رویه تصمیم‌گیری در سیاست امنیتی و دفاعی مشترک اتحادیه اروپا و چالش‌های آن؛ با تاکید بر منطقه غرب آسیا

کشورهای اروپایی بعد از جنگ جهانی دوم با کاستن از اختلافات، به تدریج در جهت آرمان سیاست خارجی و امنیتی مشترک و در این مسیر بویژه بعد از جنگ سرد، در راستای سیاست امنیتی و دفاعی مشترک گام نهادند. محل تصمیم‌گیری درباره سیاست امنیتی و دفاعی مشترک، شورای اروپایی، متشکل از سران کشورهای عضو است که به منظور ارتقای صلح و امنیت جهانی به اتفاق آراء در مورد ماموریت‌های غیرنظامی و عملیات‌های نظامی تصمیم‌گیری می‌کنند. به رغم دستاوردهایی که اتحادیه اروپا در توسعه و مدیریت سیاست امنیتی- دفاعی مشترک کسب نموده است، اما هنوز با چالش‌هایی مواجه است که مانع از کارکرد بین‌المللی مطلوب آن می‌گردد. پژوهش حاضر با هدف بررسی چالش‌های رویه تصمیم‌گیری، این پرسش را مطرح نموده است: رویه تصمیم‌گیری بر کارکرد بین‌المللی سیاست امنیتی و دفاعی مشترک اتحادیه اروپا چگونه تاثیرگذار است؟ فرضیه این است که تصمیم‌گیری بر اساس اتفاق آرا باعث شکلگیری رقابت، پیچیدگی، سرعت پایین و در برخی موارد باعث تاخیر، انسداد و یا وتوی تصمیمات می‌شود. یافته‌های پژوهش که با بررسی چند نمونه از عملکرد اتحادیه اروپا در غرب آسیا و با روش توصیفی-تحلیلی حاصل شده است نشان می‌دهد که تصمیم‌گیری بر اساس اتفاق آراء با ایجاد مانع در مسیر شکل‌گیری مولفه‌های بازیگری اتحادیه اروپا، در بسیاری از موارد موجب عدم تحقق اهداف سیاست دفاعی- امنیتی مشترک اتحادیه اروپا شده‌ است.

the decision-making procedure in the common security and defense policy of the european union and its challenges; with emphasis on the west asian region

after the second world war, the european countries, by reducing the differences, gradually took steps towards the goal of a common foreign and security policy, and in this direction, especially after the cold war in line with a common security and defense policy. the decision-making place for the common security and defense policy is the european council, consisting of the heads of member states who make unanimous decisions on civilian missions and military operations in order to promote global peace and security. the european security and defense policy was recognized as the security and defense branch of the european union during the eu summit in helsinki in 1999, where its institutional framework was established. this path of evolution continued through subsequent summits until 2009, when the lisbon treaty renamed the &european security and defense policy& to the &common security and defense policy.& this policy aims to create operational capacity and capabilities by utilizing military and civilian assets and benefiting from the member states’ strengths. despite the eu’s achievements in developing and managing the common security and defense policy, it still faces challenges that hinder its optimal international performance. among these challenges, we can mention the structure and decision-making procedure in the european union, the euro crisis, disagreements among member states, and nationalism. especially since the member states in most cases act based on their national interests and do not consider the collective interests of the european union. this research aims to examine how the decision-making process affects the international functioning of the common security and defense policy and the eu’s role as a global actor. based on this, this question has been raised: how does the decision-making process impact the international functioning of the eu’s common security and defense policy? the hypothesis is that decision-making based on unanimity leads to competition, complexity, slow progress, and, in some cases, delays, blockage, or vetoes of decisions. using a descriptive-analytical method and the concept of eu actorness, this study first describes the structure of the common security and defense policy and its decision-making process and then explores and examines its challenges. subsequently, by reviewing case studies of military operations and civilian missions led by the common security and defense policy, especially in the west asia region, it addresses the main challenges and damages caused by the decision-making process that have affected the common security and defense policy and the eu’s desired global role. mentioning case examples such as greece’s blocking of eu joint decision-making in condemning china’s human rights records and actions in june 2017, the veto by cyprus against a joint decision to condemn human rights violations in belarus in 2020, the lack of consensus among eu members to condemn the trump administration’s decision to recognize jerusalem as the capital of israel in 2017, hungary’s refusal to join other eu members in calling for a ceasefire between israel and the islamist group hamas in may 2021 and the blocking of a joint decision on the u.s.