Otonomi Strategis Atau Ketergantungan Kolektif?Menata Ulang Diplomasi Kebijakan Luar Negeri Uni Eropa

Gusti Luthfi Fahrezi

doi:10.71417/jchi.v1i2.23

Penulis

Gusti Luthfi Fahrezi Universitas Islam Indonesia Penulis

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71417/jchi.v1i2.23

Kata Kunci:

Kompas Strategis, Layanan Aksi Eksternal Uni Eropa, Otonomi Strategis, Reformasi Kelembagaan

Abstrak

Pencapaian otonomi strategis menjadi sorotan utama dalam debat kebijakan luar negeri Uni Eropa pasca–Perjanjian Lisbon. Meskipun UE telah mengadopsi Strategic Compass (2022), realitasnya, UE tetap terikat pada mekanisme keamanan kolektif—terutama NATO dan hubungan bilateral dengan Amerika Serikat—yang terus memengaruhi tindakan eksternalnya (Bastian, 2024). Penelitian ini menggunakan kajian literatur kualitatif terhadap sepuluh publikasi kunci periode 2020–2024 dan dokumen resmi UE untuk menguraikan empat hambatan utama menuju otonomi sejati: fragmentasi kelembagaan EEAS (Blockmans & Wessel, 2021; Biedenkopf & Petri, 2021), keterbatasan sumber daya pertahanan bersama (Muravska, 2020; Defence innovation…Compass, 2022), divergensi negara anggota (Bastian, 2024; Michaels & Sus, 2024), dan kerentanan dalam diplomasi digital (Hedling, 2021). Kami mengusulkan kerangka diplomasi terintegrasi—meliputi Strategic Compass mengikat dengan pengawasan parlemen, mandat EEAS terpusat, kapabilitas siber yang diperkuat, dan pemupukan pooled capabilities—untuk menata ulang kebijakan eksternal UE menuju keseimbangan otonomi strategis dan ketergantungan kolektif.

Unduhan

Data unduhan tidak tersedia.

Referensi

Bastian, K. (2024). The European Union and Strategic Competition. Connections, 23(2), 72–91. https://doi.org/10.11610/Connections.23.2.11

Biedenkopf, K., & Petri, F. (2021). The European External Action Service and EU Climate Diplomacy: Coordinator and Supporter in Brussels and Beyond. European Foreign Affairs Review, 26(1), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.54648/EERR2021007

Blockmans, S., & Wessel, R. A. (2021). The EEAS at Ten: Reason for a Celebration? European Foreign Affairs Review, 26(1), 5–12. https://doi.org/10.54648/EERR2021002

Hedling, E. (2021). Transforming practices of diplomacy: The European External Action Service and digital disinformation. International Affairs, 97(3), 841–859. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiab035

Knezović, S., & Duić, D. (2023). The EU’s Strategic Compass – Anything new for the EU’s CSDP? Zeitschrift Fur Europarechtliche Studien, 26(2), 219–238. https://doi.org/10.5771/1435-439X-2023-2-219

Molnár, A., & Jakusné Harnos, É. (2024). From Quasi-Sovereignty To Full Sovereignty? The Interpretations Of Strategic Autonomy And Sovereignty In The European Union . Anali Hrvatskog Politoloskog Drustva, 21(1), 95–116. https://doi.org/10.20901/an.21.02

Michaels, E., & Sus, M. (2024). (Not) coming of age? Unpacking the European Union’s quest for strategic autonomy in security and defence. European Security, 33(3), 383–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2024.2376603

Muravska, J. (2020). How can the European Commission help Europe’s defence industry? By making the most out of what it is already doing. Defense and Security Analysis, 36(4), 450–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/14751798.2020.1857913

Ortiz Hernández, E. (2024). Towards the autonomous defence capabilities of the European Union: Upgrading cyber defence policy. Global Policy, 15(S8), 57–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13412