Continuity And Change:the UK In EU Defence And Security Cooperation Since 2010

Changes in the domestic and international situations since 2010 have brought new developments into the UK-EU defence and security relations,and the landscape was further complicated by the 2016 Brexit referendum.By examining major events during Cameron's two terms and May's premiership,including the UK-France defence cooperation,military interventions in Libya and Syria,responses to the Ukraine crisis and the refugee crisis as well as the counter-terrorism cooperation,the author explores the UK's role in EU defence and security cooperation since 2010,in order to better understand Britain's international standing and to shed light on the future relations between big powers and the overall international security situation.Based on the understanding of previous literature,the author proceeds from major influencing factors,namely the Euroscepticism,pragmatism,inherent weakness of the EU defence and security policy and the transatlantic relationship,and then establishes theoretical and practical links between these factors and the UK-EU defence and security cooperation.A variety of data has been employed,including party manifestos,speeches of government leaders,official documents,parliamentary debates,opinion polls,news reports as well as briefings and papers from research institutions,international organizations and think tanks such as Chatham House,the International Institute for Strategic Studies(IISS),Royal United Service Institute(RUSI),etc.The author argues that,since the 2010 Coalition government,the main theme of UK participation in EU defence and security cooperation has been a delicate balance between Britain's pursuit of wielding influence as a European security power and its persistence in NATO's role as the pillar of European defence and security.In response to changes in domestic and international situations,the British government attempts to play a leading role in the realm where it has absolute advantage.But there is a huge gap between the ideals and realities.Britain found it had difficulty in taking a step in front of an increasing number of security threats with a limited defence budget,especially when Euroscepticism was on the rise and posed potential threat to the government credibility.As Britain became frustrated with its declining leadership in the European defence and security,it was inclined to combine pragmatism with the nation's deep-rooted Euroscepticism,leading to more divergence and greater estrangement from EU joint actions.The focus of the divergence was clearly on the role of NATO.Since Britain saw much coherence between NATO's role and its own leading status in Europe,it showed an ever-stronger support of NATO's role in the EU in fear of being marginalized,acting as an obstructionist in the deeper integration of the European defence and security.Pragmatism has been a dominant factor that influences the UK's role in the EU defence and security cooperation since 2010.On the one hand,Britain finds it hard to cope with the increasing security challenges.There is a dire need for close cooperation with the EU nations to protect Britain's security interest.On the other hand,Britain suffers from its declining power,yet is eager to preserve its international standing through exerting security influence in Europe and on the world stage.Faced with increasing security threats and decreasing defence budget,the British government's attitude towards the European defence and security has been of more flexibility.Compared with its predecessor's"value-based vision",the coalition government has adopted a more cost-effective view towards EU defence and security cooperation.The UK-EU defence and security relations were frustrated at a growing Euroscepticism.While it has been a tradition of most Conservative governments,the Cameron-led governments indeed helped it to reach a peak,leading to the historic withdrawal from the EU.The British government was trapped in its identity crisis.For Britain,the defence and security project of the EU was more of an instrument for preserving its interest.It was important for Britain to lead,but not necessary to participate.When the deeper integration called for more pooling of sovereignty,Britain continued to obstruct,vetoing the proposal of the European Operational Headquarter and opting out of the police and criminal justice measures.Even the existing cooperation has been diminished,as Britain gradually distanced itself from the EU defence and security frameworks.If the later part of the New Labour to some extent failed to carry on with the CSDP it established,the Cameron years has witnessed a radical disengagement.Compared with the inherent weakness of the EU defence and security policy,the UK's military and diplomatic advantages ensure its irreplaceable role in the European defence and security.After years of the EU's enlargement,the institutional inefficiency was magnified in front of the unprecedented threats.While these problems need to be solved through cooperation under strong overall planning and leadership,the complexity of these inter-linked issues creates divergence among the EU members.Disagreements exist not only among countries with different geopolitical concerns and understandings about security threats,but also among the core members that share similar ambition but discrepant objectives as well as the EU leaders themselves.More importantly,the EU has realized the painful truth of its capability,especially after the Ukraine crisis increased the panic about the EU's weakness in providing deterrence.Lack of consensus and capabilities,the EU relies heavily on the support of the UK and the leadership of the NATO,in spite of the seemingly reluctance of some member states.The transatlantic relationship has a profound influence on the UK-EU defence and security relations since the coalition government came into office.The strategic shifting of the NATO,the intensified conflicts between the West and Russia and the election of Donald Trump complicated the UK-EU cooperation.American's pivot to Asia-Pacific raised the EU's concerns about its decreasing strategic position,yet the EU began to realize the real threats only after the Ukraine crisis.Under the Trump administration,the EU has a sense of unease about the reduced commitment of NATO and at the same time,increasing concerns about Russia.As a result,the EU has shown a stronger and urgent desire to strengthen its defence and security cooperation.Yet the EU could hardly achieve real autonomy in the short run,due to its weak military capacity and increasingly split understanding on NATO's role among EU member states.NATO would still remain the pillar of the EU defence and security,and the UK would be what the EU needs in the Trump era.While the UK still wants to play an active role in Europe,its backing for NATO would be the only approach to guarantee its influence.The UK-EU defence and security cooperation after the Brexit referendum would be marked by both continuity and change.Although the EU has shown unprecedented determination to push for defence integration despite British withdrawal,it is more of a symbolic gesture to offer new impetus for the community facing "existential crisis".Similarly,Britain's threat to withdraw security cooperation was also highly likely to be a negotiation strategy.Both the UK and the EU will still need each other,not only because of the relative weakness of the EU's defence capability and the ambition of the UK to maintain its influence,but also because of the increasing number of hybrid threats that ask for close,stable and comprehensive cooperation.The interdependence of the UK and the EU becomes even more evident,when the European NATO allies began to reconsider the real challenge posed by Russia after the Ukraine crisis,especially after the election of Donald Trump.Despite the divergence in specific approaches,the UK and the EU share a common destiny that would not be altered easily.But there would be certain challenges.Brexit would affect Britain's role in the EU defence and security.The withdrawal of the EU membership means that Britain would be unable to participate in the decision-making procedure,thus weakening Britain's influence in the collective decision concerning European defence and security affairs.However,the UK would be likely to invest more in bilateral defence cooperation with European NATO members,under the pressure from the Trump administration.In addition,Britain's role in NATO would be largely unaffected.These intertwined factors would bring some delicacy to the UK-EU defence and security relations.Some of the institutional cooperation will be weakened,as Britain will be no longer an official member of the CSDP and some other important mechanisms including Europol,Eurojust,EAW and law enforcement databases if it finally exits the EU.While both the UK and the EU have their motives to maintain the existing cooperation,the most likely model for their future relationship might be the UK's partial participation or collaboration subject to a case-by-case basis in the EU defence and security.The UK-EU defence and security relations could be affected in a broader sense,since the Brexit referendum impels the British government to rethink its international standing and thus to adjust its policies.In the ongoing Brexit negotiations,the British government would most likely continue with its practical and pragmatic approach,upholding its national interest while at the same time striving for a role to wield security influence to the utmost.In this case,a major concern of the British government lies in how to strike a balance between the preservation of its national sovereignty and maximization of the degree of engagement in the EU's decision-making.After all,as long as the interests remain intact,there will not be essential change in the UK-EU defence and security relations.But both are surely willing to see a more dynamic structure for cooperation,and it will be some time before the details are revealed.