Commentary
Stefan Lehne
{
"authors": [
"Stefan Lehne"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Europe"
],
"collections": [
"EU Integration and Enlargement"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
"programAffiliation": "EP",
"programs": [
"Europe"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Europe",
"Eastern Europe",
"Western Europe",
"Iran"
],
"topics": [
"Foreign Policy",
"EU",
"Security"
]
}
Source: Getty
Other
The Western Balkans and Europe’s Geopolitical Challenges
The EU’s foreign policy principles were envisioned for a more benign international environment. But growing great-power tensions are forcing the EU to adapt its policies to the new international reality.
By Stefan Lehne
Published on Nov 1, 2020
Source: Institute for Democracy “Societas Civilis”
The change in the EU’s institutional cycle in late 2019 came with an unfamiliar type of rhetoric. The new European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, spoke of establishing a “geopolitical commission.” Both she and the EU’s new foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, insisted that the union must now “learn the language of power.”
This new language of power and geopolitics jars in many European ears because it runs counter to the EU’s long-held understanding of its place in the world. From the very beginning in the 1950s, European integration was conceived to overcome the legacy of power politics that had brought war and conflict to Europe.
That this concept succeeded over several decades was to considerable extent due to a particular geopolitical context. European integration developed in an international system shaped and dominated by the United States. It was mostly the U.S. security guarantee and its global leadership role that afforded the Europeans the luxury of leaving geopolitics behind.
After the end of the Cold War, the U.S. position at first remained preeminent. EU leaders now considered themselves Washington’s principal partners in constructing a rules-based liberal global order based on democracy and the market economy. But this dream began to fall apart about fifteen years ago. It had become clear that Russia would not transition to a liberal democracy, as many in the West had hoped in the 1990s. Rather, it would consolidate as an authoritarian state committed to securing an extensive zone of influence. It also became evident that the rise of hundreds of millions of Chinese out of poverty would not be accompanied by progress toward liberalization and pluralism. China would combine economic success with one-party rule, disproving the West’s dogma that economic development and democracy were intrinsically linked.
Read Full Text
About the Author
Stefan Lehne
Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe
Stefan Lehne is a senior fellow at Carnegie Europe in Brussels, where his research focuses on the post–Lisbon Treaty development of the European Union’s foreign policy, with a specific focus on relations between the EU and member states.
- Time to Merge the Commission and EEAS
- What Can the EU Do About Trump 2.0?Article
Stefan Lehne
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie China
- China Sells Stability Amid American VolatilityCommentary
US unpredictability has allowed China to capitalize on its positioning as the “responsible great power”. Paradoxically, the more China wins the perception game, the more likely expectations will rise for Beijing to deliver not just words but to demonstrate with its deeds.
Chong Ja Ian
- Why Vietnam Is Swinging in China’s DirectionCommentary
Hanoi and Beijing have long treated each other as distant cousins rather than comrades in arms. That might be changing as both sides draw closer to hedge against uncertainty and America’s erratic behavior.
Nguyễn Khắc Giang
- China’s Energy Security Doesn’t Run Through Hormuz but Through the Electrification of EverythingCommentary
Across Asia, China is better positioned to withstand energy shocks from the fallout of the Iran war. Its abundant coal capacity can ensure stability in the near term. Yet at the same time, the country’s energy transition away from coal will make it even less vulnerable during the next shock.
Damien Ma
- Malaysia’s Year as ASEAN Chair: Managing DisorderCommentary
Malaysia’s chairmanship sought to fend off short-term challenges while laying the groundwork for minimizing ASEAN’s longer-term exposure to external stresses.
Elina Noor
- When It Comes to Superpower Geopolitics, Malaysia Is Staunchly NonpartisanCommentary
For Malaysia, the conjunction that works is “and” not “or” when it comes to the United States and China.
Elina Noor
