About the Symposium
European Security – Responsibility of Member States in the European Security Union
Citizens of the Member States of the European Union are increasingly exposed to cross-border threats including international terrorism, a steep increase in cybercrime as well as targeted and orchestrated disinformation campaigns, and the radicalization of political debates. In such instances, countries are often no longer able to protect their citizens effectively without transnational security cooperation. Developments outside the European Union, too, increasingly require Member States to cooperate more closely. Particularly Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but also China’s growing military self-confidence, and the Trump administration’s lack of interest in transatlantic alliances have impressively shown that there is an urgent need for a Common Security and Defence Policy if Member States want to safeguard their independence and to pursue an active foreign policy.
Against this backdrop, the European Commission issued the “EU Security Union Strategy” (COM (2020) 605 final) dating as of 24 July 2020 creating a coherent regulatory framework for its numerous concepts, strategies and action programmes relating to security policy. In the strategy, the European Commission sets out its ideas for a “whole-of-society approach to security” that is to “effectively respond to a rapidly-changing threat landscape in a coordinated manner”. The afore-mentioned development goes hand in hand with a comprehensive process of institutionalization at the Union level. There is a continuous process of strengthening European agencies in the field of security
Thus, the Member States of the European Union are moving closer together in ensuring internal and external security. A closer look, however, shows that there are many issues that still require clarification. This is true especially for the significance and scope of Member State sovereignty. The reservation formulated in Article 4 (2) 3rd sentence TEU is considerably vague in normative terms. Following the recent juridicature of the European Court of Justice on data retention (ECJ GSZ 2021, 36 et seq.), it remains unclear, how far the "sole responsibility of the Member States" for their "national security" extends. France’s Conseil d’État, referring to national security interests, has openly contradicted the ECJ. Although this is no explicit dispute about ultra vires decisions between the Conseil d’État and the ECJ, individual observers are already worrying about “opening Pandora’s box”: Some Member States could view this as an invitation to abuse comparable justifications for unjustified scenarios, thus bypassing decisions of the European Court of Justice (cf. Christakis, quote from POLITICO dated 3 March 2021). The fact that the French government is taking recourse to the identité constitutionnelle in these proceedings is remarkable in so far as President Emmanuel Macron vigorously supports strengthening Union-wide cooperation in security and defence matters:
„(...) j’ai appelé les Etats européens à construire ensemble une Europe de la sécurité et de la défense. Une Europe qui protège.“
Against this backdrop, the European Commission issued the “EU Security Union Strategy” (COM (2020) 605 final) dating as of 24 July 2020 creating a coherent regulatory framework for its numerous concepts, strategies and action programmes relating to security policy. In the strategy, the European Commission sets out its ideas for a “whole-of-society approach to security” that is to “effectively respond to a rapidly-changing threat landscape in a coordinated manner”. The afore-mentioned development goes hand in hand with a comprehensive process of institutionalization at the Union level. There is a continuous process of strengthening European agencies in the field of security
Thus, the Member States of the European Union are moving closer together in ensuring internal and external security. A closer look, however, shows that there are many issues that still require clarification. This is true especially for the significance and scope of Member State sovereignty. The reservation formulated in Article 4 (2) 3rd sentence TEU is considerably vague in normative terms. Following the recent juridicature of the European Court of Justice on data retention (ECJ GSZ 2021, 36 et seq.), it remains unclear, how far the "sole responsibility of the Member States" for their "national security" extends. France’s Conseil d’État, referring to national security interests, has openly contradicted the ECJ. Although this is no explicit dispute about ultra vires decisions between the Conseil d’État and the ECJ, individual observers are already worrying about “opening Pandora’s box”: Some Member States could view this as an invitation to abuse comparable justifications for unjustified scenarios, thus bypassing decisions of the European Court of Justice (cf. Christakis, quote from POLITICO dated 3 March 2021). The fact that the French government is taking recourse to the identité constitutionnelle in these proceedings is remarkable in so far as President Emmanuel Macron vigorously supports strengthening Union-wide cooperation in security and defence matters:
„(...) j’ai appelé les Etats européens à construire ensemble une Europe de la sécurité et de la défense. Une Europe qui protège.“
(from: speech held on 5 March 2019 before the Intelligence College in Europe)
Against this background, the international conference under the patronage of the European Parliament will take a closer look at potentials and limits of European security cooperation. Primarily, the added value of the event is to provide a forum for a scientific exchange and reflection for its attendees. Both the conference itself and its documentation in an English-language edited volume may be conducive to making the discussion more substantiated and to showing more precisely where the limits of both European Union and Member State action are.
Against this background, the international conference under the patronage of the European Parliament will take a closer look at potentials and limits of European security cooperation. Primarily, the added value of the event is to provide a forum for a scientific exchange and reflection for its attendees. Both the conference itself and its documentation in an English-language edited volume may be conducive to making the discussion more substantiated and to showing more precisely where the limits of both European Union and Member State action are.
