External Relations of

the European Union

The EU’s External Relations

System: Policy-Making
© 2025.
 Outline
1.Division of Competences in
EU FP
2.Decision-Making and Policy-
Making Processes in EU FP
3.Financing of EU FP
4.Consistency in EU FP

2
Division of Competences and EU FP
 The principle of conferral of powers

 TheEU can act only in the areas

where MSs conferred upon it
competences in the Treaties

 Competences not conferred upon the

EU remain with the MSs
3
 EU can only act to attain the
objectives set out within the
Treaties

 Thereare three general categories

of distribution of competences
between the EU and MSs

 Exclusive, shared and supporting

4
 Exclusive Competences
 The EU has the power to adopt legally
binding acts

 MSs have no power to initiate legislation

or adopt it independently

 EU FP  the common commercial policy

 one of the few areas of exclusive
competence
5
 ERTA judgement  EU has competence to
act externally on issues on which it adopted
legislative measures internally

 Even if this is not explicitly mentioned in the

Treaties

 So-called parallelism principle between

internal and external competences

 EU FP  international agreements in
areas where it has the exclusive
competences to adopt legislation internally
6
 Shared Competences
 The principle of pre-emption

 Both the EU and the MSs can

adopt legislation in a specific area

 MSs can only exercise their

competence under one condition
7
 Ifthe EU has not yet exercised its
competence and adopted legally
binding acts

 MSs can thus only act where the

EU’s inaction leaves them space to
do so

 EU FP  external aspects of
environment, agriculture, migration
8
 In some areas of shared competence,
the pre-emption principle is not
enforced

 Both the EU and the MSs can act  as

long as EU activities not prevent MSs
from carrying national policy

 E.g. development cooperation,

humanitarian aid, research and
technology

9
 Supporting Competences
 EU has competence only to act to support,
coordinate or supplement

 MSs action primary, EU’s complementary

 EU action cannot supersede MSs’

competence in these areas

 EU FP  agreements in the fields such as

culture and education
10
11
 What About CFSP/CSDP?
 CFSP/CSDP competences are not
exclusive, shared or supporting

 Treaties
give the EU competences
to conduct, define and implement
CFSP/CSDP (Art. 24 TEU)

 Competences defined according to

specific provisions in the Treaties
12
 MSs reject the idea of drawing up a list
of FP matters falling under
exclusive/shared competences

 They do not want to become prohibited

from own actions  when a decision is
adopted at the EU level (shared
competences)

 CFSP  closest to shared

competences where pre-emption
principle does not apply
13
 Summary: EU Foreign Policy
 Competences distributed complexly

 EU has no general, legal basis authorizing it

to act with regard to the external
environment

 We should not expect the EU to have an

exclusive or all-encompassing FP

 The EU would (not) act in certain aspects of

FP
14
 Now, it is up to you!
Delreux
1. Which factors led to the preservation of the status quo regarding
representation of the EU in international negotiations after the Lisbon
Treaty? Discuss each.
2. What kind of balance does the Presidency strive for in its external
representation role? How does it affect its negotiation role?
3. What is a two-level game? How did the Presidency overcome the
problems stemming from the two-level game in the Nagoya and
Cancun negotiations?
Bendiek, Kempin von Ondarza
4. What are the main arguments for and against the introduction of
qualified majority voting in the EU‘s Common Foreign and Security
Policy (CFSP)?
5. What are the political, legal and constitutional challenges associated
with introducing qualified majority voting in the CFSP?
6. How can the EU balance the need for rapid and decisive action in
foreign policy with the requirement for internal legitimacy and external
credibility?
Decision-Making: External Action
 Most decision-making follows the
ordinary legislative procedure

 Commission proposes legislation +

decisions

 Council + EP decides together

 Council acts by QMV + EP by absolute or

simple majority
16
 QMV after the Lisbon Treaty:
 Double majority principle
 55% of the MSs
 65% of the overall EU population
 Blocking minority at least 4 MSs
representing at least 35% of population

 Applied for trade policy,

development cooperation,
economic, financial and technical
cooperation with third countries
17
 International Agreements
 The main procedures for conclusion of
international agreements are less
straightforward

 Trade + development cooperation + economic,

financial and technical cooperation agreements

 Commission recommends negotiation

 Council authorizes and gives the Commission a

mandate

18
 The Commission negotiates on the
basis of Council mandate

 The Council approves the agreements

by QMV

 EP is required to give consent to it

 EP can only vote yes/no + is not

involved in mandate setting and
negotiations

19
 Association agreements

 The process largely follows the

same procedure

 TheCouncil needs to approve them

by unanimity

 EP must give consent

20
 Mixed Agreements
1. They cover policy areas that fall under
both exclusive/shared competences

2. They are adopted by the MSs and the EU

at the same time  both become parties

 EU decision-making procedure is the

same as for association agreements
21
 These agreements are also subject to
national ratification 
parliaments/referendums

 During negotiation, the EU is represented

through dual representation

 The Commission represents the EU +

presidency represents the MSs

 Most international agreements are mixed

agreements

22
23
 Decision-Making: CFSP
 Follows the intergovernmental method

 The Council (+ European Council) control ale

stages of the process

 MSs (even a single one) and/or HigRep have

the right of initiative

 Any MS and/or HigRep may refer any

questions on the Council agenda

24
 In practice, there is a number of specific
procedures for CFSP

1. Decisions on the strategic interests,

objectives and general guidelines for the
CFSP

 Defined by the European Council by

unanimity

25
2. Decisions implementing common
strategies  i.e. common actions and
positions

 Unanimously in the Council  based

on European Council’s general
guidelines

 Abstentions are not preventing the

adoption of decisions

26
3. International agreements with third countries +
IOs in the CFSP

 HigRep submits a recommendation to the

Council

 Council authorizes the opening of negotiations

and nominates a negotiator  the team
negotiates

 Council eventually approves by unanimity

 EP is not involved into approval or negotiation

27
 Constructive Abstention
 When the Council acts unanimously 
abstentions by MSs do not prevent the
adoption of decisions

 If a MSs makes a formal declaration, it is not

obliged to apply the decision

 If more then 1/3 of MSs make such formal

declaration  the decision cannot be
adopted
28
 Financing EU FP
 Complex as the decision-making processes

 The funding of EU FP occurs through the EU

budget + through national budgets

 Common arrangements outside the EU

budget also used (European Development
Fund for the ACP countries)

 Funding also provided through funding for

other IOs (UN, World Bank)
29
Multiannual Financial Framework
 Dossiers of EU’s external action brought together in
Heading 4 (Global Europe) for 2014-2020

 For this period the EU has €58.7 billion  6.1% of EU

budget

 Most of these finances is aimed at supporting external

action policies  only minority relates to CFSP

 Three geographic instruments are allocated

approximately 70% (€40 billion) of the Heading 4 budget

30
1. The Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA) covers
candidate countries + potential candidate
countries (€10.5 billion)

 Provides economic and financial assistance

 Supports these countries in fulfilling the political

and economic requirements of accession
(Copenhagen)

 Supports institution-building, confidence-

building programmes, stabilization, regional
cooperation

31
2. The European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI) 
€13.6 billion

 Covers countries targeted by the European

Neighbourhood Policy

 Eastern Europe, the South Caucasus and the

Mediterranean

 Provides financial backing for EU’s bilateral

agreements with these countries

 Focuses on supporting the implementation of the

Action Plans with these countries

32
3. The Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI)

 Covers developing countries outside the ACP

region

 Mostly countries in Asia, Central Asia, the Middle

East, Latin America and South Africa

 Supports development cooperation, economic

and financial cooperation

 Main objectives are poverty reduction,

sustainable development, democracy, good
governance and human rights

33
34
 European Development Fund
 The oldest financial instrument for development
policy  created in 1957

 EDF is not financed through the EU budget

(€30.5 billion for 2014-2020)

 Directed towards the countries of the Cotonou

agreements  ACP (sub-Saharan Africa,
Caribbean, Pacific)

35
 The CFSP Budget
 Funded through EU budget as well as national
contributions

 Distinction between civilian and/or military

missions

 The EU budget for CFSP/CSDP is only €2 billion

for 2014-2020  merely 0.2 per cent of the total
EU budget

36
1. Operations of a civilian nature are generally
financed through the EU budget

 Only the salaries of personnel seconded by

MSs are borne by those MSs

2. Military and defence operations are

completely financed by the MSs

 Usually all MSs participate financially

 The main contribution is provided by the MSs

participating in a given military operation

37
Decisions v. Financing of CFSP
 Decisions on the CFSP adopted by the Council
+ European Council (intergovernmental)

 EU budget adopted by the Community method

 Commission proposes, Council + EP approve

 Commission + EP try to influence CFSP

financing through their budgetary powers

38
 This often leads to insufficient financing
of the CFSP

 If finances need to be transferred to the

CFSP from another chapter 
Commission has to propose and EP
approve

 MSs try to avoid EP’s influence  they

seek for ad hoc solutions to finance
CFSP (Athena instrument)

39
 Consistency of EU FP
 The EU’s complex system of competences, decision-
making and funding leads to consistency problems

 Vertical inconsistency  between policies agreed at the

EU level and those pursued by MSs nationally

 Interstate inconsistency  between MSs’ different

national FPs (even if there is no EU action)

 Undermines EU’s capacity to present a coherent

message + credibility as an international actor

40
 Complete consistency is in practice
impossible

 Even MSs pursue incompatible (FP) goals

 E.g. The objectives to pursue trade or

energy interests and to promote human
rights

 Czech foreign policy towards China?

41
Your questions, comments?
 Now, it is up to you!
Lilliput Effect Revisited:
1. Discuss briefly the theoretical and practical aspects of the
role of small EU member states in EU foreign policy.
2. What are the proposals for reforming EU foreign policy
and their potential impact on the role of small EU member
states?
Learning to Lead?
3. What do you know about the main aspects and
dimensions of leadership and relate them to the concept
of power?
4. What is the leadership paradox, according to the
authors?
5. How is Germany adopting different forms of leadership?
Illustrate this on the example of Germany’s response to
the Ukraine crisis.