Concept and Definition of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP)
The Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) is a central element of the European Union’s (EU) foreign and security policy and, together with the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), constitutes a core component of the EU’s treaty framework. The CSDP aims to coordinate the security and defence activities of the Member States and to protect and promote common European interests in the field of security and defence.
Legal Foundations
The legal foundations of the CSDP are enshrined in the Treaty on European Union (TEU), particularly in Articles 42 to 46 and the accompanying Protocol No. 10. Further relevant provisions can be found in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), insofar as these relate to the institutional aspects of decision-making processes.
Treaty on European Union (TEU)
- Article 42 TEU enables the European Union to develop a common defence policy which may lead to a common defence, should the European Council decide so.
- Article 43 TEU defines the tasks within the framework of the CSDP, including the so-called Petersberg tasks such as humanitarian missions, crisis management, peacekeeping and combat operations for conflict prevention.
- Article 44 TEU introduces the possibility for the Council of the Union to entrust the implementation of such tasks to individual Member States or groups of States.
- Article 45 TEU sets out the role of the European Defence Agency.
- Article 46 TEU establishes a procedure for Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO).
Scope and Distinction from the CFSP
The CSDP is structured as a subsidiary policy area of the CFSP, with its scope specifically limited to security and defence matters. While the CFSP is a broader instrument of foreign policy, the CSDP focuses on military and civil crisis management.
Legal Structure and Decision-Making Procedures
Intergovernmental Decision-Making
The CSDP primarily operates under the principle of intergovernmental decision-making. This means that control over security and defence policy decisions remains with the Member States, who are represented in the Council of the European Union. In principle, decisions are made unanimously.
Exceptions and Extensions
The introduction of Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) and the European Defence Agency (EDA) has enabled willing Member States to take further steps towards integration in the area of security and defence policy.
Institutional Framework
Political and Security Committee (PSC)
The PSC is a central body for the strategic direction of the CSDP, composed of senior representatives of the Member States.
High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
The High Representative represents the Union externally and coordinates actions under the CSDP vis-à-vis third countries and international organisations.
European Defence Agency (EDA)
The EDA supports the Member States in developing defence capabilities and coordinates projects in research, procurement, and innovation.
Legal Effects and Binding Nature
Binding Nature of Decisions
Legal acts adopted under the CSDP, especially decisions regarding operations or missions (CSDP missions), are binding on the Member States. However, implementation takes place strictly on a national basis; the Union does not possess its own armed forces.
No EU Armed Forces
According to Article 42(3) TEU, Member States may make armed forces available, but there are no truly European armed forces in the strict sense. Member States’ sovereignty in matters of defence remains largely intact.
Areas of Responsibility of the CSDP
Petersberg Tasks
The core areas of the CSDP include:
- Humanitarian aid and evacuation operations
- Conflict prevention and peacekeeping
- Crisis management, including peace-making measures and combat operations
- Contributions to counterterrorism
Missions and Operations
The CSDP has conducted numerous civilian and military missions, for example in regions such as the Western Balkans, Sahel, Horn of Africa, and Ukraine. Implementation is mostly achieved by deploying national forces and civilian experts.
Relations with Other International Organisations
Cooperation with NATO
The EU and NATO cooperate closely in crisis management and collective defence. The CSDP is designed to be complementary to NATO and respects the commitments of Member States under the North Atlantic Treaty.
Relations with the United Nations
CSDP actions often take place within the framework of, or on the basis of, UN Security Council mandates and are guided by the principles of the UN Charter.
Further Development and Prospects
The CSDP is a dynamic policy field that is constantly evolving. Since the Treaty of Lisbon, numerous new instruments have been created to expand the Union’s military and civilian capabilities. These include, in addition to PESCO, the introduction of the European Defence Fund (EDF) and the strengthening of the Union’s strategic autonomy.
Conclusion
The CSDP is the European Union’s central vehicle for developing a coherent, effective, and legally binding security and defence policy. It is based on firmly anchored legal foundations, is institutionally clearly regulated, and allows for flexible, though always Member State-controlled, responses to international security challenges. The CSDP underlines the Union’s growing engagement in security policy and promotes stronger European cooperation in the field of security and defence.
See also:
- Treaty of Lisbon
- Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)
- Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO)
- European Defence Agency (EDA)
- Petersberg Tasks
Frequently Asked Questions
Which legal foundations regulate the European Union’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP)?
The legal foundations of the CSDP are primarily found in the Treaty on European Union (TEU), particularly in Articles 42 to 46. These set out the main competences, procedures, and decision-making mechanisms. The legal basis is the principle of unanimity in the Council of the EU, although certain measures may be adopted by qualified majority. Decision-making power rests largely with the European Council and the Foreign Affairs Council. Special rules apply to the participation of Member States with neutrality reservations and to opt-out clauses, such as for Denmark. The treaty provisions are supplemented by protocols and declarations, which are legally binding and regulate the application and interpretation of the CSDP. Furthermore, every action within the CSDP framework is subject to the scrutiny of the Court of Justice of the European Union, insofar as compliance with the EU legal framework and fundamental rights is concerned, whereas operational decisions themselves are exempt from judicial review pursuant to Article 275 TFEU.
Who bears legal responsibility for military and civilian operations under the CSDP?
Legal responsibility for operations under the CSDP primarily lies with the Council of the European Union, which acts as the decision-making body. These missions are carried out by Member States, which provide troops or civilian specialists, and remain responsible under international and national law for the conduct of their deployed units. The EU itself acts as a subject of international law on behalf of its Member States, particularly in compliance with the UN Charter and other international obligations. Each sending state is also subject to its own constitutional limitations, and in the event of legal violations, either an individual Member State or the EU as a whole may be held liable, depending on the nature of the act and the applicable legal bases. Coordination of civil liability and criminal prosecution is supplemented by Status-of-Forces Agreements (SOFA) as well as specific operational mandates.
How is parliamentary oversight of the CSDP regulated at EU and national level from a legal perspective?
Parliamentary oversight of the CSDP at the European level is limited by the treaties. The European Parliament has the right of consultation and may request discussions and hearings on CSDP-related issues (Art. 36 TEU), but does not have formal rights of initiative or veto regarding CSDP decisions. At the national level, it is up to each Member State to regulate parliamentary control over troop deployments and other CSDP acts. In countries such as Germany, this is stipulated by the Parliamentary Participation Act, which requires Bundestag approval for any deployment. In other countries, executive prerogatives may be more extensive. Thus, there is a dual oversight structure, with effective control exercised mainly by national parliaments, which leads to a certain legal pluralism within the EU in this respect.
What role do Member States’ international law obligations play in the context of the CSDP?
Member States’ obligations under international law remain fully in force within the framework of the CSDP and determine the legal scope for joint operations. Every action within the CSDP context must comply with existing international treaties, particularly the Charter of the United Nations (for example, Art. 51 self-defence, Art. 42 mandate by the Security Council). Existing obligations deriving from NATO membership, bilateral defence agreements or international humanitarian law (e.g. Geneva Conventions) must also be taken into account. Where CSDP measures go beyond or conflict with existing international law, international treaty law or national reservations take precedence—operational mandates must therefore always be coordinated and, if necessary, adjusted to fit into the overall international law framework of the respective Member States.
What legal mechanisms govern third country participation in CSDP missions?
The participation of third countries in CSDP missions is governed by specific Council decisions based on the EU Treaty’s legal foundations (especially Art. 42 TEU and Council mandate). For each mission, Status of Forces Agreements (SOFA) or Status of Mission Agreements (SOMA) are negotiated with the participating third countries, which regulate the rights, obligations, as well as immunities and privileges of the deployed contingents. Participation always occurs on a voluntary basis and under the conditions agreed upon by the Council and the third countries for each mandate. Third countries have no voting rights in intra-EU bodies but can contribute in an advisory and operational capacity. The legal responsibility for third country contingents remains—with Member States as well—with the sending states.
How is compliance with human rights and fundamental rights standards ensured within the CSDP?
Ensuring compliance with human and fundamental rights standards is a central legal requirement under the CSDP. All operations must be consistent with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Prior to the start of each mission, a comprehensive risk and legal assessment (Legal Review) is conducted to prevent any violations of fundamental rights, particularly violations of the right to life, physical integrity, liberty and security. In addition, specific EU guidelines and procedural rules exist for the prevention and prosecution of human rights violations during CSDP missions. In cases of complaints or evidence of legal violations, both internal investigation mechanisms and judicial review (before national or, in some cases, internal EU courts) are available. Responsibility for compliance lies both with the EU and with the respective Member States, which remain disciplinarily and criminally liable for their personnel.
What legal liability arrangements exist for damages during CSDP operations?
Damages arising in the course of CSDP operations are subject to complex liability arrangements both at the Union level and under the national law of the sending states. Status agreements such as SOFA/SOMA and individual mandates regulate certain liability issues in advance—for example, responsibility for compensation to civilian third parties. Generally, the individual Member States are liable for damages caused by their personnel, provided these actions were within the respective rules of engagement. The European Union may be held subsidiarily liable if the act was explicitly performed in the name of and as instructed by the EU, or in cases of institutional organisational fault. Access to courts—both national and European—is governed by the respective legal acts. The enforcement of claims depends on the specific circumstances, with immunity provisions for EU institutions and operational personnel needing to be observed. In certain cases, recourse may be had to national compensation funds or international arbitration bodies.