Sebastian Schäffer and Ulrich Schneckener Speak on European Security and Integration in Vienna
„The EU can hardly continue with its incremental and largely technocratic approach regarding enlargement while still lacking a viable plan for the new emerging security order.“
Sebastian Schäffer and Ulrich Schneckener Speak on European Security and Integration in Vienna.
On Tuesday 9 July, Sebastian Schäffer, director of the IDM and Ulrich Schneckener, Professor of International Relations at the University of Osnabrück, partook in a public discussion hosted by the Dialogue Office for Civil Society Cooperation as a prelude to the upcoming European Political Community (EPC) meeting planned for 18 July in the United Kingdom. The forum was centred on a coauthored proposal by Director Schäffer and Professor Schneckener on the idea and concept of a Greater European Council (GEC). The GEC would supplant the EPC as the forum for EU member states and non-EU states on security and trans-regional issues of common interest. Joining the discussion was Hanna Smith, Senior Strategic Advisor to the Secretary General of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), and Stefan Melle, managing director of Dialog-Büro Vienna. The discussion was moderated by Simon Ilse, head of the Global Unit for Human Security at the Heinrich Böll Foundation.
Director Schäffer and Professor Schneckener began the programme by reminding the audience of the security situation in Europe. The ongoing war of Russian aggression against Ukraine, the rise and influence of right-wing political groups on the continent, and the lagging EU accession with the Western Balkan states, Ukraine, and Moldova have shown the frailties of current intergovernmental cooperation. To meet the dual challenge of organizing security cooperation beyond the EU and to facilitate EU enlargement, they propose the creation of the GEC. This would be an extended version of the European Council and, thereby, more institutionalized than the informal EPC. Co-chaired by the President of the European Council and a rotating non-EU state, the GEC would meet four times a year in the context of the EU summits. However, the EU Foreign Affairs Council and successively other thematic Council formations could also meet in the extended format to establish a follow-up from the GEC meetings on concrete policies and projects. In the concept, the GEC serves as a testing ground for the collaboration between the 27 EU member states, aspiring candidate states, and European states who do not want to join the EU. Both authors emphasized that the GEC – other than the EPC – should not be conceived merely as a consultative forum, but rather it needs to act as a decision-making body on pan-European security and trans-regional issues such energy, infrastructure, migration, socio-economic or ecological questions. Thereby, it should also allow for “coalitions of willing” within the format, so that not all 40-plus states need to agree on everything.
Both Hannah Smith and Stefan Melle expressed their views on the proposal. Referring to the OSCE membership, mandate and on-going activities, Mrs. Smith questioned the added value of a new format for addressing pan-European security issues. She emphasized the need for dialogue, compromise and diplomacy which can be delivered by the OSCE and existing formats. Mr. Melle was supportive of the ideals of a GEC but was apprehensive about the efficiency of such a venture. He pointed to the EPC and its hasty formation in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Despite its initial strengths, it has since sputtered in vision and efficacy, something that could occur in the created GEC.
During the discussion a variety of topics on European affairs were addressed, covering the role of EU, NATO, and the EPC as well as the security challenge posed by Russia. In replying to some questions about the character of the GEC, Director Schäffer reaffirmed that the format would not be an EU institution or a new organization but offers a platform for better cooperation and integration among like-minded states. The possibility of another Trump Administration and the election results in some EU countries also show the window of opportunity for such an initiative may close sooner than expected.
The evening concluded with a reception, giving time to continue the discussion. Director Schäffer and Professor Schneckener both thank the Dialogue Office for Civil Society Cooperation for their cooperation and hosting the event.
