THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE UNITED NATIONS: THEORY AND PRACTICE

Abstract

Any multilateral forum represents a dilemma for its members: is it
just a medium for asserting and defending national interests, or an
institutional outlet that could constrain national egoism and promote
compromise towards achieving collective goods and a sense of
community?
This dilemma is particularly sharp in the case of the UN,
and especially in the case of the UN Security Council.
As an intergovernmental organisation, the United Nations are
premised upon and protective of state sovereignty.
States are the key
members of the UN and they control the decision-making process.
Moreover, the UN membership is a reflection of the sovereign equality
of member states. However, the UN multilateralism allows blocks and
regional political groupings in its institutional and political processes.
Therefore, this terrain is suitable for EU action. Besides the fact that
many EU Member States have traditionally viewed the UN as an arena
for national diplomacy, they coordinate themselves on the EU common
position, including the drafting of EU statements and the adoption of EU
positions on Resolutions and other texts within the UN processes.
According to Laatikainen and Smith, the Union has its own approach
to multilateralism: the EU seeks to pool sovereignty and create a
common foreign policy in many policy arenas.
The EU has the potential
to be an important power in shaping global events. However, the EU has
exploited this potential more in the economic sphere than in the political
and security spheres. Through the Common Commercial Policy the EU
has used its power to promote global free trade and promote itself as the
world’s largest trader. On the other hand, the EU has been less capable
of speaking with a single and reliable voice on global political and
security issues. The governments of the Member State have
progressively strengthened the institutional capacity of the EU to agree
on and implement foreign policy actions, and this has facilitated the
definition of collective interests; the adoption of policy compromises; the
prevention of national actions that could undermine common policies,
and the presentation of common views in a coherent manner to theoutside world.
As a result, the EU has taken action on numerous non-sensitive issues. One example is the political and economic support to
the new democracies in Central and Eastern Europe.
On the other hand, the EU has been incapable of acting consistently
and decisively when faced with fundamental challenges to its security.
This was demonstrated by the EU’s response to the conflict in
Yugoslavia
, and moreover, with its failure to agree on a common
position during the Iraq crisis.
Even with regard to the recent crisis in
North Africa, the EU has once again failed to act rapidly on the issues
that affect its foreign and security policy. Furthermore, there were many
discrepancies among the EU Member States on the issues concerning
asylum seekers from the North African countries.
Taking into account these facts, the article will provide an insight
into the relations between the EU and the UN in today’s international
system. As the EU cannot be a member to the UN, the coherence
between the EU Member States within the UN institutional structure and
on different issues will be explained. Furthermore, the relationship
between the UN as a global international organisation and the EU as a
regional sui generis organisation will be explained through different
theories on international relations.