541 Natividad Fernández Sola The proposed reform of the european external actions service and its implications for the european union‘s security policy factors, and while they demonstrate the negative prospects of short-term professional promotion for their members, they nevertheless value other indicators (prestige or work-satisfaction)12. The consequence of this personal implication of the EEAS staff members is positive for the construction of a more robust EU foreign policy. Nevertheless, more than three years since its inception, the EEAS presents problems that go beyond those related to its own evolution and development as a newly formed body, or brought about by personality clashes between ex European officials in charge of external affairs13. Other problems have arisen that derive from its staffing structure, difficulties over issues of international law and the problems of EEAS agenda-setting14. One of the first problems detected in the new service was the presence of a substantial number of high-ranking officials that generated major intergovernmental negotiations concerning the definitive structure of the service and the selection of personnel. But it also gave rise to disputes within the Service and the Commission over issues such as their respective competences in foreign policy issues and available resources. At the present time the structure of the upper echelons of the service is generating more confusion over the implementation of a common foreign policy and this affects the functioning of the EEAS. As the report on the reform of the EEAS points out15, there is no need for an Executive Secretary General and Chief Operating Officer supported by two deputies. This institutional design, along with the high number of Director Generals, most of which are national diplomats, stems largely from politicking over staffing rather than a response to the demands of a functional rationality.16 It is therefore a circumstantial problem of structure, which could be resolved without major difficulty. On the other hand, the rigid division of the service into the geographic areas apportioned to these high-ranking officials could produce an unnecessary rigidity in their functioning and impede the development of cross-cutting functions between these and the structures responsible for missions and operations developed under the Common Security and Defence Policy. In this sense, the proposed reform of the EEAS presented by the High Representative contemplates the possibility of merging 12 JUNCOS, Ana E., POMORSKA, Karolina, ‘In the Face of Adversity’: Explaining the Attitudes of EEAS Officials vis-à-vis the New service”, Journal of European Public Policy, 2013 13 SMITH, Michael E., “The European External Action Service and the Security-Development Nexus…”, cit. 14 VANHOONACKER, Sophie and POMORSKA, Karolina, “The European External Action service and Agenda setting in European Foreign Policy”, Journal of European Public Policy, 2013, http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2012.758446 15 European External Action Service, EEAS Review, July 2013, p.4. It also includes the proposal to reduce the number of posts for high-ranking officials and increase responsibilities at directorship level. 16 JUNCOS, Ana E., POMORSKA, Karolina, op. cit.
REVISTA IEEE 2
To see the actual publication please follow the link above