Ph.D. (Political Sciences)
Petro Mohyla Black Sea National University, Mykolaiv, Ukraine
Abstract. The purpose of the study is to analyze the development of the European common security and defense policy during the Obama and Trump administrations by determining the specifics of its formation, trends and causes. It is observed the preconditions and principles for the formation of European CSDP; tendencies of its evolution in the post-bipolar era are considered; the EU CSDP is explored as a part of transatlantic system in the times of Obama administration; the trends and changes in the CSDP are examined in correlation with NATO policy under the Trump administration. The research emphasizes a significance of the European defense policy, which has been creating in two following ways: as a united force within NATO and as a unique initiative in parallel to the transatlantic cooperation (mostly, after the destruction of the bipolar system). However, the Euro-Atlantic defense ties never crashes, despite the periodic abatements. The article notes that Europe has substantially strengthened its positions at the end of the era of bipolarity, demonstrating its intention to create the own security system. It was found that in 2010–2016 there was a tendency weakening of American influence on the European community defense integration. According to Western European researchers, the EU defence initiatives became a matter of concern to both American presidents. However, during the Obama period, European governments failed in realizing their intentions (despite the desire to create their own army) due to the lack of mutual understanding on the issue and unwillingness to bear the additional costs of implementing the CSDP. However, such an opportunity has arisen during Trump’s presidency. It is stated that the foundation of a new stage of European defence integration was laid in 2016. Since 2017, European countries have taken new steps by creating the European Defense Fund (EDF) and starting the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO). In addition, the article notes that in 2017–2018 there was an increase in the participation of national contingents in NATO. Moreover, the EU considers its defense system as «autonomous», but not absolutely independent of existing and effective structures. It is concluded that transatlantic relations matter and the further cooperation between European governments and the United States could be enhanced.
Keywords: Europe, United States, NATO, CSDP, Obama, Trump, defense policy.
Download full text
1. Zhurkin V. (2001). Evropeiskaia oborona ot mifa k realnosti. Sovremennaia Evropa, 3, 52–65.
2. Lymar, M. (2015). Formuvannia SPBO YeS v konteksti spivpratsi z NATO yak instrumentom zovnishnopolitychnoho vplyvu SShA. Naukovi pratsi: naukovo-metodychnyi zhurnal Politolohiia, Mykolaiv, 248(260), 106–110.
3. Ratnikov, M. I. (2013). Yevropeiska polityka SShA v konteksti politychnykh transformatsii u YeS (Unpublished PhD dissertation). Natsionalna Akademiia Nauk Ukrainy, Instytut Svitovoi Ekonomiky i Mizhnarodnykh Vidnosyn, Kyiv.
4. Brattberg, E. & Valasek, T. (2019). EU Defense cooperation: Progress amid transatlantic concerns. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Retrieved from: https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/11/21/eu-defense-cooperation-progress-amid-transatlantic-concerns-pub-80381.
5. Clinton, W. J. (1999). Public papers of the presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton, 1998. Best Books on.
6. Coffey, L. & Kochis, D. (2016). NATO Summit 2016: Alliance members must commit to increased defense spending. The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved from: https://www.heritage.org/global-politics/report/nato-summit-2016-alliance-members-must-commit-increased-defense-spending.
7. Defence expenditure of NATO countries (2011–2018). (2019). Belgique, Bruxelles: NATO Public Diplomacy Division. Retrieved from: https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2019_03/190314-pr2018-34-eng.pdf.pdf.
8. Defence expenditure of NATO countries (2013–2019). (2019). Belgique, Bruxelles: NATO Public Diplomacy Division. Retrieved from: https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2019_11/20191129_pr-2019-123-en.pdf.pdf.
9. EUISS yearbook of European security. (2015). Paris: European Union Institute for Security Studies.
10. European Defence Action Plan: Towards a European Defence Fund. (2016). Brussels: An official website of the European Union. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_16_4088.
11. European Defence Fund. (2019). Brussels: An Official Website of the European Union, Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/news/european-defence-fund-2019-mar-19_en.
12. European defence industrial development programme: Information day. (2019). Brussels: An official website of the European Union. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/growth/content/european-defence-industrial-development-programme-information-day_en.
13. Financial and economic data relating to NATO defence. (2015). Belgique, Bruxelles: NATO Public Diplomacy Division. Retrieved from: https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2015_06/20150622_PR_CP_2015_093-v2.pdf.pdf.
14. Gates R. M. (2011). The Security and Defense Agenda (future of NATO). U.S. Department of Defence. Retrieved from: http://archive.defense.gov/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1581.
15. Mogherini, F. (2016). Shared vision, common action: A stronger Europe. A global strategy for the European Union’s foreign and security policy. Brussels: An official website of the European Union. Retrieved from: https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/eugs_review_web_0.pdf.
16. National Security Strategy of the United States of America. (2017). Washington DC: The White House. Retrieved from: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-0905.pdf.
17. Pannier, A. & Schmitt, O. (2014). Institutionalized cooperation and policy convergence in European defense: Lessons from the relations between France, Germany and the UK. European Security, January. Retrieved from: https://warstudiespublications.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/institutionalised-cooperation-and-policy-convergence.pdf
18. Permanent Structure Cooperation – PESCO. Deepening defence cooperation among EU member states. (2019). Brussels: An official website of the European Union. Retrieved from: https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/pesco_factsheet_november_2019.pdf.
19. Shevin-Coetzee, M. (2019). Resetting the US-EU defense relationship. Berlin Policy Journal. Retrieved from: https://berlinpolicyjournal.com/resetting-the-us-eu-defense-relationship/.
20. Congressional Research Service (CRS). (2020). U.S.–European Relations in the 116th Congress. Retrieved from: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/IF11094.pdf.