After Cold War and Eu Integration

Nowadays, EU intends to make itself an important and effective actor in global
Politics which speak with one voice and have influence on international issues. In order
To achieve this goal, EU has developed an effective and coherent CFSP with the
Maastricht Treaty. But, to understand the CFSP better, its historical background should be evaluated. The idea of a credible and effective CFSP has been a constant theme of European integration since the early 1950’s. The failure of the EDC Project in
1950’s was followed by “Fouchet Plan”in 1960’s. After two desperate initiatives, last but successful initiative was the establishment of European Political Cooperation
(EPC) in 1970’s and 1980’s which enabled the construction of the CFSP in large scale.
The modest experience of the EPC, therefore laid the framework for the establishment of the CFSP at Maastricht.
This study aims at evaluating these three initiatives which paved the way for the creation of the CFSP and European Union states efforts to develop a coherent and effective foreign and security policy in the Cold War Period.

.Recent day we have faced many international, political and social problems, mainly we have to focus on the end of the cold war because this era had kind of changing deeply ,There are much-discussed and consensus in the field of international relations. Today it have been agreed at the beginning of the issues that arise post-cold war period, the new structure of the international system.
According to the many analysis; 21th political system is mainly concern about USA is the leader of globe so there is a unipolar system .But on the other hand according to the new analysis; they say there is a new balance of power between USA, Russia, China, India, United Nations and japan so this unipolar system is changing and there is a multipolar system is occurred.
We taking into account in the different reviews; after the cold war the new structure of the international system which level is changed or transformed and they are caused kind of argument about new global system. This study use nation-state as an analysis and they also research the level of system.
For Rosecrans; He studied at system analysis and he examined nine part of system or historical era and he said this system also bifurcate two part like balanced-stable and out of balance –unstable. There are destructive input, organizer mechanisms and social limitation of international system. For instance; when destructive inputs are too much it will go out of balance-unstable also when, organizer mechanisms are too much it will go balanced-stable.
European centred classical balance of power was established international system at 18th and 19th century. The beginning of the 20th century; First World War (1914-1945), which was the one of the deadly and destructive war, and Second World War (1939-1945) caused transition period in international structure and these war also gave huge power to USA.
1946-1991 this period was called cold war .While the cold war was continuing, there was a bipolar international system was occurred. The approach of England and USA caused first polar Soviet which became a powerful and centre of attraction. Than USA was also established against polar and USA was pushed by Soviet power so USA was respected west block and Soviet was respect east block. These powers of divisions had few member states. Block leaders and member states political, solidarity, economic, strategic and geopolitical behaviour and applications created bipolar system’s main principles and parameters thus; with this way balance of power was between two blocks. Leaders power was supported with own international impact, capacity. West (Nato-USA) and East (Soviet) block applied surround and stabilization policy for everything. In addition in cold war time’s bipolar system; India, Egypt, Indonesia... etc. these countries were not joining west or east block.
Briefly; Balance of power was distributed between these polar and solidarity, political pronunciation and application were dominate, power politics and conflict were lived under realist theory. This bipolar system was collapse at 1990 with Berlin Wall was broken down and split of The Soviet Union at 1991.

Between 1991-2001; the Soviet Union was broken and USA showed own winning.it was the meaning of cold war’s bipolar structure was ended when Iraq invasion to Kuwait at august 1990. And also this invasion was caused gulf crisis at that time USA’s president Bush said that; he used ‘’new world order’’ concept and he also said bipolar system was ended and there is a new order is emerged at international system. According to the USA‘s ‘’new world order’’ saying was showed that; it tells there is a change –transform at international system and it also showed there are new expansion at international geopolitics and geostrategic.
After the Soviet Union collapse Russia replaced at international system at 1991-2001. Gorbachev has started Glasnost (transparency \openness) and Perestroika (restructuring\rebuilding) with this political ways transition to liberal-democratic political structure and free market economy, they were caused starting a reformation course. With the collapse of soviet union and the end of cold war Russia only focused on domestic policy so it was not effective on international policy at 1999-2000 so USA was the leader or central power of Europe and it also established global empire (supreme power).USA’s geopolitics and geostrategic policy aims and application was also called transition or interim period at international system which under USA‘s led by (after 1990)
As a matter of fact 11 October conflict was shown that there was no monopole system. Francis Fukuyama wrote an article, which was called ‘’ Does the end of history?’’ at The National Interest journal, he argued that the end of history thesis with liberal-democratic values is the last level of human’s ideological evolution and he also publicized to international public opinion USA’s victory at cold war and the leadership of World. On the other hand there were 11october attack was famous .Pentagon and World Trade Centre, which are the most important symbolic building at USA’s history, had assaults which gave negative impact at USA’s prestige and these caused examine 21th century’s system. USA always was successful at kept away from their own continent but 11 October attacks were shown that USA had a war or conflict on own land at first time so this event also important for 21th century because they showed that system was changed or transformed from monopole to bipolar international system. Returning to bipolar system’s symbolic event was 11 October is shown after the terror offensive USA’s geopolitics and geostrategic was decrease day by day at east(Iraq) , central Asia(Afghanistan ) so international actors who have the potential to become the global leader like Russia ,China ,India ,Japan and European Union …etc. They became global competitors for USA and they also contributed Conjecture forming an international impetus to the strategic expansions. Regional powers like Turkey, Iran Brazil ,Indonesia also take place at this game and they supported new multi-polar system at changes in the international system transformation. These all strategic change-transform and after the 11 October cause kind of free action at system with get powerful regional alliance and new formations are kind of international strategic acts which impact or imply of majority .
For example; at 13may 2008 international union was established(UNASUR) between Argentina Bolivia, brazil chili Colombia ,Equator ,Guano, Paraguay ,Peru, Surinam, Uruguay and Venezuela .the changing of international system topic ‘s background was shown these new transforms were used by leaders with strategic ways. They are influence at international literature .for instance; February 2007 at 43.th security conference Vladimir Putin’s speaking in Munich, the president of Russia, : recent years I am following USA’s create a monopole world policy . If one country want to accept own rules to other all countries like this is natural rule for all region, these places have not peace and stable you also accept or wait many problems. In modern world think this one leader implement issue is not possible and it also unacceptable so I think USA use dangerous power and if you use missile shield we will give the answer defiantly. Indian and Russia foreign minister also have against to monopole system and they explained with a joint declaration. Today there are many discussions at USA about importance of multipolar sytem.
There are many debates about Bush‘s doctrine for American project .He said; ‘’we have to revised with other important countries for America (if we have good relation or policy these country our project’s future will be possible with others’ support.). These all changing was concretized with report of USA National Intelligence Council‘s global trends at 2025 article under ‘’ a changing world’’ title. According to the article the axis of power will slip from west to east. When these changing will occurred non-state actors will have important impact at international system. They will also contribute for pluralism of the system with emerging states. According to the report at this era, which is called; global multi-polar system, Russia, China and India will have bigger role in Middle East.
After the cold war time there were many arguments were said like some analysis showed that where international system is going and about system new shape and future. First decade; we faced unipolar world order dominated with American leadership .These years had many uncertainties with insufficient geopolitical power and leaders new role of system.11 October 2001 has not renamed so this attacks also added and examined ‘’after cold war era’’ and this time really important for international system it also has created breaking point and also it was the central of global system. Today works/studies ,which are starting under ‘’after cold war’’ title , are changing and they also called and examined under ‘’ after 11 october’’ title . briefly;first decade’s uncertainties at international system’s future and this uncertanities was reduced by 11 october attacks and providences also were shown and there were many debate were occurred about international system’s evolution.
Today international actors aware of importance of pluralistic structure and they are playing with this awareness. They are developing our networks of the system and they are rebuilding within the framework of pluralist parameters.

|