R ECOMMENDATIONS : FITTING THE EEAS FOR PURPOSE This section presents a list of recommendations intended to help the EEAS address the dilemmas and plug the gaps exposed above, and better fulfil its desired mission and manifold roles articulated in section 2. The prescriptions, which are a distillation of points raised in section 3, capitalise on the Service’s strengths/assets, and attempt to turn some of its weaknesses into opportunities. It is up to the HRVP to infuse the EEAS with a clearer sense of purpose and focus it on forging a distinctly European brand of diplomacy. The latter entails the EEAS’ capacity to pioneer and imbue, in all EU policies, the strategic vision and geopolitical direction that will gradually lead the EU to perform as an influential global actor. By providing unique cognitive and institutional support to other protagonists of EU external action, in particular the Commission and the member states, the EEAS will generate recognition of its added value, and in turn garner the trust and loyal cooperation needed for a‘whole of Europe’ approach to foreign policy. Without questioning the legal status of the EEAS, and the different cultures of the institutions it is tasked to cooperate with, any change calls for some degree of flexibility. The European diplomatic service must be given the capacity to define a tailor-made working process better suited to its needs. Advantage should thus be taken of the EEAS’ weak sense of purpose to promote its adaptability. Likewise, the EEAS should foster agility to curb its relative institutional weaknesses. And it should cut through the EU’s complex external action architecture by enhancing the Service’s thought-leadership in situational awareness, planning and policies. The Task Force’s recommendations below should be seen as complementary rather than mutually exclusive. The list identifies some priority actions(*) to signal the political importance that ought to be attached to their swift implementation, paving the way for further action in a joined-up and balanced manner by the member states, Commission and European Parliament. In the short- to mid-term, inter-service arrangements could be strengthened between the EEAS, the Council and the European Council. In the longer term, however, the structural dichotomies between the CFSP and non-CFSP parts of EU external action will only be overcome if the 2010 Council Decision and the Treaties are changed. This is an issue that could be considered in the context of the Conference on the Future of Europe. The EEAS as coherence-builder 1. The EEAS leadership should strengthen its direction-setting role through in-house communication, structured cooperation from the HRVP down to director level, and the introduction of‘ jours fixes’ for staff to meet with the High Representative.(*) 2. Boost information-sharing across the EEAS and secure continuity in direction and feedback(in particular between HQ and EUDs). 3. Increase the mobility of officials across the organisation, both between HQ and EUDs across HQ, including between planning units and other directorates, thus fostering better connections between situational awareness, planning and practical diplomacy. 26|