The future of the EU-Foreign Policy in the light of the constitutional treaty

The dominant view among scholars and politicians on the CSFP is that it had not enabled the EU to meet the demands corresponding to its size as economic power and its own ambitions. Generally, there was a great agreement, that this was due to leading role the member states played in the decision-making structures of the CSFP. Whereas most observers accused the national egoisms and the diverging interests of the member states to cause the lack of coherence in the collective affairs, there seems to be a political understanding and an underlying desire that Europe should play a more proactive role in international relations to serve European interests and common values.1 Regularly, the lamentation about the absent coherent appearance refers to the comparison, that Europe is an economic colossus but a political pigmy.2 Therefore, the debate is quite old, but became more intense after the dramatic change in the world order in the early 1990ties and in the aftermath of the Maastricht summit in 1991.

The creation of the three “pillar” based community construction in the Treaty of Maastricht in 1991 implemented the Foreign Policy into the contractual framework of the European Union and many observers and contributing policy makers viewed this as a major strengthening of the Union’s capability to act more effective on the global stage. However, this institutional change, which felt short of the high hopes many had, was not the starting point of the process leading to further integration even in formerly carefully as a member state responsibility protected policy areas.