Through recent research I have poinpointed the emergence of an ‘open strategic autonomy paradox’ , which becomes apparent when considering the increased use of EU unilateral measures and incremental sanctions policies from a constitutional law perspective. The EU global pursuit of peace, stability and security  through a values based approach (Article 3(5) TEU)  seems potentially thwarted to the extent that opportunities to exert influence through a soft power approach are thereby undermined. Instead, an emerging spiral of conflict, further inducing geo-political threats and again unilateral measures, may well spin out of EU control.

Currently the open strategic autonomy approach is perceived as a ‘repli sur soi’, but also increasingly focusing on ‘like-minded’ countries. If so, what does that mean for the global ambitions of the EU as a values based legal order ?  How does this interact with the Council of Europe and in particular the ECHR ?

Against the backdrop of the above findings, it will be analysed whether the key question is really whether the EU constitutional order is fit for the geopolitical turn the EU is seemingly taking, agains the backdrop of the Russian war in Ukraine and the uncertainties concering the US continuing engagement within NATO,  or rather vice versa. Should the open strategic autonomy  not rather  be turned into a more ambitious and longer term  pursuit of 'strategic interdependence' as a new  global approach, including in its interdepence with other legal orders such as the WTO,  UN and the ECHR, in line with the  current EU Treaty objectives.