The European Union actually has a foreign ministry, called the "External Action Service." The stated goal of the group is to respond to unexpected events. A recent article in The Economist Baronness Catherine Ashton, head of the organization, has come under fire for her lack of visibility and unwillingness to take a leadership role with fellow foreign ministers. She has been slow to call for free and fair elections in Egypt, a fact that some attribute to her desire for consensus among EU states.
The foreign ministers of individual EU states have not hesitated to take unilateral actions in a number of cases--banning visas and freezing assets of senior Belarussian officials, of the president of the Ivory Coast, and of the former president of Tunisia. This is an indication that the role of the EU is, at least for the present, limited to issues of the member states. When it comes to foreign affairs, the real power still lies with the individual states. There is no EU military force, so membership in NATO is the closest thing there is to having any sort of compulsive power when it comes to out-of-area actions.
This article brings to mind several questions. Is Baroness Ashton's view of her role typical of British domestic politics? It is typical for cabinet ministers in Britain to depend heavily on career civil servants, and the EU position might assume expertise in the field of foreign affairs. Is her reticence is a reflection of the British idea of "cabinet responsibility," where decisions are made behind closed doors and a united front is presented to the public? Is her lack of visibility indicative of a lack of support of EU policies within Britain?
