Actor or Bystander? The EU and Conflict Management in Its Neighbourhood

What accounts for the variation in EU’s actorness in cases of contested statehood in the EU neighbourhood? A comparative analysis of the EU’s policies vis-à-vis three territorial conflicts – Kosovo, Abkhazia/South Ossetia and Western Sahara – demonstrates the intricate relationship between structure and agency in the EU’s decision-making leading to substantial involvement, partial involvement or non-involvement in conflict management. Using insights from Bretherton and Vogler’s notions of opportunities, presence and capabilities, the paper offers a conceptualisation of the EU’s conflict management role in different constellations of sovereignty and a contingent explanation of the EU’s varying commitment to resolving conflicts in three cases of contested statehood. It first discusses the external structural determinants of EU’s policies in the three geographical regions (Balkans, Caucasus, Maghreb), including the acceptance of the EU’s security role by other external players and the eruption or threat of eruption of violence in the conflict zones. It then investigates the EU’s presence in the conflict regions by giving an account of the levers of EU power in the different contexts of statehood contestation, with Kosovo having made important steps towards external sovereignty but with internal sovereignty still undermined, Abkhazia/South Ossetia enjoying internal sovereignty but without great prospects for external sovereignty and Western Sahara experiencing considerable intrusions in both external and internal sovereignty. It finally explores the EU’s capacity for action as conditioned by internal decision-making processes characterised by a varying degree of agreement on collective action. The paper finds that the interplay of the three aspects of EU’s actorness is best positioned to explain the observed variation in EU’s contribution to conflict management.