Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
EU Law after Lisbon$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Andrea Biondi, Piet Eeckhout, and Stefanie Ripley

Print publication date: 2012

Print ISBN-13: 9780199644322

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: May 2012

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199644322.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2018. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 13 December 2018

The EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy after Lisbon: From Pillar Talk to Constitutionalism

The EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy after Lisbon: From Pillar Talk to Constitutionalism

Chapter:
(p.265) 13 The EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy after Lisbon: From Pillar Talk to Constitutionalism
Source:
EU Law after Lisbon
Author(s):

Piet Eeckhout

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199644322.003.0013

The Treaty of Lisbon is generally described as doing away with the three-pillar structure of the European Union. There is no better indication of this unification than the single legal personality which has been created for the whole of the EU construct (Article 47 TEU). However, notwithstanding the attempt to unify the EU's legal and institutional system, the Treaty of Lisbon certainly did not remove all differences between the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and the EU's other policies. There is much that can and needs to be said about the EU's evolving attempt, post Lisbon, to set up a genuine foreign policy. This chapter focuses on some of the essential changes to the system which the Lisbon Treaty introduced. As will be seen, pillar talk cannot as yet be avoided. However, there is also a need to move beyond pillar talk, and to analyse the CFSP from the perspective of constitutionalism. Is it really proper for the CFSP to be intergovernmental, which means that it is dominated by executives? Are there adequate checks and balances? Again, this chapter does not aim to provide a definitive analysis. More modestly, it seeks to draw attention to at least some of the constitutional defects. It focuses on three areas of Lisbon innovation: the scope and nature of the CFSP competences (including their delimitation from other competences); the legal acts employed to conduct the CFSP; and the institutional innovations, in particular the office of the High Representative and the European External Action Service.

Keywords:   CFSP, The Three Pillars, constitutionalism, external relations

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .