The Nordic Countries and the European Security and Defence Policy

THE INTERFACE OF EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL SECURITY 273approaches that can transcend the internal–external distinction in an EU securityfield that is steadily moving east and south.Further away from the EU heartland, the security identity of the EU is graduallychanging character. European Union security is a hybrid of an internationalorganization and a would-be polity whose object is both the protectionof EU and universal values wherever they are threatened in the world and thesafety of the EU citizens in a more narrow sense. 32 European security crisesmight best be defined by threats to the core values of the EU—free trade andfree passage, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, and so on—and, increasingly,to international law and the values embodied by the United Nations. 33According to the EU’s Constitutional Treaty, ESDP missions should be carriedout for the purpose of peacekeeping, conflict prevention and the strengtheningof international security in accordance with the principles of the UN Charter. 34The EU’s first independently launched military operation—Operation Artemisin the Democratic Republic of the Congo, in 2003—was carried out at therequest of the UN (under a Chapter VII resolution). 35 If the early practicesinvolving UN requests and mandates have set a precedent for future ESDPoperations, EU security might increasingly encompass all people who areinvolved in a grave international crisis. 36 The evolving security role of the EUmight perhaps best be characterized as that of a regional body for theimplementation of UN decisions. In that case, EU security would equal internationalsecurity, and the EU would have no specific external security space.IV. The September 2001 attacks and the emerging new roles ofthe Nordic armed forcesThere are many areas where fundamental revisions of national security anddefence structures have been initiated as a result of the September 2001 terroristattacks, as mentioned above. The EU member states have started to redefine32 Whitman, R. G., ‘The fall, and rise, of civilian power Europe?’, Paper presented at the Conference onthe European Union in International Affairs, National Europe Centre, Australian National University,3–4 July 2002; and Manners, I., ‘Normative power Europe: a contradiction in terms?’, Journal of CommonMarket Studies, vol. 40, no. 2 (2002).33 Haaland Matlary, J., ‘Human rights’, eds Carlsnaes, Sjursen and White (note 9), pp. 141–54. On theEU Charter of Fundamental Rights see URL .34 The Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe was signed on 19 Oct. 2004 but has not beenratified. The text of the treaty is available at URL and selected articles are reproduced in the appendix in this volume35 Ulriksen, S., Gourlay, C. and Mace, C., ‘Operation Artemis: the shape of things to come?’, InternationalPeacekeeping, vol. 11, no. 3 (autumn 2004), pp. 508–25.36 It is perhaps significant that ‘a human security doctrine for Europe’ was recently proposed as a doctrinefor Europe’s security capabilities. Study Group on Europe’s Security Capabilities, ‘A human securitydoctrine for Europe’, Barcelona Report of the Study Group on Europe’s Security Capabilities, LondonSchool of Economics and Political Science, Centre for the Study of Global Governance, London, 15 Sep.2004, URL . The studygroup, led by Mary Kalder, was set up in 2003 at the request of the EU’s High Representative for theCFSP and Secretary-General of the Council of Ministers, Javier Solana.