The article is devoted to the relevant in the science of international law the issue of evolution of doctrinal approaches to international police cooperation within the European Union. The literature on this issue is being investigated, on the basis of which observations of the nature of internal security management in the EU are made. The connection and the mutual stress between police integration and internal EU security policies are investigated on the one hand and the state sovereignty and the state monopoly to use force on the other. The evolution of the public sphere in the management of security policies is traced. The role of politicization in the management of international police cooperation is outlined. It is noted that politicization and public discourse can be both a favorable factor and an obstacle to police integration. The article highlights the evolution of management methods through soft and rigid law, as well as the growing role of internal and supranational actors in the management of police integration. The influence of differentiated informal networks on internal security management is noted. There is a trend available in the theoretical literature to mix powers through the generalization of cooperation networks. The issue of domestic and international internal security management is considered. It is concluded that not the state, but the network of police professionals determine the level of interest of states in integration in the field of international police cooperation. It is stated that a large array of research focuses on the institutionalization of the process of managing international police cooperation, while at the same time, relatively little work was carried out on the specific impact of differentiated networks on security management and the results of EU security policy. The asymmetry and variability of the integration preferences of states in the field of internal security are investigated. It is noted that this issue is best considered in the framework of the theory of functionalism. Such explanations are based on responding to common threats and functionality of ordinary institutions that allow to achieve certainty about the expected behavior of states.
Read full abstract