DÜNYA İLİŞKİLERİNDE AVRUPA BİRLİĞİ

According to our book, Europe and European integration are undeniably going through a phase of geopolitical turbulence.

According to the textbook, The United Kingdom’s decision to leave the EU (so-called Brexit) on the basis of a referendum and the election of Donald J. Trump
as President of the United States have shaken the pillars that support the
international and European order.

According to our textbook, "John Ikenberry (2014) argues that a stable world order requires three things: support from a strong enough powerbase represented by one or more states; that the rules and institutions of the order must enjoy a certain degree of legitimacy; and that the order must resolve collective problems and/or offer benefits to actors in the order."

According to our textbook, "US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton hoped that the defunct Transatlantic Free Trade Agreement (TTIP) would become an “economic NATO”."

According to our tetbook, Viewed from a European horizon, the EU as an actor has thus been surrounded by two formative dimensions in the liberal order: the European nation state and US hegemony.

According to our book, In 1998, US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright warned of “discrimination, disconnection, duplication” if the EU conducted its own security policy.

The EU’s actorness is analyzed in THREE concepts: coherence, capacity and context., capacity and context.

According to our book, "With regard to Brexit, the effect has been to unite the remaining member states, at least in relation to the UK and the negotiations."

According to our book, "Capacity is the combination of resources a collective actor can draw on to achieve its foreign and security policy aims."

According to our book, "It can also be assumed that the shift from a globalization paradigm to a greater role for geopolitical logic will have an asymmetric effect on Europe and, in the long run, its actorness."

Europe and European integration are undeniably going through a phase of geopolitical turbulence. Today, some of the European Union’s (EU) most acute crises, such as on Eurozone cohesion and the shortcomings of a common approach to migration, have been managed in the short term, but turbulence has arisen elsewhere. The United Kingdom’s decision to leave the EU (so-called Brexit) on the basis of a referendum and the election of Donald J. Trump as President of the United States have shaken the pillars that support the international and European order.

“… principles that governed the internal life of the liberal states: sovereignty, political freedom, a market economy and strong institutions.”

“… the liberal world order was being challenged by the rise of non-Western countries. Brazil, Russia, India and China (later joined by South Africa, the so-called (BRICS)presented proposals that could be seen as alternative arrangements in certain fields.

A bigger problem in the long term for the European Project is the revolt against liberal democratic principles taking place within the EU. Countries such as Poland and Hungary have made clear departures from the internal rule of law while also challenging supporting principles such as compliance with EU law.

Coined by Ian Manners, the term normative power means the power of the EU is derived from the values and norms upon which the Union was created and that are written into its treaties.

John Ikenberry argues that a stable world order requires three things: support from a strong enough powerbase represented by one or more states; that the rules and institutions of the order must enjoy a certain degree of legitimacy; and that the order must resolve collective problems and/or offer benefits to actors in the order.

Within the liberal world order, it is possible to see a “Euro-Atlantic suborder”, based on a number of geopolitical agreements. Ikenberry describes three such agreements: US security guarantees to Europe within the framework of NATO; US support for European reconstruction and integration after the end of World War II, manifest in the Marshall Plan; and European support for US leadership of the liberal system at different levels and within different policy areas.

Coherence refers to the degree of cohesion between EU member states. As a collective actor for which foreign and security policy decision-making is of an intergovernmental nature, coherence is vital to potential actorness.

The context is the demand for and acceptance of European actorness in the regions and policy areas where the EU aims to act. To some extent, this has been considered above by focusing on the direct effects of turbulence in the order.

First, the EU should strengthen its ability to be a strategic actor, not just an actor. As Engelbrekt has emphasized, it is precisely the interaction between the constituent parts of actorness that give rise to strategic actorness. Coherence should constitute not just consensus, but agreement on overall and long-term goals. Capacity should be seen in relation to these goals, and both objectives and resources should be balanced against the context in which they are to be implemented. Second, the EU should try to minimize both the uncertainty and the loss of capacity resulting from the UK’s departure. There are good reasons to connect the UK as closely as possible in a number of areas, such as intelligence cooperation, crisis management, defence issues and counterterrorism. Third, the EU should prepare to take greater responsibility for the liberal order, both inside and outside of Europe. As this chapter has shown, Europe and the EU are hugely affected by illiberal trends, both globally and locally. Finally, the EU will need to develop  actorness beyond the boundaries of current and future orders in order to maintain international political relevance