While this may be true, there are also strengths involved in this configuration. Unlike an individual sovereign state which is limited by its own resources and individual structure, the EU can draw on a vast array of resources when necessary from each of its member states. This unique quality through coordinated efforts has the potential of ensuring a powerful tool in the peacekeeping missions required in today's volatile world (Gourlay 404). As such, delving into the policy making and decision making responsibilities the EU has poses some interesting questions when it comes to international peacekeeping responsibilities. The decisions on how the EU handled international peacekeeping interventions and how it has evolved into a world class example of a peacekeeper will be shown. Additionally on its path through these various initiatives unique challenges faced by the EU and its membership will be discussed as well as a look towards the future face of the EU as a major shareholder in the peace process worldwide. The EU has successfully navigated uncharted water with its original hierarchy. Throughout this essay we will examine how the EU has accomplished some milestones well. There have been bumps in the road but as will be evidenced, the EU keeps moving to the future and a safer more secure world for us all.
According to Bono the lines get even further blurred when examining this issue He asks the question, "When analysing the EU's foreign, security and defence role, should we be focusing on examining the activities of the Commission, the Council, the European Parliament or individual EU member states" ("Introduction" 396) Most literature assumes that the common approach accepted is via the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP), However, Bono points out that there are actually three distinct approaches that can be taken:
First, the CFSP and the ESDP are not interchangeable with respect to foreign policy and security; rather it encompasses both. The fundamental difference lies in the EU's involvement in the peacekeeping mission. A short term approach would entail use of military force while a long term involves use of less obtrusive methods such as aid or financial assistance. ("Introduction" 397)
The Second approach is that the EU has no centralized entities that define it in the traditional approach as a single unit. Therefore, analysis must come from examining each individual state's level or participation and coalitions between individual states and not regard, in this context, the EU separately as it is not by traditional definition a sovereign body.
The last approach is even more complex. In examining peacekeeping activities not only must individual states and any coalitions formed be examined, but also the next tier, the collective policy must be evaluated such as the CFSP and the ESDP. Additionally the very top layer the policy of the EU itself as the umbrella body must be examined.
Gourlay however presents a more traditionally view of the lines of responsibility to peacekeeping efforts specifically. In Figure 1 below Gourlay presents the hierarchy of the EU in response to crisis management in