Search

Begin New Search Topic International Security Political Geography Europe Publishing Institution EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations

1. EU cyber partnerships: Assessing the EU strategic partnerships with third countries in the cyber domain

Author:
Thomas Renard
Publication Date:
02-2018
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:
The European Union is increasingly active on cyber issues internationally, guided by its various foreign policy documents and strategies, including its 2013 Cybersecurity Strategy and the 2015 Council conclusions on cyber-diplomacy. In line with these documents, the EU has deepened its bilateral ties with a number of key countries, resulting in a network of cyber partnerships. This article explores these partnerships in depth. It seeks to explain the different types of purposes that they fulfil, and the various mechanisms that underpin them, based on an ambitious mapping exercise. In essence, it is argued that the EU’s cyber partnerships aim not only for bilateral cooperation, but also for ‘reflexive’ results (whereby the EU aim to develop its cyber and diplomatic agency) and ‘structural’ results (whereby bilateral partnerships aim to strengthen the multilateral fabric and global internet governance). Once assessed against these multiple and intertwined purposes, these cyber partnerships appear more useful than meets the eye.
Topic:
International Security and Cybersecurity
Political Geography:
Europe

2. Recalibrating CSDP - NATO Relations: The Real Pivot

Author:
Jo Coelmont and Maurice de Langlois
Publication Date:
06-2013
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:
Are long-standing allies drifting apart? In the US, struggling with budget deficits, questions such as “Is current US security strategy not stimulating free-riding by allies and friends?”, or “NATO: what is in it for us? “, and even “Should the US not withdraw from NATO's military command structure?”1, are more than ever coming to the fore. In Europe on the other hand, even if some worry about the effects of the “the US pivot to Asia”, many are still looking to the US to take ultimate responsibility for crisis management operations. The effect of the post-Iraq/post-Afghanistan context in the US and the real meaning of “leadership from behind” are not that well understood in Europe. The message that at times it will be up to Europeans to take responsibility has not come across. Consequently, so far Europeans have not achieved more coherence in defence capabilities, let alone more integration – barely some limited cooperation and minimal savings. Persistent shortfalls in military capabilities are not being met, quite the contrary.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, NATO, Globalization, International Cooperation, International Security, and Power Politics
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Iraq, Europe, and Asia