The EU should have remained a civilian power. Discuss Essay

The EU should have remained a civilian power. Discuss - Essay Example According to Stavridis, civilian power can be defined as an entity that has influence on international systems using economic, financial and political means in absence of any military means (Stavridis, 2001, p.3). Many wonder which type of power the EU exercises, whether civilian, military, or normative power, as they try to identify the roles of the EU in the international politics. This paper presents a very thoughtful discussion, specifically arguing for why the EU should have remained a civilian power. The first part of this paper focuses on the meaning of civilian power; the second part presents arguments explaining why the EU should remain a civilian power, then it lays out a counterargument detailing why EU should not remain civilian and at the end, it draws a conclusion of the discussion. The main considerations focus on the normative dimension of the EU’s foreign and security policy, its mandate as a trading power, and the EU as a substantial donor of humanitarian and development aid. Furthermore, the view of civilian power has been used to evaluate EU’s foreign policy based on its promotion of human rights, democracy as well as the rule of law, and its contribution in peacekeeping and stability efforts aimed at keeping the international system peaceful and stable. ... 13). Civilian power and military power are very different this is because civilian power unlike military power does not involve the use of armed forces, but mainly involves the use of economic, diplomatic and cultural policy instruments. In addition, peacekeeping strategies are also associated with civilian foreign policy, but military power is characterized by the use of military forces. A civilian power not only entails the means used by an actor but also the end to pursue it; therefore, being civilian power involves combination of four elements, which are means, ends, use of persuasion, and civilian control over foreign policy making (Smith, 2005, p.2). Moreover, one of the most prominent scholars of the civilian power concept, Francois Duchene did not clearly define it, but used two elements, which are means and ends to explain who can be termed as a civilian power (Smith, 2005, p. 3). Unlike a military power, which entails military means, military ends, hard power, and lack of d emocratic control, civilian power is actually the opposite. Therefore, when defining a civilian power, it is indispensable to consider all the four elements that include civilian means, civilian end, soft power, and democratic control (Smith, 2005, p.6). However, the use of military means can be associated with civilian power especially when they are used to protect human rights and democracy (Stavridis, 2001, p. 17). According to Sjursen, lack of military instruments is what defines a civilian power (Sjursen, 2006, p. 236). Furthermore, Hans Maull presented a clear definition of civilian power stating that civilian power refers to the recognition of the inevitability of