Politics

The United States’ Third Offset Strategy (TOS) is a step-change in military innovation offering the likelihood of strategic change in capability, designed to enable the US to maintain global hegemony in an era of great power competition. It represents a key opportunity of technological investment for US defence capacity, which in turn can stimulate the US defence industrial base and the broader technological ecosystem. This policy paper looks into how the TOS may impact Western defence and security decision-making and its strategic implications for the European Union.

The present paper maps out some of the tangible potential consequences of Brexit on the European armament industry. A year after the UK’s vote to leave the bloc, there has been altogether little thinking dedicated to the issue. Will the UK have access to EU research funding up to and after 2020? What is the potential impact of Brexit on the European Defence Agency, the European Commission and its directives, on OCCAR and the LOI? What repercussions might it give rise to for bilateral or multilateral European programmes? What will be the impact of negotiations on UK-EU defence company agreements, from Thales to Airbus, and from MBDA to Leonardo? The aim of the following report is to provide a modicum of clarity on issues, which may seem uncharted in places, and inscrutable at times.

The present paper maps out some of the tangible potential consequences of Brexit on the European armament industry. A year after the UK’s vote to leave the bloc, there has been altogether little thinking dedicated to the issue. Will the UK have access to EU research funding up to and after 2020? What is the potential impact of Brexit on the European Defence Agency, the European Commission and its directives, on OCCAR and the LOI? What repercussions might it give rise to for bilateral or multilateral European programmes? What will be the impact of negotiations on UK-EU defence company agreements, from Thales to Airbus, and from MBDA to Leonardo? The aim of the following report is to provide a modicum of clarity on issues, which may seem uncharted in places, and inscrutable at times.

The present paper maps out some of the tangible potential consequences of Brexit on the European armament industry. A year after the UK’s vote to leave the bloc, there has been altogether little thinking dedicated to the issue. Will the UK have access to EU research funding up to and after 2020? What is the potential impact of Brexit on the European Defence Agency, the European Commission and its directives, on OCCAR and the LOI? What repercussions might it give rise to for bilateral or multilateral European programmes? What will be the impact of negotiations on UK-EU defence company agreements, from Thales to Airbus, and from MBDA to Leonardo? The aim of the following report is to provide a modicum of clarity on issues, which may seem uncharted in places, and inscrutable at times.

The present paper maps out some of the tangible potential consequences of Brexit on the European armament industry. A year after the UK’s vote to leave the bloc, there has been altogether little thinking dedicated to the issue. Will the UK have access to EU research funding up to and after 2020? What is the potential impact of Brexit on the European Defence Agency, the European Commission and its directives, on OCCAR and the LOI? What repercussions might it give rise to for bilateral or multilateral European programmes? What will be the impact of negotiations on UK-EU defence company agreements, from Thales to Airbus, and from MBDA to Leonardo? The aim of the following report is to provide a modicum of clarity on issues, which may seem uncharted in places, and inscrutable at times.

Warfare is shaped by geopolitical, societal, technological, economic and military trends:
Geopolitical: The multipolar relations between ever bigger political entities with overlapping spheres of influences are defined by surpise and uncertainty. Smaller political entities will be weaker and proxy wars more common in the future. Detterence will be reinterpreted, vulnerable states more prone to aquire nuclear weapons and international norms weakened. Megacities will be central battlefields that leave ground forces vulnerable.
Social: Warfare will shift to the internet, it will be uncontrollably ‘open-source’, live and shocking, with ever more spectacular terror. Armies will be more network-centred, waging more personalised wars and will have to find new ways to interact with democratic societies. Women in combat and the disappearance of world war veterans change the way people think about war.
Technological: Mankind becomes more powerful over time, with non-state actors possessing capabilities currently restricted to super-powers. It will struggle to outlaw technological advances and wage war without violence. The West will lose its technological superiority and will have even bigger problems in knowing how and what to research. Both inferior and highly developed armies will develop new ways of engaging the enemy. Artificial intelligence (AI) will mean that democratic armies have to balance the ‘human in the loop’ policy against effectiveness.
Economic: The economy of the opponent will be a bigger target than in the past, with commercial and dual-goods becoming more important, and the environment a more widely used weapon.
Military: Possible future military situations will be more diverse then ever. Western armies will be vulnerable to cheap weaponry. The idea that wars will be easy to win will make the world more dangerous.
Key uncertainties are China, the cyber-dimension, robotics, autonomous systems and artificial intelligence, paradigmatic breakthroughs such as quantum computing, general AI and anti-ballistic systems, nuclear detterence and nuclear bargaining. Ten key questions for policy-makers focus on strategic autonomy, adaptation, balancing reserves, R&D, cooperation and export, interventions, China, weakening norms, anticipation, communication and procurement.

This report is based on discussions in the CEPS Task Force on EU Reform. The group met four times between September 2016 and January 2017. Participants included members of the European Parliament, former members of the college of Commissioners, former members of the European Council and Council of Ministers, as well as leading scholars on EU politics and law. A list of members and their organisational affiliation appears in the Annex. Pieter de Gooijer, Permanent Representative of the Kingdom to the Netherlands to the EU, and Pawel Świeboda, Deputy Head of the European Political Strategy Centre of the European Commission acted as observers to the proceedings of the Task Force.
CEPS’ Task Force on EU reform has looked into constitutional issues and citizens' involvement in politics, migration and asylum, euro area economic governance, and trade policy. These are all areas where the added value of the Union's action is clear and where we still have unfinished business. We have tried to draw up a list of proposals for actions that are positive and can bring solutions where populist discourse cannot. Our recommendations are achievable, realistic, concrete, based on objective facts and figures, and part of a broader long-term approach. We do not shy away from considering possible treaty change, but focus first on what can be done quickly and easily, if there is a willingness to act.

The Mercator Dialogue on Asylum and Migration (MEDAM) was established in 2016 to pursue two objectives: to conduct research to improve our understanding of the interrelated challenges facing the EU and its member states in the areas of asylum, migration, and mobility; and to engage European policy makers and civil society in a broad and open debate about comprehensive, implementable solutions to these challenges.
This 2018 MEDAM Assessment Report on Asylum and Migration Policies in Europe is the second in an annual series. The challenges European policymakers face may appear less urgent today than in 2015 or 2016 because fewer irregular immigrants are now arriving in the EU. But each of the main measures that are associated with reducing the number of irregular immigrants - the EU-Turkey agreement, the closure of the Western Balkans migration route, and cooperation with the Libyan coast guard and other problematic actors in Libya - has important shortcomings that call into question their long-term sustainability in their current form.
In this report, we analyze how these policy interventions may be further developed and which complementary measures are needed to create an effective framework of policies to protect refugees, respect the human rights of migrants, and reduce irregular immigration to the EU.
We begin by assessing immediate challenges to EU policies. We apply the notion of ‘flexible solidarity’ to provide guidance on how EU member states may effectively share responsibility for interconnected policies in different areas. We discuss possible responses to the challenges posed by irregular migration across the Mediterranean and explore ways in which EU member states can create more opportunities for legal labor migration from Africa to the EU.

Permanent Structured Cooperation (PeSCo), the so-called ‘sleeping beauty’ of EU defence, is awake. Still barely predictable only a year ago, PeSCo is an ambitious, binding and inclusive legal framework aimed at incentivising defence cooperation among member states. PeSCo is based on binding commitments between member states that could promote increased defence spending, improve force commitments for EU operations and stimulate European defence equipment programmes. In addition to the regular assessment of these commitments, PeSCo will also house a number of concrete projects designed to improve the effectiveness of EU military operations and to sustain European capability development. Taken together, these elements are designed to potentially shape national mindsets and practices in defence through a structured framework at the EU level.
Elaborating on the likely form and extent of PeSCo, this Chaillot Paper not only sketches out the historical metamorphosis of PeSCo but it also looks more specifically at how it could change the operational and capability development dynamics of EU defence cooperation. The paper is not primarily occupied with questions about its finalité politique, but it is rather an analytical guide to assist experts and lay readers alike navigate the major operational and capability issues at stake.

This Chaillot Paper contextualises the dilemmas facing EU policymakers as Europe experienced an unprecedented influx of migrants and refugees in 2015-2016. Analysing and comparing the differing perspectives of external experts and internal practitioners, it examines how the EU’s enlargement, neighbourhood and development policies evolved in response to the migration crisis.
The paper identifies nine important shifts in European foreign policy that took place during the crisis, offering an explanation of why each occurred.