The European Union’s securitisation of global health: was COVID-19 a Zeitenwende?
Almost 30 years since the Maastricht Treaty provided an explicit legal basis in the health realm, the European Union (EU) declared global health an “essential pillar” of its external action. Yet, it is still seeking to “come of age” as a global health actor. This might be facilitated by the securiti...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2024 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat Pompeu Fabra |
| Repositorio: | Repositorio Digital de la UPF |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositori.upf.edu:10230/61265 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10230/61265 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2024.2376605 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | European Union Global health Securitisation Health security COVID-19 Actorness |
| Sumario: | Almost 30 years since the Maastricht Treaty provided an explicit legal basis in the health realm, the European Union (EU) declared global health an “essential pillar” of its external action. Yet, it is still seeking to “come of age” as a global health actor. This might be facilitated by the securitisation of health, which was evident during the COVID-19 crisis, often framed as a war against a common enemy. However, the literature is yet to establish whether these analogies were systematically embraced by EU institutions, signalling a Zeitenwende – or “epochal tectonic shift” – in the EU’s health-related discourse. Through an analysis of key strategic documents and public statements, this article determines the extent to which COVID-19 drove the attempted securitisation of global health in the EU. Relatedly, it discusses whether this framing might be conducive to an enhanced EU actorness on the world stage. The article concludes that, after COVID-19 struck, some EU institutions did intensify their “health security” rhetoric in pursuit of an expanded, more “mature” role. While this shift was neither widespread nor enduring enough to be characterised as “epochal”, it does denote the EU’s turn towards a less altruistic conception of its global health action. |
|---|