The end of the cold war in WesternEurope brought a new emphasis on coming up with a uniquely European tactic tosecurity. The need of a new approach was impelled by a number of factors,including the need of a structure to enable West European involvement innon-European conflicts and the wish to embed German amalgamation in the courseof European incorporation and, in the course of Iraqi raid of Kuwait in 1990.The plan of escalating the European Community role was divided into two parts:to look at economic and political features of security; and a possible role forthe European Community in security policy, firstly via tauter associationsbetween the Western European Union (WEU) and European Community, and a moreunified “Security Policy and Common Foreign” (CFSP), improving on the processesof European Political Cooperation to look at economic and political aspect ofsecurity. The security community is expanding as aresult of European Union self-perception and origins which are compelled by thedetermination to create long-lasting harmony.
The importance’s mechanismsexplore are the neighborhood policies and European Union’s enlargements thatare more understood when examined using the concepts of concentric circles. Themethod used by EU in expanding its security community is comprehensible withits readiness to act and be seen as a regional security actor. For an instance,the progression of the European Union involvement in the Western Balkan is seenas an ideal example showing that the European Union actions are founded on amix of the two conceptual approaches initially mentioned in the introductionpart of this discussion that mostly help it to be a regional security actor.The situation during the 1990s in the case of Western Balkans provides the’worst case scenario’ that is both in terms of intensity and geographicalproximity– centered on the succession of armed battles at the doorstep of theEuropean Union (Biscop&Andersson, 2007.p.89). The whole scenario turned outto be a dramatic failure for the European Union and it began its turning pointin its rhetoric and actions directed to its neighbors.
Thus,the Western Balkans was a region in which the European Union had and currentlyhas the sturdiest inspiration to expand its security in the community. InEurope, there are still some security intimidations and problems faced bymembers as expressed in the ESS. Balkan’s conflict emergence was a reminderthat war was still prevalent on the continent (Urwin, 2014.p.
145).Through theincorporation of the Western Balkans into the European security, a community isthat via the EU it has industrialized into two key tools as highlighted in theESS implementation description: “in the whole region, good neighborly and cooperationare crucial where the latter being a certain type of conditionality(Deighton,2002.p.178).
In addition, this is a situation showing the EuropeanUnion pragmatic basis since in its other sidelines, the European Unionintentions for action are only weaker forms of the same. In general, theregional European Union founded security community is a multi-speed securitycommunity, resilient at its essential and feebler as it extends towards itslimits. Furthermore,the European Union Security community attempts to enlarge both in pragmatic andideational positions. The EU sees itself as both peaceful hegemon and normativeauthority, hence interpreting its mission for harmony in judgments that aremostly at the helm of its consecutive expansions and its readiness’s to performas a national security actor in its surrounding. The post entrants Europedenotes to Europe after the 2004-2007 European Union expansions and means weremain in the period where big thump expansions of the European Union areconcluded and the delineations of the European scheme are more or not known,presumptuous the Western Balkans ultimately increase concurrence (Webber,et.
The post -2004 efforts to come up with a close incorporation with designatedpost-Soviet nations have particularly not accomplished the intended involvementof the ‘European Security Community’ further east. Although the European Unionapproach intended to the eastern neighbors should positively not be viewed asthe only crucial basis of the ‘insecurity region’ between the European Unioneastern borderline. It is thus hard to evade the verdict that engagements suchthe EaP and ENP have been an essential fragment in these signs of progress. The accomplishment of European Union has beento help the formation of wealthy, steady and thriving ruled nations in Europeapplying the transformative influence of expansion, however, that’s aim is notwhole as the countries of the Western Balkans and Turkey and many more in theEast have a European prospect. The problem nowadays for the European Union ishow it can repeat that attainment to the south which comprises nations whoseprospect may not lie as part of the European Union even though its success maybe closely tied to European (Acharya, 2014.
p.112). The European communitysecurity has been able to encourage and inspire developments of peacefulinteractions beyond its limits. Nevertheless, the expansion of European Unionsecurity community in the whole of a continent is faced with a lot of problemsthat the EU as a standard exporter is incompetent in resolving. Therefore, inthe whole of the region encouraging harmony and constancy on one side andequality and the rule of law on the other always seems hard to reunite(Howorth, 2014.
p.88). As it is always argued stability and security are the keyurgencies of the European Union associate states in the area and politicalalteration towards democratization were supposed as possibly undermining andwould hence be subordinated to the upkeep of national solidity”.The goal of the European securitycommunity expansion is to promote the integration of the partner countrieswithin the EU and acknowledge the weaknesses and the challenges they pose togreater expansion. The said weaknesses represent greater challenges to the partnercountries and Europe as a whole.
Moreover, it is impossible to talk about theclose ties within the EU without acknowledging the presence of the RussianFederation which is a third large party. Ever since Vladimir Putin took overpower, Russia has been aggressive in preventing countries perceived as closerto it’s economic, political and cultural circle from pursuing closer ties withWestern Europe (Sokolsky, 2017, 14). One of the recent examples is the Ukrainecrisis and such weaknesses need to be critically examined within thepartnership between the EU and Russia. Since the year 1989, European securitycommunity saw the need for the Eastern partnership in the creation ofwell-governed stable and prosperous nations along the EU eastern borders. Thepartnership allowed the choice of the model of engagement between each of thecountries and the EU within its free and sovereign will. Several summits wereconducted to reshape the partnership policy basing on the inclusivity principlefor all the countries within the framework and look upon the increasing needfor differentiation among each of the countries (Geyer, 2016, 45). Ever since the fall of the Berlin walla new security system has been created in Europe this includes severalorganizations interacting and complementing each other. Each of theorganizations has different membership and differing mandates.
The presentEuropean security community and its partnership with others have created a verystable nucleus, in which threats of war or even war between the countries hasdisappeared at least for the members in organizations such as the WesternEuropean Union, European Union, and NATO. The post-1989 European securitycommunity has been very successful in the meantime regarding the partnership andcooperation (Menon, and Sedelmeier, 2010, 84). After the 1997 partnership andcooperation agreement between the EU and Russia, there appeared to be a rosyfuture for the two stakeholders.
The two sides grew apart when Russian domesticsituations changed particularly because Russia insisted on being treated as “anequal” implying a growing but hidden disagreement about the values regardingthe EU enlargement. The 2008 war in Georgia also deepened the gap between theEurope and Russia and even foreshadowed the divisive split that followed.During president, Medvedev era relationship between Russia and EU warmed butthe EU overlooked critical signs that would have sowed alarm (Copsey, andPomorska, 2014, 430). During the third term of president Putin, things changedfundamentally as Kremlin tried to stop the EU’s Eastern Partners efforts tomove closer to Europe.
Russia wanted “new rules” threatening the alternative”no rules at all” (Sokolsky, 2017, 16). Russia was now seen a “strategicproblem” rather than the “strategic partner” as it was sometimes back. However,the outcome of Ukraine will play an important and decisive role both in therelationship between Russia and Europe and its future.The Helsinki process facilitated the’cooperative security’ and the need for self-reliance saw the rise of NorthAtlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) states. The European security communityalso saw the informally and contextually bound groups of practitioners who arelike-minded and have a shared interest forming NATO states to Central andEastern European nations during the 1990s. Signs of integration and cooperationhave been expressed by Russians, for example, the 1994 when Austria, Norway,Sweden and Finland treaties of accession to the EU were signed, also signed wasthe extensive Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) between Russia andEU. In the event held in Greece, 16 EU leaders were present to witness theaccession of the counties (Maltby, 2013, 440).
Also present was the Russianpresident, Boris Yeltsin who expressed Russia’s vision to reform, democratizeand eventually integrate with Europe. However, when Moscow demanded to betreated as “an equal” it simply means that it won’t accept the EU principles ofbehavior upon joining and hence Europe should negotiate these behaviors. In thelong run, Russia began to complicate its attitude towards western organizationswhich eventually made NATO membership from becoming realistic for Moscow.Although the country is powerful it failed to embrace the NATO goals. The year 2004 saw the entry of tencountries of central and Eastern Europe in the European Union, these are CzechRepublic, Lithuania, Malta, Hungary, Cyprus, Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Slovenia,and Slovakia. Other three countries remained candidate countries and theyincluded Bulgaria, Romania, and Turkey. However, Bulgaria and Romania both inEastern Europe joined the EU in January 2007 bringing the number of membercountries to 27.
Between the years 2004 and 2007, the EU mainly focused onsigning and amending the previous treaties so the EU can be more efficient,transparent and democratic so together member states can be able to tackle theglobal challenges including climate change, sustainable development, andregional security (Christou, 2010, 423). The treaty of Lisbon was signed on13th December 2007 and it ratified all the 27 EU member countries beforeentering into force two years later. ConclusionFromthe above discussion, it is clear that the post-1989 expansion of the Europeansecurity community has been successful in several ways including the 2004-2007entrants which comprised of eight former communist countries into the Europeansphere. This significantly extended the European zone of peace extending fromBaltic region in the north and the black sea to the south. Eastern Partnershipand Russia cooperation also saw the European security community extend and havemore partners in fighting common enemies including terrorists and controllingcrime. The western Balkan countries which surround EU members’ states are alsoseen as a key role in the regional integration and cooperation.