Thinktanks and “strategic autonomy”: making sense of EU’s role in the world of geoeconomics

The dawning world of geoeconomics and weaponised interdependence presents a significant problem for the European Union as a foreign policy actor. Having spent almost two decades thinking of itself as a "normative power Europe", the "return of geopolitics" globally and a weakening of transatlantic axis amount to a fully-fledged foreign policy identity crisis (Guzzini, 2012). In this paper, I will argue that European foreign policy thinktanks have been a central – if often overlooked – actor in this ongoing process of the EU "learning to speak the language of power" (Borrell, 2019). Brussels-based (e.g. CEPS, ECFR) and national capitals-based organisations (IFRI in Paris, DGAP in Berlin) have been important actors – both formally and informally - in making sense of the EU's new position within the geoeconomized global order, (re)defining its interests and the tools to achieve them. The existing literature on European foreign policy remains heavily focused on establishing a precise balance between the national and supranational aspects of foreign policy-making, thus overlooking thinktanks. On the other hand, the literature on European thinktanks as transnational actors either skips the member states-dominated policy area of foreign policy or refrains from making the extra step from mere mapping towards examining thinktanks' influence. In line with the insights of Critical Political Economy and neo-Gramscian works, I argue that thinktanks are at the centre of a discourse coalition (Hajer, 2002) redefining the EU's role in the world. As transnational actors, they bridge the gap between concrete actors and institutionalised agency and are central in the formation of discourse coalitions (Plehwe, 2015). The paper's empirical focus will explore "strategic autonomy" as the central organising concept replacing the previously dominant "normative power." While the concept was applied to security issues in the 2016 European Global Strategy, its use has now spread, making it the EU’s main strategic concept. Thinktanks have been central in this process. By mapping the links between top European policymakers and thinktank(er)s, I will illustrate the network producing the new common sense and use primary and secondary sources to trace how it came about. Exploring the thinktanks' links to broader social forces will also allow me to draw some conclusions about this reorientation's social purpose and political economy. Thus, my paper will contribute to a better understanding of the EU as a particular (and conflicted) actor in the "geoeconomic game" and indicate which instruments are envisaged by strategic autonomy. Borrell, J. (2019). HEARING OF JOSEP BORRELL VICE, PRESIDENT-DESIGNATE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION HIGH REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNION FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND SECURITY POLICY (A Stronger Europe in the World). European Parliament COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS. Guzzini, S. (2012). The Return of Geopolitics in Europe? Cambridge University Press. Hajer, M. A. (2002). Discourse coalitions and the institutionalisation of practice: The case of acid rain in Great Britain. In Argument Turn Policy Anal Plan (pp. 51–84). Plehwe, D. (2015). The Politics of Policy Think Tanks: Organising Expertise, Legitimacy and Counter-Expertise in Policy Networks. In Handbook of Critical Policy Studies (pp. 358–379). Edward Elgar Publishing.