including in the field of security and defence, Europe suffers from its chronic inability to identify where its interests lie and to go beyond petty jealousies between member states. In 2011, the European Commission finally, and with great difficulty, gave birth to a half-hearted “European space strategy”. Although the latter does mention the security stakes and underlines the efforts that must be made to fill capability gaps, it still hesitates to settle the Union's problem of governance. This is obvious if one looks at the delays incurred in the European satellite radio-navigation programme Galileo, the uncertainties weighing on the financing of the next stages in the GMES observation programme, and the last agony of the MUSIS military spatial observation project. As international competition increases, Europe balks at investing in space, at the risk of losing its technology proficiency.