“What is Europe's role in this changed world? Does Europe not, now that is finally unified, have a leading role to play in a new world order, that of a power able both to play a stabilising role worldwide and to point the way ahead for many countries and peoples?” These were two of the central questions put by the Laeken Declaration, adopted by the European Council in December 2001. The Declaration offered the beginning of an answer, pointing out the direction for future policy developments, and for the institutional reform underpinning them: “The role it has to play is that of a power resolutely doing battle against all violence, all terror and all fanaticism, but which also does not turn a blind eye to the world's heartrending injustices. In short, a power wanting to change the course of world affairs…A power seeking to set globalisation within a moral framework.” At the same time, the Laeken Declaration pointed out some more specific questions concerning the institutional innovations required to enhance the coherence of European foreign policy and to reinforce the synergy between the High Representative for CFSP and the relevant Commissioners within the RELEX family. With a view to a better distribution of competences between the EU and Member States, on the basis of the principle of subsidiarity, the text mentioned the development of a European foreign and defence policy first, and referred more particularly to the scope for updating the ‘Petersberg’ tasks of crisis management, a policy domain that would take a pivotal place in the consolidation of ESDP and CFSP at large. This Declaration marks the beginning of the process of regime reform that covers the last three years of common foreign and security policy (CFSP) of the European Union. This evolution, and the innovations that it has brought about in institutional and normative terms, are the subjects of this thesis.The Convention on the future of Europe, set up by the Laeken Declaration, represented an important stage in the pan-European debate on the objectives, values, means and decision-making tools of CFSP. The US-led intervention in Iraq in March 2003 marked a new ‘critical juncture’ in the development of the conceptual and institutional bases of CFSP. As it was the case in the past, following major policy failures in the course of the Balkan wars, Member States sought to mend the rift that divided them in the run up to the Iraq war. In so doing, Member States agreed on a significant degree of institutional reform in the context of the Convention and of the subsequent Inter-Governmental Conference (IGC). The creation of the new position of a double-hatted Foreign Minister, as well as the envisaged rationalisation and consolidation of the instruments at his/her disposal, including a new European External Action Service (EAS), is a primary achievement in this perspective. On the defence side, a new formula of ‘permanent structured cooperation’ among willing and able Member States has been included in the Treaty Establishing the European Constitution (Constitutional Treaty), with a view to them undertaking more binding commitments in the field of defence, and fulfilling more demanding missions. Right at the time when the Iraq crisis was sending shockwaves across the political and institutional structures of the Union, and of CFSP in particular, the first ESDP civilian mission were launched, soon followed by small military operations. The unprecedented deployment of civilian and military personnel under EU flag in as many as 13 missions between 2002 and 2005 could be achieved thanks to the development of a new layer of policy-makign and crisis-management bodies in Brussels. The launch of successive ESDP operations turned out to be a powerful catalyst for the further expansion and consolidation of this bureaucratic framework and of the conceptual dimension of CFSP/ESDP. Most importantly, these and other dimensions of institutional and operational progress should be set in a new, overarching normative and political framework provided by the European Security Strategy (ESS). Needless to say, institutional innovations are stalled following the rejection of the Constitutional Treaty in the French and Dutch referenda of May/June 2005. With a view to the evolution of the CFSP regime, however, I argue in this thesis that the institutional reforms envisaged in the Constitutional Treaty are largely consistent with the unfolding normative and bureaucratic features of the regime. As illustrated in the course of my research, the institutional, bureaucratic and normative dimensions of the regime appear to strengthen one another, thereby fostering regime deepening. From this standpoint, therefore, the stalemate of institutional reform does slow down the reform of the international regime of CFSP but does not seem to alter the direction of its evolution and entail its stagnation, or even dismantling. On the contrary, I maintain that the dynamics of regime change that I detect will lead to stronger, endogenous and exogenous demands for institutional reform, whose shapes and priorities are to a large extent already included in the Constitutional treaty. This vantage point paves the way to identifying the trends underlying the evolution of the regime, but does not lead to endorsing a teleological reading of regime reform. As made clear in what follows, CFSP largely remains a matter of international cooperation with a strong (although not exclusive) inter-governmental component. As such, this international regime could still suffer serious, and potentially irreversible, blows, were some EU Member States to openly depart from its normative coordinates and dismiss its institutional or bureaucratic instances. While this scenario cannot be ruled out, I argue in this thesis that this does not seem the way forward. The institutional and normative indicators that I detect and review point consistently towards a ‘deepening’ of the regime, and closer cooperation among Member States. In other words, it is not a matter of excluding the possibility of disruptions in the evolution of the CFSP regime, but to improve the understanding of regime dynamics so as to draw a distinction between long-term trends and conjunctural crises that, so far, have not undermined the incremental consolidation of CFSP/ESDP. Central to this research is the analysis of the institutional and normative features of the CFSP regime at EU level. The focus lies on the (increasing) difference that institutions and norms make to inter-governmental policy-making under CFSP, in the inter-play with national actors. The purpose of my research is therefore threefold. First, I investigate the functioning and development of the bureaucratic structures underpinning the CFSP regime, since their establishment in 2000/2001 up to 2005. This theoretically informed review will allow me to highlight the distinctive procedural and normative features of CFSP policy-making and, subsequently, to assess their influence on the successive stages of reform. Second, I track and interpret the unprecedented processes by which innovations have been introduced (or envisaged) at the institutional and normative level of the regime, with a focus on the Convention on the future of Europe and on the drafting of the European Security Strategy. Third, I assess the institutional and normative output of this dense stage of reform, with respect both to the ‘internal’ coherence and the deepening of the regime, and to the ‘external’ projection of the EU as an international actor in the making. On the whole, I assume that a significant, multidimensional transition of the CFSP regime is underway. The bureaucratic framework enabling inter-governmental cooperation encourages patterned behaviour, which progressively generates shared norms and standards of appropriateness, affecting the definition of national interests. In terms of decision-making, debate and deliberation increasingly complement negotiation within Brussels-based CFSP bodies. Looking at the direction of institutional and policy evolution, the logic of ‘sharing’ tasks, decisions and resources across different (European and national) levels of governance prevails, thereby strengthening the relevance of ‘path-dependency’ and of the ‘ratchet effect’ in enhancing inter-governmental cooperation as well as regime reform., Doctorat en Sciences politiques et sociales, info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished