Abstract. The following article intends to identify the motives, benefits, and patterns of third state contributions to EU security management endeavours in crisis areas. After the definition of the classes of potential partners and the conceivable legal frameworks for their participation, the investigation turns to European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) missions as examples of variable coalitions with their temporary structures in the course of operational multilateralism of EU crisis management. A brief overview of the practice emerged in the first decade of ESDP ensues to illustrate the general analyses. The assessment of the relevance of third country participation in EU conflict prevention or conflict response undertakings brings the examination to conclusion.
In the practice of EU-UN collaboration in international crisis management, examples of European Union (EU) military operations have emerged when contingents of troops are dispatched to African conflict zones for limited period and purpose as temporary support for pending United Nations (UN) or already operating African Union (AU) missions. These EU deployments are intended to ‘bridge’ the gap in international capabilities until a more comprehensive and sustained ‘multidimensional presence’ under UN direction is not prepared to take over full responsibility for the security and protection of civilians and humanitarian assistance. Bridging operations can be conducted as temporary EU military crisis management undertakings in support of other multinational missions. The current deployment of an EU-led military contingent in the Central African Republic (CAR) began originally to help the AU intervention force, then it continued its operation to complement the subsequent UN mission on the way to its full operational capability. EU bridging operations are closely coordinated with the UN, implemented under explicit Security Council authorizations and concluded with the transfer of tasks and responsibility to a succeeding UN mission.
Status agreements for EU crisis management operations and missions represent a necessary legal aspect of their consensual conduct and completion. The adopted Status of Forces (SOFA) and Status of Mission (SOMA) Model Agreements for military and civilian deployments respectively have been implemented regularly in Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) undertakings for the presence and transit of EU-led multinational contingents and assets on land or at sea. Variations and repetition in the application of the ready standard frameworks dominate the spectrum of evolved practice, but casual and adaptive solutions have also indicated the occasional need for specific modalities of status arrangements for CSDP operations and missions. These include the extension of existing SOFA arrangements of an EU member, a UN peacekeeping mission or North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to an EU-led successive, supplementary or reinforcing multinational engagement in the same theatre of operation. With respect to non-standard arrangements for certain civilian CSDP crisis management deployments, their status came to be defined as activities of diplomatic missions due to the particular nature and context of EU undertakings in Bosnia, in Congo or in Kosovo. The available blueprints and tested modalities of status arrangements offer a comprehensive set of examples for the choice of adequate solutions for any future CSDP operation or mission.
CSDP, crisis management operation, crisis management mission, status of forces, status of mission, Model Agreement, EU forces, EULEX Kosovo
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.