Overcoming Deadlock in European Security and Defence Policy and Enlargement: Modes and pathways

How can the institutional deadlock preventing further progress in EU’s security and defense policy (CSDP) and enlargement be overcome? Since the start of Russia’s full scale invasion in 2022, the EU’s security and defense policy and enlargement have operated under conditions favourable for change with new discourses, decisions, policy measures and funding. However, despite some far reaching decisions and policy measures, both policies encounter deadlock– albeit to different degrees. The two policies have come up against predominant unanimity decision-making which represents a constitutional level (treaty based) constraint, combined with divergence of preferences of member states. In contrast to a perspective that emphasizes these aspects, we develop a new approach to account for the current policy dynamics. We argue that both policies find themselves in a state of simultaneous development and deadlock, in Heritier’s conceptualization (1999). Building on previous work on overcoming deadlock (Heritier 1999; Farrell and Heritier 2002; Crespy et al 2024), we explore specific modes of circumventing or overcoming deadlock, used by different actors, for example, such as changing arenas, operating through informal channels, innovative organisational forms and drawing public attention. While these are familiar from the literature on institutional change regarding market oriented EU policies, yet the nature of enlargement and security and defense as ‘high politics’ makes them less amenable to the usual subterfuge/ behind the scene policy strategies. Our question is then, how different actors have used tools to circumvent deadlock in way that fits the policies. We summarize the new discourses, decisions and organizational developments so far using a stairway of change framework. We argue that once discourse and decisions in two policy areas have started changing at the highest level (European Council, Member states) and under continuous pressure in the current geopolitical context, actors have brought strategies into play to continue policy development despite deadlock induced by exisiting decision-making rules. Examining innovation in both policies, we also identify the most successful pathways so far that have managed to further policy development.