Since its inception, the European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) has generated controversy and concern, especially in the United States. Although Washington has wanted a stronger European partner, it has also worried that a stronger ESDP could undermine NATO and weaken the transatlantic link. The debate over ESDP must be seen in the broader strategic context, which has been influenced by the war in Kosovo, the effort to strengthen European defense integration, the reorientation of U.S. strategic interests after the Cold War, and the Bush administration's penchant for unilateral action and its suspicion of multilateral organizations--as shown by its actions in Iraq. As ESDP proceeds, the United States and Europe need to ensure that it strengthens transatlantic relations: (1) The U.S. must accept that Europe needs some autonomous operational planning capability outside of NATO. (2) U.S. and European defense transformation must be closely harmonized. (3) How ESDP develops will depend in part on whether the U.S. maintains a unilateralist approach or returns to its former respect for multilateralism. (4) Europe should eschew efforts to develop the EU as a counterweight to the United States.
Originally published in: The International Spectator, v. XXXIX, no. 1, January 2004, pp. 51-70.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Reprint series. The Reprint was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1992 to 2011 that represented previously published journal articles, book chapters, and reports with the permission of the publisher. RAND reprints were formally reviewed in accordance with the publisher's editorial policy and compliant with RAND's rigorous quality assurance standards for quality and objectivity. For select current RAND journal articles, see External Publications.
Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/research-integrity.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.