Search

Begin New Search Topic Security Author Steven Blockmans

1. How the EU can – and should – enhance its security and global competitiveness

Author:
Stefania Benaglia, Steven Blockmans, Michael Emerson, Tinatin Akhvlediani, Ceren Ergenc, and Fanny Sauvignon
Publication Date:
09-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
To achieve the objectives of security and competitiveness the EU will absolutely need to prioritise its enlargement policy, defence strategy and global partnerships over the coming years to 2030 and beyond. To make the EU fit for 30+ members, it will have to start by reforming its enlargement methodology towards a ‘staged accession’ procedure and move towards more qualified majority voting, alongside adapting its budget to accommodate new members. Accession negotiations will need to have ironclad security commitments and the EU should assist candidates in shoring up their own defences, as well as beefing up its own Member States’ military capacities. The EU also has no choice but to become a security provider for the entire continent. To strengthen its overall global competitiveness, the EU should boost Europe’s defence industry, ramp up the production of much-needed capabilities, tackle procurement issues and harmonise technical and operational standards. Collaboration with regional partners through the Global Gateway is also important but the EU shouldn’t position itself as an exclusive alternative to China’s Belt and Road Initiative. It must also actively engage all parties in the Middle East peace process to counterbalance China’s influence and (re)assert itself as a key regional player. The India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) will test the EU’s ability to maintain its global relevance and uphold its values.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, European Union, Competition, and Enlargement
Political Geography:
Europe

2. The Unfulfilled Promise of EU Foreign and Security Policy towards Iran

Author:
Riccardo Alcaro, Steven Blockmans, Akin Unver, and Sine Özkaraşahin
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
With the 2015 nuclear deal dead in all but name, Iran is getting closer to Russia and more repressive at home, while EU member states’ priorities about the Islamic Republic now extend beyond nuclear proliferation to human rights and European security. This shift in priorities cements a re-orientation of the EU’s approach to Iran from conditional engagement to confrontation. EU member states’ options are limited, however. Pressure worked prior to the nuclear agreement because the EU cut off significant trade with Iran. But US extraterritorial sanctions, re-imposed after the United States left the deal in 2018, have rendered EU-Iran trade so modest that cutting it would have little impact. The EU could get more leverage by providing incentives, yet the political inexpediency of rewarding Iran at a time of rising belligerence of the Islamic Republic greatly restricts the range of benefits potentially on offer. Still, in the mid- to longer term, the EU and its member states will need to combine pressure with some form of incentives if they want to defend their interests in non-proliferation, European security and the protection of human rights in Iran. They also need to resort to a variety of international partnerships in order to maximise their residual leverage.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, European Union, and JCPOA
Political Geography:
Europe, Iran, and Middle East

3. How to Reduce the Impact of Internal Contestation, Regional Fragmentation and Multipolar Competition on EU Foreign and Security Policy

Author:
Sarah van Bentum, Caterina Bedin, Gregor Walter-Drop, Steven Blockmans, Agnès Levallois, and Tiffany Guendouz
Publication Date:
05-2023
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
In a Union of 27 Member States, differences in (geo)political interests, socio-economic realities, historical trajectories and national identity construction constantly threaten internal unity and thus also the external coherence of the EU’s Foreign and Security Policy (EUFSP). The following three factors and their mutually reinforcing interplay appear to have a significant impact on the creation and shaping of EUFSP, especially when it comes to managing international crises and conflicts: internal contestation, regional fragmentation and multipolar competition. The analysis in this paper draws on the main findings from nine case studies carried out under the Horizon 2020 JOINT project. The paper first assesses the (generally negative) impact of the three factors on EUFSP in these contexts of international crises, identifies common patterns and divergent approaches. The second part of the paper identifies strategies to mitigate and/or reduce the (negative) impact of these challenges on EUFSP and points towards windows of opportunity to take action moving forward. The ultimate aim of this research is to provide experts and officials with concrete ideas about how EU policy decision-making processes can enable greater coherence among EU institutions and Member States in their response to international crises and conflicts.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, European Union, Regional Integration, Multipolarity, and Fragmentation
Political Geography:
Europe

4. What should the EU do about violent extremism?

Author:
Dylan Macchiarini Crosson, Tatjana Stankovic, Pernille Rieker, and Steven Blockmans
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
Despite a recent spike in concern about a resurgence in great power conflict, addressing terrorism and violent extremism has driven the foreign policy debate in the collective West for the better part of two decades since 9/11. In the European Union, these concerns most prominently emerged in the 2003 European Security Strategy (ESS) that identified terrorism and “violent religious extremism” originating in the EU’s neighbourhood and caused by weak institutions, conflict, and state failure as a primary concern. The crux of the matter, however, is how this increased attention translates in policy terms. In other words, is the EU’s chosen CT-P/CVE policy mix balanced and fit for purpose? First, the EU’s CT-P/CVE action can hardly be framed according to a binary security versus democracy logic because of the significant emphasis placed by the EU on socio-economic development to address the structural causes of violent extremism. Second, despite the EU’s developmental focus, the language of good governance and peacebuilding, as well as funding for these areas, are key elements missing from the EU’s engagement. In order to remedy the many upstream and downstream diplomatic trade-offs that EU policymakers face in tackling violent extremism, the EU must begin to frame CT-P/CVE as part of its wider endeavour to support sustainable peace. It can do this by formulating an EU Agenda for Peace that once again underlines the EU’s commitment to promoting inclusive governance, community resilience, and social justice.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, Terrorism, Violent Extremism, European Union, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Europe

5. The EU and CT-P/CVE in its external action

Author:
Dylan Macchiarini Crosson, Tatjana Stankovic, Pernille Rieker, and Steven Blockmans
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
This article re-frames the ongoing democracy versus security debate surrounding the European Union’s (EU) policies to counter terrorism and prevent/counter violent extremism (CT-P/CVE). Indeed, extant literature has primarily focused on how the EU’s CTP/CVE-specific emphasis on security concerns has come at the expense of attention towards good governance and social justice, thereby undermining the effectiveness of its approach. After reviewing general concepts discerned from previous research on the EU’s CT-P/CVE policy, tracing its approach over time, analysing key documents, and conducting interviews with policymakers, this analysis finds that the EU – in its words, funding, and policy implementation – also pays significant CT-P/CVE-relevant attention to the structural causes of radicalisation to violent extremism and terrorism by mobilising significant developmentoriented resources and diplomatic energy. By doing so, the EU’s CT-P/CVE policies balance an emphasis on security concerns and broader socio-economic and diplomatic engagement. However, the EU simultaneously de-emphasises good governance and peacebuilding, which must be reinforced and mainstreamed across its primary developmental engagement for the EU’s CT-P/CVE approach to be considered fully fit-for-purpose.
Topic:
Security, Terrorism, Governance, Violent Extremism, European Union, Democracy, and Peacebuilding
Political Geography:
Europe

6. Why the Ukraine crisis should push the UK and EU into a tighter embrace on security policy

Author:
Steven Blockmans
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
One of the costs of Brexit is the weakened ability of both the UK and the EU to shape a strong joint response to Russia’s threats to pan-European security. In the standoff over Ukraine, the need for close cross-Channel cooperation is particularly acute for any effective sanctions package negotiated with the US. Yet, post-Brexit relations between the UK and the EU are currently governed by a narrow Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) which does not include a designated chapter on political dialogue and that, barring a handful of exceptions, does not contain any provisions on cooperation on foreign and security matters. Fortunately, the preparatory work undertaken to reach the bilateral accord contains the answer to the question on how trust between the parties can be regained through procedural means. This policy brief highlights the embers of the Brexit bonfire that might be raked up to rekindle the flame of dialogue and cooperation between the UK and the EU in foreign affairs and security policy.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Sanctions, European Union, and Brexit
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Europe, and Ukraine

7. The EU’s Strategic Compass

Author:
Steven Blockmans, Dylan Macchiarini Crosson, and Zachary Paikin
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
Taking their fate into their own hands, EU heads of state and government endorsed the Strategic Compass on 24 March 2022, a roadmap for becoming a stronger security and defence actor. The shared threat assessment, a first in the history of the EU, is a positive development. Rewritten over the last month to emphasise the impact of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the Strategic Compass reveals a newfound consensus among EU Member States on the danger Russia poses, but also a lack of strategic foresight. This raises the question of whether the final document might contain shortcomings regarding the threat posed by China and the importance of the Indo-Pacific. As such, the document essentially characterises the EU’s security and defence actorness as that of a regional – not a global – power. Divided into four baskets, ‘Act’, ‘Secure’, ‘Invest’, and ‘Partner’, the Strategic Compass appears at times bogged down in policy details rather than answering the tough questions that might reveal an overarching vision for EU security and defence. However, if the measures outlined in the document are reinforced by more effective implementation and duly complemented by NATO’s forthcoming Strategic Concept, then the EU may yet appear more credible in the eyes of others and ultimately, the Strategic Compass will have been ink well spent.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, European Union, and Strategic Planning
Political Geography:
Europe

8. Opinion on Moldova’s application for membership of the European Union

Author:
Michael Emerson, Denis Cenusa, Steven Blockmans, and Tinatin Akhvlediani
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
This paper responds to Moldova’s request of 3 March 2022 to accede to membership of the European Union. The European Council meeting at Versailles on 10-11 March endorsed the Council’s invitation to the European Commission to produce an Opinion on this request. The present paper gives our opinion on the position that we would like to see the Commission take, namely that the EU should extend candidate status to Moldova. Progress in implementing the Association Agreement and Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area between the EU and Moldova means that there is already a substantial degree of preparedness for the accession process. While Moldova has an important reform agenda to sustain, especially on the judiciary and rule of law, its democratic electoral processes have been of impressive quality since 2020. There is good coherence between the presidency, government and parliament on the reform and European integration agendas. Moldova’s common history, border and partly overlapping citizenship with EU Member State Romania is also relevant. With Russia’s ongoing aggression in Ukraine, Moldova is next at risk on account of political, economic and security vulnerabilities. Recent explosions in Transnistria point to the possibility of this separatist region being instrumentalised by Russia to destabilise Moldova. These factors further underline the case for comprehensive EU support and the need for geostrategic clarity, which should be framed by an EU decision to extend candidate status to Moldova.
Topic:
Security, Reform, European Union, Regional Integration, and Trade
Political Geography:
Europe and Moldova

9. Next steps toward a final deal with Iran

Author:
Steven Blockmans and Luigi Scazzieri
Publication Date:
02-2014
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
On January 20th, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed that Iran had been implementing its commitments as part of the Joint Plan of Action (JPA) agreed by the E3+3 in Geneva on November 24th of last year. In particular, the Agency confirmed that Iran had not installed new centrifuges, that it had stopped enriching uranium above 5%, that it had disabled connections between cascades being used to enrich up to 20%, and that it had begun the process of diluting half of its stockpile of 20%, while the other half is to be converted to oxide over the next six months. Over the next six months, the IAEA will continue to monitor Iranian enrichment, and activities at Arak, Fordow and Natanz. Immediately following the IAEA announcement, the US and EU suspended some of the sanctions currently imposed on Iran. Sanctions relief, quantified at $7 billion, comprises both the suspension of some sanctions and the repatriation of $4.2 billion of oil revenues in tranches.
Topic:
Security, Economics, International Cooperation, International Organization, Treaties and Agreements, International Security, and Nuclear Power
Political Geography:
Iran