Despite its status as the biggest example of regional integration, the European Union remains greatly affected by internal divisions. These continue to threaten the EU’s pursuit of strategic actorness, a complex process the primary aim of which is to establish Brussels as an autonomous decision-maker on the international stage. Divisions between member states are wide-ranging, affecting multiple policy areas.
Whether regarding the EU’s still-evolving enlargement agenda or the extent of its engagement with partners such as Türkiye, member state divergences threaten to undermine the EU’s ability to act swiftly and strategically in the most crucial and pressing moments. Given the scale of unpredictability which characterizes contemporary affairs, and also the considerable ground the EU must still make to close the capabilities gap with other major global powers, this uncertainty threatens to further weaken the EU’s global influence. The fragmentation which is regularly assigned to the EU’s actorness can be placed in two overarching categories.
The first concerns strategic divergence between key member states on several essential aspects of EU policy, including defence and security, enlargement and even migration. The second factor concerns internal dynamics in leading EU countries, which could alter the EU’s overall course and nature as an institution. In addition to present-day disagreements between key members on existing policy issues, the EU faces equally challenging long-term obstacles in the face of domestic political uncertainty experienced by its leading actors.
This deserves just as much recognition as the ongoing divisions between key EU leaders. Disagreements between member states continue to span a range of areas. One of the most notable and consequential examples for the EU’s status as an actor are its relations with states which are not members but widely considered to be indispensable partners.
The relationship with Türkiye is a useful and prominent example. For several years, the EU and its member states have struggled to voice a unanimous and clear-cut position on its relationship with Ankara. Even if officials in Brussels publicly recognize Ankara’s strategic importance for the European continent and voice support for closer ties, it is apparent that this remains a relationship with considerable untapped potential.
Altering dynamics in the transatlantic relationship and the United States’ reconsideration of its role in NATO have urged the EU to reexplore some of its other important relationships. Nevertheless, in the case of Türkiye, this has not occurred in line with a consistent strategy. For instance, the backbone of the relationship remains the EU-Türkiye Customs Union, which since entering into force in December 1995 has not been modified or upgraded.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
