1. Aready the announcement and the expectation of the enlargement of the EU are regarded as producing a moderating effect that reduces the inclination toward the use of force. See Reinhardt Rummel, ‘Conflict Prevention in Central and Eastern Europe: Concepts and Policies of the European Union’, in Wolfgang Heinz (ed.), Human Rights, Conflict Prevention and Conflict Resolution (Brussels, 1996) pp. 51–78. See for the next enlargement round Antonio Missiroli, ‘EU Enlargement and CFSP/ESDP’, 25 European Integration (2003), pp. 1-16.
2. Hans-Georg Ehrhart, ‘What model for CFSP?’, 55 Chaillot Paper (2002).
3. For detailed policy recommendations see EPLO position paper on the European Convention and Conflict Prevention. ‘Building conflict prevention into the future of Europe’. (Brussels, European Peacebuilding Liaison Office 2002) available at . For a detailed discussion of possible priorities for the various Council Presidents see: ‘Towards a coherent EU conflict prevention policy in Africa’. Challenges for the Belgian presidency. Conference report and policy recommendations — 17 September 2001, (Brussels, European Peacebuilding Liaison Office in cooperation with the Heinrich Böll Foundation 2001), available at ; ‘Putting conflict prevention into practice’. Priorities of the Spanish and Danish EU presidencies 2002. (Oxfam (and others) in association with the European Platform for Conflict Prevention and Transformation and the European Peace-building Liaison Office (EPLO) 2002), available at ; and ‘Ensuring progress in the prevention of violent conflict’. Priorities for the Greek and Italian EU presidencies (London, Saferworld, International Alert 2003) available at .
4. Brahimi Report (New York, United Nations 2000) .
5. See Joint Report of the Commission and the Council of 30 November 2000 on Improving the Coherence and Effectiveness of European Union Action in the Field of Conflict Prevention (Doc. No. 14088/00).