Press "Enter" to skip to content

“Ups, we did it again” – What EU (in)action on Belarus tells us about the EU as a „global actor”

The EU’s potential as a global actor and its nature as “soft” or “normative” power is again under scrutiny regarding the escalation of violence against Belarusian protestors following a fraudulent election in August 2020.

Belarus is one of the six Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries that cooperates with and receives assistance from the EU for EU funded Action Programmes. The country also participates in various multi-country projects with the other EaP partner countries. The partnership aims to deepen EU integration and support democratic development yet, without a clear perspective of future membership.

Stay up to Date – Subscribe to our newsletter.

After the violent post-election crackdown on protestors, the EU now, once again, discusses the introduction of sanctions on several Belarusian officials involved and took the first step towards sanctions during a video conference on Friday, 14th August 2020.

While this move is a good sign and sanctions remain one of the most powerful tools for EU foreign policy, given that the EU used to present itself as a soft, or normative power lacking hard power capabilities, it sheds light on a bigger problem that tends to recur in the EU’s common foreign and security policy – the need of unanimity among EU member states. Whereas Germany, Sweden and Austria strongly support the move towards sanctions, others, most notably Hungary, remained silent on events in Belarus and called on the EU to pursue a dialogue instead of sanctions.

Now, whether one may think that sanctions can be effective or not in Belarus, it may be more interesting to look at what EU action may tell us about the EU’s potential as “global power”. Here, it again proves to be true that the EU, even if it decides to impose sanctions, is unable to speak as a united actor, with one voice. It is also evident that discussions on decisions for EU actions are often lengthy – thereby wasting precious time while a country in the EU’s backyard is once again on fire.
Perhaps most importantly, the current situation again demonstrates that the Union is often paralyzed by its own inability to act. This in turn, significantly impacts the EU’s reputation and makes it appear slow, passive or worse incapable, to take action.

In short, the current situation in Belarus is yet another example of why the EU needs to step up its game as a global power, to resemble the powerful and legitimate actor it seeks to represent.

The EU needs faster decision-making processes, which goes hand in hand with a reform of the decision-making process. Moreover, qualified majority voting in lieu of the currently required unanimity in CFSP can make a significant difference. Processes that need to reach unanimous decisions are generally lengthy and may lead to a complete stalemate.

What happens in Belarus, how the EU reacts and decides to act is therefore just another example for the necessity to – finally – reform the block’s foreign policy into something resembling a global power whether it will be a soft, normative or hard power in the end.

 

Notes

This article was written on 17th August 2020. As of 19th August 2020, the EU decided to reject Belarus’ election results and that it would impose sanctions on individuals responsible for electoral fraud. The block, however, did not call for a new election.

Sources

Barigazzi, J. (2020): EU takes first action toward Belarus sanctions, Politico, https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-belarus-sanctions-first-steps/, accessed, 29.08.2020

Erlanger, S. (2020): E.U. Rejects Belarus Election, Without Demanding a New One, The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/19/world/europe/eu-belarus-election.html, accessed 20.08.2020

Eastern Partnership Civil Society Facility (2017): https://eapcivilsociety.eu/belarus,accessed, 19.08.2020

European Parliament, Legislative Train Schedule, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-europe-as-a-stronger-global-actor/file-more-efficient-decision-making-in-cfsp, accessed, 19.08.2020

Holroyd, M. (2020): Hungary urges EU to pursue dialogue with Belarus amid violent protest, Euronews, https://www.euronews.com/2020/08/13/hungary-urges-eu-to-pursue-dialogue-with-belarus-amid-violent-protests, accessed, 19.08.2020

The Big Bear is still longing for the Mediterranean (no matter the war)

Russian access to the Mediterranean has been one of the Kremlin's foreign policy goals all along. Not coincidentally, a big conquest in this regard has been the establishment of a naval facility in the city port of Tartus in Syria, which explains also Russia's strong pro-Assad stance. Now it seems that after the war against Ukraine began two months ago, Russian sea activities are not directed only toward the Black Sea, as expected, but even more toward the Mediterranean.

Africa in the Great Power Competition

Against the backdrop of historical great power competition, Africa can today create a tremendous impact on the global arena. While China is currently gaining foothold on the continent with its increased investments, infrastructure projects and trade, also Russia has an interest in maintaining good relationships with African states, leaving the EU and the U.S. struggling for their space in the equation. In the end, a Cold War-like rivalry over Africa between the West and the China-Russia strategic alliance could ensue.

Why no foreign boots will be on Ukraine’s ground

During the last weeks, the world has been closely watching what is happening at the Ukrainian-Russian border. Despite the fact that the Ukrainian border has been the focus of attention for some years, the current crisis is taking another level. This is due to the deployment of a great number of Russian troops to the border, raising concerns about the region’s future and making experts speculate about a Russian invasion. However, even though specialists and pundits are warning decision-makers of the risk of a major war involving great powers, there are some reasons to doubt that there will be a Russian invasion or a deployment of NATO’s forces in Ukrainian territory, let alone a major conflict.

An Analysis of the Final 2020 US-Presidential Debate

On Thursday, 22nd October 2020, the final presidential debate between President Donald Trump and former Vice-President Joe Biden took place in Nashville. Kristen Welker of NBC News moderated the discussion. The debate covered six topics, amongst others, the COVID-19 pandemic, national security, the economy, and race in America. The debate was more orderly than the first presidential debate.

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *