Differentiated integration is not a new phenomenon in European integration. It has taken various forms over a wide range of policy areas in the past. Importantly, differentiated integration is not merely an internal question for the EU as the Union’s organization and internal dynamics also shape its external actorness. Consequently, various forms of differentiation are present in the EU’s external relations and policies.
The objective of this report is to take a closer look at differentiated integration in the EU’s external relations and, in so doing, to discuss its implications for the EU’s aspirations to forge more unitary and effective external policies. To this end, the contributors to this report will examine the different features of differentiated integration that currently exist in various fields of the EU’s external relations. Relatedly, they will analyze whether the level of differentiation is increasing and, if so, what the key drivers of the current trends are.
Thus far there is rather limited evidence that the level of differentiation is increasing in the EU’s external relations due to the ongoing developments related to the EU’s financial and economic crisis. Depending on the level and duration of differentiation embedded in the current reforms of the EMU, some consequences might occur in due course.
FIIA Working Paper
Few would dispute the assertion that human security has failed in Syria. Authoritarian regimes in the Arab world have had well-documented deficits in human security emerging from coercive internal politics, a lack of respect for human rights such as freedom of expression, and limited freedom from fear and want.
The concept of human security has developed mainly within the domain of UN development policy, but it has also made headway in security policy, being advocated as one approach in international crisis management and peacekeeping. Less attention has been paid to its adaptability in forming the basis for the internal security policy of any given state.
The main argument of this paper is that human security principles can be the cornerstones of state security, potentially preventing, mitigating, and remedying security issues within a state that could lead to societal upheaval.
The argument is presented by outlining some major developments in the history of modern Syria up to its present state of civil war. The paper shows that the security paradigm exercised in Syria has led to a double failure in which human insecurity has resulted in turmoil for ordinary people and has shattered the authoritarian governance. The paper suggests that the rebuilding of security sectors must be based on the principles of human security, not only in Syria but also in the Arab world at large.
FIIA Briefing Paper
China is challenging the regional balance of power in East Asia through a military buildup and an increasingly assertive foreign policy. The US is forced to find the right balance between cooperating with China while benefiting from its economic rise, and countering China’s regional reach by carrying out its self-declared “pivot” to Asia in spite of domestic and budgetary constraints.
With just over one year in office, Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzō Abe has received wide domestic support for his ambitious plans to revive Japan’s economy through his threefold policy of Abenomics. At the same time, however, he has implemented a number of significant policies in the defence and security sphere.
In response to China’s military rise, the Abe administration increased and recalibrated the defence budget. Furthermore, in order to reinforce the alliance with the US, the government approved the creation of a US-style National Security Council, passed a Secrecy Bill, and aims to reverse Japan’s self-imposed ban on exercising the right to collective self-defence.
Under the banner of “proactive pacifism”, the Abe cabinet is seizing the momentum caused by the changing regional power dynamics in order to edge closer towards “breaking away from the postwar regime”. A proposed revision of Japan’s constitution, unchanged since 1947, symbolizes the ruling Liberal Democratic Party’s (LDP) objective to bring about a more autonomous role for Japan both in the security alliance with the US and as an international actor.
Turmoil in the newest state in the world shows that much work still needs to be done in South Sudan after formal independence. The international community must continue its efforts to help the South Sudanese people to restore and maintain peace in order to build a viable state.