CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1. The European External Action Service (EEAS),
launched in January 2011, was one of the most important institutional
innovations brought about by the 2009 Lisbon Treaty.[1]
The creation of the EEAS formed part of a re-organisation of the
external action of the European Union (EU), which also involved
the creation of the posts of President of the European Council
and High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security
Policy/Vice-President of the Commission (HR/VP). The system of
the six-monthly rotating presidency was retained, but its role
was diminished.
2. Article 27 of the TEU specifies that the role
of the EEAS is to assist the HR/VP in fulfilling their mandate.
The Treaty sets out this mandate as being:
- to "conduct the Union's common
foreign and security policy", including making proposals
and implementing policy agreed by the Council;
- to perform the same role for the common security
and defence policy;
- to "preside over the Foreign Affairs Council";
- to "be one of the Vice-Presidents of the
Commission"; and
- to "ensure the consistency of the Union's
external action".[2]
3. The TEU, the TFEU, and a subsequent Council
Decision outlined how the new Service was to operate.[3]
The aim of budget neutrality for the new Service was specified.[4]
4. It is now two years since the EEAS was launched.
A structure has been created, with a central direction in Brussels
and 141 EU delegations around the world.[5]
The aim of this report is to contribute to the review of the EEAS
which the HR/VP is to conduct in mid 2013. We must acknowledge
that, with evidence from barely two years of such a challenging
innovation inside the EU, this can only be a preliminary assessment;
but we feel that its importance alone justifies it.
5. During our inquiry, we heard that the EEAS
was created to resolve the unsatisfactory nature of the previous
system, which had caused uncertainty on the part of third countries
as to who was representing the EU in any week or month. The functions
of collective representation were also determined by the capacity
of the national diplomatic service that happened to be holding
the six-monthly rotating presidency office at any one time, and
therefore varied in quality.[6]
In Chapter 2 of this report (paragraphs 10-85) we examine how
the new institutions have evolved and whether they represent an
improvement over the previous structure. In Chapter 3 we consider
the achievements of the new Service (paragraphs 86-100), and the
remaining challenges (paragraphs 101-145). We look particularly
at whether the EEAS has contributed to coherence and consistency[7]
in the development and implementation of the Common Foreign and
Security Policy (CFSP), and whether it has added value to the
EU's external action. In Chapter 4 we consider the views of the
EU Member States (paragraphs 146-165).
6. It was a major challenge to establish the
HR/VP post and form the EEAS while they simultaneously had to
begin their work. The first HR/VP, appointed in 2009, was Baroness
Ashton of Upholland. By combining the two old posts of the Council's
High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy (formerly
occupied by Javier Solana), and Commissioner for External Affairs,
(previously held by Benita Ferrero Waldner), the new HR/VP post
gave Baroness Ashton of Upholland a leadership role over both
the CFSP (an intergovernmental process directed by the Council)
and the Commission's external relations functions. However, the
Lisbon Treaty left a number policy areas relating to external
affairs under the direct responsibility of the Commission—trade,
development, neighbourhood policy, enlargement, and climate change.
The Lisbon Treaty also lacked clarity about how the EEAS would
function.
7. In January 2010, before the implementation
of the Lisbon Treaty, the EU had 136 representations around the
world,[8] staffed by Commission
officials, to transact Commission business, mostly trade (for
which the EU has exclusive competence), and for development and
humanitarian aid (where competences are shared with the individual
Member States). With the formation of the EEAS, these representations
became EU delegations. Their staff were recruited from the diplomatic
services of the Member States, (to represent one third of all
staff by the time the EEAS reached full capacity), and from permanent
officials of the Union, who were to represent at least 60% of
all EEAS staff at Administrative (AD) level.[9]
The challenge was to recruit the appropriate staff and form them
into a united service with one corporate culture, both in Brussels
and in the field.
8. This inquiry was conducted between November
2012 and March 2013 by the EU Sub-Committee on External Affairs,
whose members are listed in Appendix 1. Those from whom we took
evidence are listed in Appendix 2. We are grateful to them all.
9. We make this report to the House for debate.
1 The Treaty made various changes to the Treaty on
European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union (TFEU). In this report, the term "Lisbon Treaty"
is used as a shorthand to refer to the combined provisions of
the TEU and TFEU, as amended by the Lisbon Treaty. Back
2
Article 18, TEU. We set out the Treaty's provisions in this area
in our 2008 report: European Union Committee, 10th Report (2007-2008):
The Treaty of Lisbon: an impact assessment (HL Paper 62-1,
Chapter 7) Back
3
Council Decision 2010/427
26 July 2010 Back
4
Council Decision 2010/427 Back
5
The number fluctuates as Delegations are opened and others closed. Back
6
Professor Richard Whitman, University of Kent Q 41, also David
Spence, LSE Q 67 Back
7
Article 26, TEU, states that "the Council and the High Representative
… shall ensure the unity, consistency and effectiveness of
action by the union." Back
8
EU Observer, 21 January 2010 Back
9
Article 6(9) of the EEAS Council Decision Back
| 
