Abstract. This article seeks to develop a concept of 'security governance' in the context of post-Cold War Europe. The validity of a governance approach lies in its ability to locate some of the distinctive ways in which European security has been coordinated, managed and regulated. Based on an examination of the way governance is utilised in other political fields of political analysis, the article identifies the concept of security governance as involving the coordinated management and regulation of issues by multiple and separate authorities, the interventions of both public and private actors (depending upon the issue), formal and informal arrangements, in turn structured by discourse and norms, and purposefully directed toward particular policy outcomes. Three issues are examined to demonstrate the utility of the concept of security governance for understanding security in post-Cold War Europe: the transformation of NATO, the Europeanisation of security accomplished through EU-led initiatives and, finally, the resultant dynamic relationship between forms of exclusion and inclusion in governance. IntroductionThinking about European security has been shaped by a series of different ideas and concepts over the past quarter of a century: an architecture, regime, community. However, it has not been subjected to an account through the lens of governance. Given the application of the concept to a range of other thematic areas, this is rather surprising. This article seeks to explore 'security governance' in the context of post-Cold War Europe. The validity of a governance approach lies in its ability to locate some of the distinctive ways in which European security has been coordinated, managed and regulated. Three issues are chosen to illustrate this: the transformation of NATO, the Europeanisation of security accomplished through EU-led initiatives and, finally, the resultant dynamic relationship between forms of exclusion and inclusion in governance.The timing of research into security governance in Europe might be seen to be rather challenging. From a series of arguments about the nature and balance of institutional responsibilities, to debates over the role of institutions in the global 'war on terror', to the seeming marginalisation of those institutions in the war in Iraq, it has been difference that has seemingly been the hallmark of European security interaction. Indeed, this might raise a question about why think in terms of governance now; why at all? Other frameworks are viable, networks perhaps most obviously. Governance is, however, an obvious choice, not least because in a sense, it is the concept that policymakers have sought to develop. Governance also encompasses many of the central themes of European security: the importance of ideas, of institutions and both formal and informal structures, of multiple actors purposefully motivated. Security governance might also be able to emphasise key strengths of other approaches: being based on both shared epistemologies (as with epistemic communities) and ...
For scholars and practitioners of European politics alike, the distinction between supranationalism and inter-governmentalism has always been fundamental. This distinction has underpinned the various schools of European integration theory, just as it has remained crucial for European governments keen to demonstrate that the Member States remain in charge of key policy areas. Nowhere is this considered to be more central than in the area of foreign and security policy, which has consciously been set within the rigid intergovernmental framework of Pillar Two of the Maastricht Treaty and, under the Lisbon Treaty, remains subject to the unanimity rule. However, scholarship on the major decision-making agencies of the foreign and security policy of the EU suggests that the distinction is not only blurred but increasingly meaningless. This article demonstrates that, in virtually every case, decisions are shaped and even taken by small groups of relatively well-socialized officials in the key committees acting in a mode which is as close to supranational as it is to intergovernmental.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.