This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Overlapping Institutions in the Realm of International Security: The Case of NATO and ESDP Stephanie C. Hofmann The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Unions (EU) European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) both occupy the policy space of crisis management. This overlap has two effects. First, overlap has generated chessboard politics shaping member state strategies. Second, institutional overlap has generated a number of feedback effects. The prior existence of NATO shaped the conceptualization and organization of ESDP at its creation, and the existence of two alternative security insti- tutions continues to influence the ways that the institutions evolvehow each institution defines security interests and how mem- ber states adjust the mandate of each institution to address changes in the security environment. Because both institutions are intergovernmentally organized and consensus-based, the actions and decisions of both institutions reflect the agreements of mem- bers. Chessboard politics and feedback effects are consequently interrelatedstates strategize to affect outcomes in one venue or another, and decisions in one institution can affect decisions and behaviors in the other institution. E ver since European Union (EU) member states decided to create the European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) in 1999, both ESDP and the North AtlanticTreaty Organization (NATO) have occu- pied the institutional space of crisis management. Despite American suspicion of an autonomous European security institution, 1 EU member states created an alternative to NATO crisis management activities. 2 Both organizations have operational credibility. ESDP has conducted 22 oper- ations and missions since it was declared operational in 2001. At the same time, NATO has conducted 17 oper- ations. Some of these operations took place in the same theater, and at times ESDP operations have relied on NATO assets. Nonetheless, as NATOs General Secretary recently observed, it is astounding how narrow the band- width of cooperation between NATO and the Union has remained. There is a remarkable distance between them. 3 ESDP and NATO are typically examined in isolation, perhaps because of the relative absence of interaction between them. 4 But institutional overlap has important repercussions for both institutions and their member states. In line with this symposium, I explain some important consequences of international regime complexity in the field of international security. Overlap between ESDP and NATO has two effects. First, overlap has generated chessboard politics shaping member state strategies. I discuss these strategies in exam- ining the implementation of the framework agreement outlining the parameters of inter-institutional coopera- tion called the Berlin Plus agreement, 5 which attempts to manage overlap between the two institutions. Second, insti- tutional overlap has generated a number of feedback effects....
View Full Document
This document was uploaded on 10/31/2011 for the course POLI 103C at South Carolina.
- Spring '11