559 Natividad Fernández Sola The proposed reform of the european external actions service and its implications for the european union‘s security policy explains the difficulty of generating a foreign policy that combines the interests of the Member States, the Commission and the European Parliament, each one of these institutions with its own agenda and interests. The establishment of the EEAS during the worst financial crisis Europe has faced since 1929, has not been conducive to its success67. Similarly a lack of leadership in the service has not helped. In the years that have passed since the establishment and commencement of operations of the European External Actions Service, it has shown itself to be suffering from the same ailments as the CSDP, although it has the same potential to present an integrating and regenerating policy for a declining Europe in international affairs which otherwise appears unstoppable. The review currently outlined contains short- and long-term recommendations for organisation, staffing and functioning, perhaps without addressing major internal and legal changes that would be required for certain essential strategic questions; but putting forward proposals that at least allow for improvements in relation to the main deficiencies in foreign policy management and in particular in relation to the issue of CSDP. We should bear in mind the forthcoming discussion on the action plan for its enhancement at the December 2013 European Council meeting, and the institutional transition due to take place in 2014, which advises against transcendental change at this time. The proposals outlined and others such as an acceleration of the process making funds available and an increase in financial resources for the preparation of foreign policy initiatives, the creation of a centre of logistics and administrative services shared between CSDP missions and Special Representatives as well as the strengthening of the political planning capacity of the EEAS give a clear idea of the awareness of these problems and the willingness to deal with them. Regarding the changes that could bring about an improvement in common security and defence policy, some require not very extensive restructuring of the European External Actions Service organisation chart. Others permit the present design to be maintained, by changing operational procedures to facilitate the participation of all the players who should be taken into account and who could bring positive elements to the table in terms of security and defence policy decision-making. A more complex task is that of providing the EU with a permanent capacity for planning and implementation of civilian and military operations within the organic structure of the EEAS which, undoubtedly, would simplify the structures and procedure of the CSDP. One option might be for it to be constituted on the basis of enhanced cooperation or as a permanent structured cooperation, although these formulas of flexibility have not been used up to now. 67 LARIVÉ, Maxime H. A., “Reflections on the EEAS Review”, Foreign Policy Association, 22 Au-gust 2013, http://foreignpolicyblogs.com/2013/08/22/reflections-on-the-eeas-review/
REVISTA IEEE 2
To see the actual publication please follow the link above