{"title":"欧盟转向“战略自治”:政策行动的余地和冲突点","authors":"Armin Steinbach","doi":"10.1093/ejil/chad048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In a world marked by intensifying geopolitical rivalries, supply chain vulnerabilities and disruptive technological change, ensuring ‘strategic autonomy’ is now an avowed goal of numerous European Union (EU) policy initiatives. This article seeks to facilitate an assessment of this ‘policy turn’ by developing a taxonomy of associated objectives and by illuminating points of conformance and conflict with EU and international law. The EU Treaties offer a robust legal basis for a stronger-values orientation in external relations, for policies designed to rebalance reciprocity in pursuit of geo-economic ambition and for the pursuit of technological leadership within the EU Treaties’ level-playing-field legal foundation. Yet there is a thin line to collisions with international (trade and investment) law, notably where value prioritization, technological preferences or geopolitical concerns are tantamount to discrimination or invite protectionist policy choices. Employment of coercive tools in a unilateral fashion questions the legal default of multilateralism and openness. Persistent strategic diversity within the Union hinders ‘institutional autonomy’, particularly where unanimity voting makes intergovernmentalism the predominant mode of cooperation. The findings shed light on how the evolving geopolitical environment leads to a recalibration of EU external relations between protection and openness, independence and interdependence, unilateralism and multilateralism and power and rules.","PeriodicalId":47727,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of International Law","volume":"51 ","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The EU’s Turn to ‘Strategic Autonomy’: Leeway for Policy Action and Points of Conflict\",\"authors\":\"Armin Steinbach\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ejil/chad048\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In a world marked by intensifying geopolitical rivalries, supply chain vulnerabilities and disruptive technological change, ensuring ‘strategic autonomy’ is now an avowed goal of numerous European Union (EU) policy initiatives. This article seeks to facilitate an assessment of this ‘policy turn’ by developing a taxonomy of associated objectives and by illuminating points of conformance and conflict with EU and international law. The EU Treaties offer a robust legal basis for a stronger-values orientation in external relations, for policies designed to rebalance reciprocity in pursuit of geo-economic ambition and for the pursuit of technological leadership within the EU Treaties’ level-playing-field legal foundation. Yet there is a thin line to collisions with international (trade and investment) law, notably where value prioritization, technological preferences or geopolitical concerns are tantamount to discrimination or invite protectionist policy choices. Employment of coercive tools in a unilateral fashion questions the legal default of multilateralism and openness. Persistent strategic diversity within the Union hinders ‘institutional autonomy’, particularly where unanimity voting makes intergovernmentalism the predominant mode of cooperation. The findings shed light on how the evolving geopolitical environment leads to a recalibration of EU external relations between protection and openness, independence and interdependence, unilateralism and multilateralism and power and rules.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47727,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of International Law\",\"volume\":\"51 \",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of International Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chad048\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chad048","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The EU’s Turn to ‘Strategic Autonomy’: Leeway for Policy Action and Points of Conflict
Abstract In a world marked by intensifying geopolitical rivalries, supply chain vulnerabilities and disruptive technological change, ensuring ‘strategic autonomy’ is now an avowed goal of numerous European Union (EU) policy initiatives. This article seeks to facilitate an assessment of this ‘policy turn’ by developing a taxonomy of associated objectives and by illuminating points of conformance and conflict with EU and international law. The EU Treaties offer a robust legal basis for a stronger-values orientation in external relations, for policies designed to rebalance reciprocity in pursuit of geo-economic ambition and for the pursuit of technological leadership within the EU Treaties’ level-playing-field legal foundation. Yet there is a thin line to collisions with international (trade and investment) law, notably where value prioritization, technological preferences or geopolitical concerns are tantamount to discrimination or invite protectionist policy choices. Employment of coercive tools in a unilateral fashion questions the legal default of multilateralism and openness. Persistent strategic diversity within the Union hinders ‘institutional autonomy’, particularly where unanimity voting makes intergovernmentalism the predominant mode of cooperation. The findings shed light on how the evolving geopolitical environment leads to a recalibration of EU external relations between protection and openness, independence and interdependence, unilateralism and multilateralism and power and rules.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of International Law is firmly established as one of the world"s leading journals in its field. With its distinctive combination of theoretical and practical approaches to the issues of international law, the journal offers readers a unique opportunity to stay in touch with the latest developments in this rapidly evolving area. Each issue of the EJIL provides a forum for the exploration of the conceptual and theoretical dimensions of international law as well as for up-to-date analysis of topical issues. Additionally, it is the only journal to provide systematic coverage of the relationship between international law and the law of the European Union and its Member States.