1
Prof. Jean Y. Haine
European Security
Tuesdays 17h00-19h00.
1) Module description.
The short course offers a broad overview of European Security challenges since the end
of the Cold War. It will combine historical understanding and political science
explanations to review the most significant contemporary security issues faced by the
European Union. The aim is to better understand the emergence of the European Union
as a security actor, the difficulties it faced and the opportunities it may create.
2) Assignments
Each student will have a presentation on the theme covered in the course (30% of the
Grade), an op-ed on a specific issue due (10 %) and a research paper (50%) on a specific
issue agreed in advance. Participation (10 %) will also be part of the requirements. Each
class will start by the presentation, followed by a discussion and an interactive lecture.
The presentation will be about specific themes that will need to be covered with a
theoretical and an empirical research. (Themes are the bullet points below). Since you are
likely to present in a group, coordination inside the group will be required. The op-ed
topic will be given in due course. You will have one week to write a 700 words column as
if it was for a national newspaper.
3) General readings
Keohane Robert O., Joseph S. Nye and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War,
International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991, Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1993.
Jolyon Howorth, Security and defence policy in the European Union, Basingstoke; Hampshire,
Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.
Sven Biscop and Jan Joel Andersson, The EU and the European security strategy: forging a
global Europe, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2008.
Anand Menon, Europe: The State of the Union, London: Atlantic Books, 2008.
Giovanni Grevi, Damien Helly and Daniel Keohane, (Editors), ESDP: The First 10 Years,
Paris: EU ISS, 2009.
Asle Toje and Barbara Kunz, Neoclassical Realism in European Politics, Manchester
University press, 2012.
4) Classes
1. The European security landscape in the 1990s.
The grand settlement of 1989 left a paradox: Europe was a continent finally reunited, yet
NATO remained the only meaningful security organization. The class will review the
diplomacy of the end of the Cold War, the origins of the Maastricht Treaty and Europe’s
hour in the Balkans.
2
Readings:
Mearsheimer John J., “Back to the Future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War”,
International Security, (Summer 1990), Vol. 15, n°1, pp. 5-56.
Van Evera Stephen, “Primed for Peace: Europe after the Cold War”, International Security,
(Autumn 1990), Vol. 15, n°3, pp. 7-57.
Guicherd Catherine, “The Hour of Europe: Lessons from the Yugoslav Conflict”,
Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, (Summer 1993), Vol. 17, n°2, pp. 41-57.
Gordon, Philip H., “Europe’s Uncommon Foreign Policy”, International Security, (Winter
1997-98), Vol. 22, n°3, pp. 74-100.
2. The Europeanization of Foreign and Security Policies
Among the key lessons learned from the Bosnian tragedy was the necessity for Europe
to speak and to act with one voice. The emergence of CSDP after Saint-Malo and the
ratification of the Lisbon Treaty constituted significant progresses, yet problems of
coherence remain.
Readings:
Howorth Jolyon, “Discourse, Ideas, and Epistemic Communities in European Security
and Defence Policy”, West European Politics, (2004), Vol. 27, n°2, pp. 211-234.
Mérand Frédéric, “Social Representations in the European Security and Defence Policy”,
Cooperation and Conflict, (June 2006), Vol. 41, n°2, pp. 131-152.
Missiroli Antonio, “The New EU ‘Foreign Policy’ System after Lisbon: A Work in
Progress”, European Foreign Affairs Review, (November 2010), Vol. 15, n°’4, pp. 427-452.
Frédéric Mérand, Stéphanie C. Hofmann and Bastien Irondelle, “Governance and State
Power: A Network Analysis of European Security”, JCMS: Journal of Common Market
Studies, (January 2011), Vol. 49, n°1, pp. 121-147.
 The European External Action Service: Can it Deliver?
3. Hard Power Europe: the EU and the use of force
CSDP has been essentially about military capabilities. Despite considerable progress in
upgrading its hard power, Europe still punches well below its economic weight. EU
military missions have been few, short and relatively risk-free. The class will analyze the
current state of CSDP.
Readings:
Everts Steven et alii, European Way of War, (May 2004), London: Centre for European
Reform, Available at http://www.cer.org.uk/pdf/p548_way_ofwar.pdf
Mary Kaldor and Andrew Salmon, “Military Force and European Strategy”, Survival,
(Spring 2006), Vol. 48 n°1, pp. 19-34.
Koivula Tommi, “Towards An EU Military Ethos”, European Foreign Affairs Review, (May
2009), Vol. 14, n°2, pp. 171-190.
Matlary Janne, “When Soft Power Turns Hard: Is an EU Strategic Culture Possible?’
Security Dialogue, (March 2006), Vol. 37, n°1, pp. 105-21.
Haine Jean-Yves, The Failure of European Strategic Culture: EUFOR Chad, the last of
its kind”, Contemporary Security Policy, (December 2011), Vol. 32, n°3, pp. 582-603.
Vines Alex, “Rhetoric from Brussels and reality on the ground: the EU and security in
Africa”, International Affairs (September 2010), Vol. 86, n°5, pp. 1091-1108.
3
Chris J. Bickerton, Bastien Irondelle and Anand Menon, “Security Co-operation beyond
the Nation-State: The EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy”, JCMS: Journal of
Common Market Studies, (January 2011), Vol. 49, n°1, pp. 1-21.
Bastian Giegerich & Alexander Nicoll , “The Struggle for Value in European Defence”,
Survival, (February-March 2012), Vol. 54, n°1, pp. 53-82.
 European missions in Somalia and Mali: Do they matter ?
4. EU, NATO and the US relationship
From the Cold War years to the dispute about Iraq, the transatlantic partnership has
always been marred by regular crises, yet it remains a cornerstone of European security.
Beyond the problematic EU-NATO relations, the class will address the strength and
weakness of the current US-EU relationship.
Readings:
Cox Michael, “Beyond the West: Terror in Transatlantia”, European Journal of International
Relations, (Spring 2005), Vol. 11, n°2, 203–234.
T.V. Paul, “Soft Balancing in the Age of U.S. Primacy”, International Security, (Summer
2005), Vol. 30, n°1, pp. 46-71.
Wivel Anders, “Balancing against threats or bandwagoning with power? Europe and the
transatlantic relationship after the Cold War”, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Vol.
21, n° 3, (Sept. 2008), pp. 289-305.
Howorth Joylyon and Anan Menon, “Still Not Pushing Back: Why the European Union
is Not Balancing the United States”, Journal of Conflict Resolution, (October 2009), Vol. 53,
n°5, pp. 727-744.
Porter Patrick, “Last charge of the knights? Iraq, Afghanistan and the special
relationship”, International Affairs (March 2010), Vol. 86, n°2, pp. 355-375.
 The Obama Administration and Europe: Benign neglect?
5. Is the EU ready for a multipolar world ?
With the economic crisis, the inward-looking tendencies of EU countries have increased.
Europe however has always aimed at playing a global role and has often called for the
emergence of a multipolar world. Yet, it seems to have difficulty to speak with one voice
to Moscow, Delhi or Beijing. The class with review the so-called strategic partnerships of
the EU.
Readings:
Whitman Richard ‘The EU: Standing Aside from the Changing Global Balance of
Power?”, Politics, (2010), Vol. 30, n°1, pp. 24-32.
Manners Ian, “Global Europa: Mythology of the European Union in World Politics”,
JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, (January 2010), Vol. 48, n°1, pp. 67-87.
Krotz Ulrich, “Momentum and Impediments: Why Europe Won’t Emerge as a Full
Political Actor on the World Stage Soon”, JCMS Journal of Common Market Studies, (June
2009), Vol. 47, n°3, pp. 555–578.
Grevi Giovanni, “Making EU strategic partnerships effective”, (December 2010),
FRIDE, Available at http://www.fride.org/publication/875/making-eu-strategicpartnerships-effective
4
David A Scott, “Multipolarity, Multilateralism and Beyond… EU- China Understandings
of the International System”, International Relations, (2013), Vol. 27, n°1, pp. 30-51.
 Does Moscow take the EU seriously?
________________