Why not NATO? Military planning in the European Union

Journal of Strategic Studies

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 53-72

  Rynning, Sten ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EUROPEAN UNION; INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS; MILITARY INTERVENTION; NATO;

EUROPE;

EID: 0038372104     PISSN: 01402390     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01402390308559308     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. EU Presidency Conclusions, Cologne European Council, 3-4 June 1999, Annex III .
2. EU Presidency Conclusions, Helsinki European Council, 10-11 Dec. 1999, Annex 1 to Annex IV .
3. EU Presidency Conclusions, Santa Maria de Feira European Council, 19-20 June 2000, Annex I .
4. Alain Richard, 20 Nov. 2000 .
5. European Security Review .
6. .
7. Javier Solana, 'Summary of Intervention', Brussels, 19 Nov. 2001 .
8. 'Statement on Improving European Military Capabilities: European Capability Action Plan', 10 Dec. 2001, Annex I to Draft Presidency Report on European Security and Defence Policy, Council document 15193/01 .
9. Independent, 'Britain leads calls for EU force to be beefed up', 20 Nov. 2001 .
10. Presidency Report on the European Security and Defence Policy, 4 Dec. 2000, Annex V and footnote 5.
11. J. Bryan Collester, 'How Defense "Spilled Over" into the CFSP: Western European Union (WEU) and the European Security and Defense Identity (ESDI)', in Maria Green Gowles and Michael Smith (eds.) The State of the European Union (Oxford: Oxford UP 2000) p.375.
12. Michael E. Smith, 'What's Wrong with the CFSP? The Politics of Institutional Reform', in Pierre-Henri Laurent and Marc Maresceau (eds.) The State of the European Union (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner 1998) pp.164 and 174.
13. William S. Cohen, Birmingham, United Kingdom, Tuesday, October 10, 2000, Informal NATO Defence Ministerial Meeting .
14. Ivo H. Daalder, 'Are the United States and Europe Heading for Divorce?', International Affairs 77/3 (July 2001) p.559.
15. BBC News, 'UK, Blair backs EU defence arm', 21 Oct. 1998 .
16. Joint Declaration Issued at the British-French Summit, Saint-Malo, France, 3-4 Dec. 1998 .
17. .
18. .
19. Frank Boland, 'Force Planning in the New NATO', NATO Review 46/3 (Autumn 1998) pp.32-5.
20. British Ministry of Defence, European Defence, Policy Paper No.3, 14 Nov. 2001 .
21. Geoff Hoon, 'European Defence - the Facts and the Myths', 15 Feb. 2001, London, Press Office.
22. Jacques Walch, 'La défense européenne, de l'autonomie à l'intégration', Politique étrangère 66/2 (April-June 2001) pp.341-52.
23. .
24. .
25. Rob de Wijk, 'Convergence Criteria: Measuring Input or Output?', European Foreign Affairs Review 5/3 (Autumn 2000) pp.397-417.
26. David Yost, 'The NATO Capabilities Gap and the European Union', Survival 42/4 (Winter 2000-1) pp.97-128.
27. Financial Times, 'Not rapid enough', 18 Nov. 2001
28. 'A Bruxelles, les Quinze adoptent un plan d'action pour combler les lacunes opérationelles de la défense européenne', Le Monde, 21 Nov. 2001 .
29. .
30. .
31. Christopher Layne, 'Death Knell for NATO? The Bush Administration Confronts the European Security and Defense Policy', Policy Analysis, 394 (4 April 2001) pp. 1-15.
32. Julian Lindley-French suggests that NATO should produce 'European Force Goals' suited to the EU strategic agenda and that 'EU Force Goals' in time should take over completely. See Julian Lindley-French, 'Terms of Engagement: The Paradox of American Power and the Transatlantic Dilemma post-11 September', Chaillot Paper 52 (May 2002) p.60.
33. Sten Rynning, 'The Transatlantic Link and European Security: Defense Capabilities in Old or New Bottles?', NATO-EAPC Research Fellowship Report, 2000-2002, Oct. 2002 .