Political Science

When Austria joined the EU in 1995 it had to find its place in a substantially altered world order. Yet, rather than conceiving its membership in the EU as an opportunity to reenergize its foreign policy through Europeanization, Austria has displayed little interest in developing an active foreign policy profile within, or through, the EU. While membership in the EU meant a broadening of Austria's foreign policy agenda – as Austria became involved in a broad range of international issues and started to participate in the multi-level negotiation process of the EU-its main contributions to European foreign policy occurred in areas close to its national interest, as exemplified by its active role in the Western Balkans. Simultaneously, EU membership placed considerable constraints on Austria's formerly independent national foreign policy, especially on Austria's neutrality. This special issue brings together different international scholars with a longstanding expertise on different aspects of Austrian foreign policy that they will cover to take stock of the Europeanization of Austrian foreign policy two decades after it joined the EU.


Zum Zeitpunkt seines EU Beitritts 1995 musste Österreich seine außenpolitische Rolle in einer neuen Weltordnung neu de-finieren. Die Mitgliedschaft in der EU wurde dabei allerdings nicht systematisch genutzt, um durch eine Europäisierung nationaler Außenpolitik an globalem Einfluss und Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten zu gewinnen. Österreich hat insgesamt eher wenig Interesse gezeigt, eine aktive Rolle innerhalb der europäischen Außenpolitik zu entwickeln. Während die EU Mit-gliedschaft eine signifikante Ausweitung der außenpolitischen Agenda bedeutet und Österreich sich in die Prozesse euro-päischer Politikgestaltung integriert hat, blieb der Schwerpunkt der österreichischen Diplomatie weitgehend auf nationale außenpolitische Interessen fokussiert. Dies zeigt sich etwa an der aktiven Rolle Österreichs im Rahmen der europäischen Politik gegenüber dem Westbalkan. Gleichzeitig kam es im Zuge der EU Mitgliedschaft zu Beschränkungen der einst unab-hängigen österreichischen Außenpolitik, gerade etwa in Bezug auf Österreichs Neutralität. Dieses Schwerpunkheft vereinigt internationale Experten, um 20 Jahre nach dem EU Beitritt bilanzieren über den Stand der Europäisierung verschiedener Aspekte österreichischer Außenpolitik. Insbesondere thematisieren die einzelnen Beiträge die Bereiche Kooperation in der Außen-und Sicherheitspolitik, Entwicklungspolitik, sowie die Veränderungen diplomatischer Praktiken und Institutionen.

Can diplomacy work without physical presence? International relations scholars consider the European Union (EU) the most institutionalised case of international cooperation amongst sovereign states, with the highest density of repeated diplomatic exchange. In a year, the Council of Ministers hosts on average 143 ministerial and 200 ambassadorial meetings, along with hundreds of working group meetings. These intense diplomatic interactions came to an abrupt halt in mid-March 2020, when the spread of COVID-19 forced the Council to approve-in a manner unprecedented in European integration history-the temporary derogation from its rules of procedures to allow votes in written form, preceded by informal videoconferences between ministers or ambassadors. This essay reflects on how we can use these extraordinary months of intra-European diplomacy to assess the viability of virtual diplomacy in the EU context and what lessons it provides as we seek more sustainable means of international engagement.

Can diplomacy work without physical presence? International relations scholars consider the European Union (EU) the most institutionalised case of international cooperation amongst sovereign states, with the highest density of repeated diplomatic exchange. In a year, the Council of Ministers hosts on average 143 ministerial and 200 ambassadorial meetings, along with hundreds of working group meetings. These intense diplomatic interactions came to an abrupt halt in mid-March 2020, when the spread of COVID-19 forced the Council to approve-in a manner unprecedented in European integration history-the temporary derogation from its rules of procedures to allow votes in written form, preceded by informal videoconferences between ministers or ambassadors. This argumentative essay reflects on how we can use these extraordinary months of intra-European diplomacy to assess the viability of virtual diplomacy in the EU context and what lessons it provides as we seek more sustainable means of international engagement.

The Lisbon Treaty introduced far-reaching reforms for EU foreign policy cooperation. In the decade since, most scholarship has focused on the High Representative and EEAS. Far less consideration has been given to its consequences for member states' ownership of foreign policy. This article therefore examines how these institutional reforms have affected the Political and Security Committee (PSC), established to enable member states to better manage EU foreign policy cooperation. Drawing on new empirical data, it shows that the PSC has found its capacity to act as strategic agenda-setter increasingly constrained because of greater opportunities for activism by the HRVP and EEAS; and by the emergence of the European Council as the key arbiter in foreign policy decision-making. While this indicates the PSC today finds it harder to perform the role originally assigned to it, it is gaining alternative relevance through an emerging oversight role, which has implications for member states' EU foreign policy engagement.

The Lisbon Treaty introduced far-reaching reforms for EU foreign policy cooperation. In the decade since, most scholarship has focused on the High Representative and EEAS. Far less consideration has been given to its consequences for member states' ownership of foreign policy. This article therefore examines how these institutional reforms have affected the Political and Security Committee (PSC), established to enable member states to better manage EU foreign policy cooperation. Drawing on new empirical data, it shows that the PSC has found its capacity to act as strategic agenda-setter increasingly constrained because of greater opportunities for activism by the HRVP and EEAS; and by the emergence of the European Council as the key arbiter in foreign policy decision-making. While this indicates the PSC today finds it harder to perform the role originally assigned to it, it is gaining alternative relevance through an emerging oversight role, which has implications for member states' EU foreign policy engagement.