Who’s in Charge? Member States, EU Institutions and the European External Action Service | ISPI
Skip to main content

Search form

  • INSTITUTE
  • CLERICI PALACE
  • CONTACT US
  • MEDMED

  • login
  • EN
  • IT
Home
  • INSTITUTE
  • CLERICI PALACE
  • CONTACT US
  • MEDMED
  • Home
  • RESEARCH
    • CENTRES
    • Asia
    • Cybersecurity
    • Europe and Global Governance
    • Business Scenarios
    • Middle East and North Africa
    • Radicalization and International Terrorism
    • Russia, Caucasus and Central Asia
    • Infrastructure
    • PROGRAMMES
    • Africa
    • Energy Security
    • Global cities
    • Latin America
    • Migration
    • Religions and International Relations
    • Transatlantic Relations
  • ISPI SCHOOL
  • Publications
  • EVENTS
  • CORPORATE PROGRAMME
    • about us
    • Closed-door meetings
    • Scenario Conferences
    • Members
    • Executive Education
  • EXPERTS

  • Home
  • RESEARCH
    • CENTRES
    • Asia
    • Cybersecurity
    • Europe and Global Governance
    • Business Scenarios
    • Middle East and North Africa
    • Radicalization and International Terrorism
    • Russia, Caucasus and Central Asia
    • Infrastructure
    • PROGRAMMES
    • Africa
    • Energy Security
    • Global cities
    • Latin America
    • Migration
    • Religions and International Relations
    • Transatlantic Relations
  • ISPI SCHOOL
  • Publications
  • EVENTS
  • CORPORATE PROGRAMME
    • about us
    • Closed-door meetings
    • Scenario Conferences
    • Members
    • Executive Education
  • EXPERTS
Policy Paper

Who’s in Charge? Member States, EU Institutions and the European External Action Service

08 October 2014

 

Abstract

Taking the confirmation hearing of the forthcoming HRVP Federica Mogherini as an appropriate juncture in the EEAS’s existence, this policy brief employs a unique data-set classifying the nationality and source of recruitment of EEAS management and 276 Heads of EU Delegations:  

•The policy brief demonstrates a growing overrepresentation of national diplomats over former Commission and Council staff in the European External Action Service (EEAS), particularly at the EEAS management and Heads of EU Delegation levels. 

•Even though the overall EEAS staff data correspond to the target of 1/3 of national diplomats recruited to the EEAS set by the Council EEAS decision, by September 2014 EU Member States occupied 17 (out of 34) posts i.e. 50% posts at the senior management level (from Directors up) while holding 12 (out of 21) top management positions (from Managing Directors up). 

•Similarly, the proportion of EU Delegations headed by national diplomats increased from 8.3 per cent in 2010 to 61.2 per cent in September 2014 after the first round of the 2015 rotation, whereas the percentage of EU Delegations headed by EU institution officials decreased from the peak of 91.7 per cent in 2010 down to 38.8 per cent in September 2014. The EEAS Council Decision 1/3 target for EU Heads of Delegations was achieved by 2013 and, since then, it was exceeded and indeed reversed.

•By pointing to this trend, the policy brief argues that it is increasingly EU Member States who are in charge of the EEAS having taken-over the decision-making channels. 

•As a result, the policy brief therefore concludes that thanks to the implications, the patterns of EEAS recruitment clearly contribute and reinforce the tendency towards a ‘CFSP-ization’ of the EEAS managerial structures and hence of EU foreign policy-making. 

•In addition, the policy brief identifies which countries were particularly (in)effective in getting their nationals into the EEAS staff with France leading the successful Member States and Finland and Luxembourg being the least successful.

* This is a revised and updated version of an earlier policy brief which was based on previous data sets and published as a GR:EEN European Policy Brief. The author would like to thank the ISPI Milan for providing the outlet to publish this timely research, the FNRS and GR:EEN Research Programme for the funding, her colleagues at Université libre de Bruxelles as well as other academic collaborators for providing comments on various iterations of this brief. Most of all, the author is grateful to senior EEAS officials for sharing their insights and data without which this research would not have taken place. The author can be contacted at: Tereza.Novotna@ulb.ac.be. 
Tereza Novotná, Ph.D., FNRS and GR:EEN Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Université libre de Bruxelles

Read more:

The War in Ukraine Has Made the European Chips Initiative Out of Date
Daniel Gros
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Chips and Rare Metals: the Case for European Strategic Autonomy and Technology Supremacy
Piotr Arak
Polish Economic Institute
Next Generation EU: A Paradigm Shift in European Mobility?
Luigi Borré
President, EuroMilano and Professor, Eastern Piedmont University
The EU Economy: Paris and Rome on the Same Page
Antonio Villafranca
ISPI
North Africa's Energy Transition: A Key Asset in the War?
Amine Bennis
International Legal Counsel
Africa and Europe: Time to Summ-it Up
Giovanni Carbone
HEAD, ISPI AFRICA PROGRAMME
,
Lucia Ragazzi
RESEARCH FELLOW, ISPI AFRICA PROGRAMME

Tags

Federica Mogherini European Union EEAS european parliament HRVP
Versione stampabile
Download PDF

GET OUR UPDATES

SUBSCRIBE TO NEWSLETTER

About ISPI - Work with us - Experts - Contact - For Media - Privacy

ISPI (Italian Institute for International Political Studies) - Palazzo Clerici (Via Clerici 5 - 20121 Milan) - P.IVA IT02141980157