歐洲統合於過去半個世紀的發展，為政策實踐與學術研究提供建構歐洲特殊身份認同的機會。在尋求一個適合其身份認同的全球性角色的過程當中，歐體/歐盟已在對外政策的合作進程中，展現與傳統強權不同的特質，並呈現出具關鍵影響力的規範性力量。隨著在政策領域當中歐洲國家逐漸發展出對外與安全政策整合的機制，學界也提出「公民強權」的概念，藉以指稱在聯盟的層次上，以集體性的非軍事措施解決國際衝突的方式，在經過不斷實踐形成行為體間互動慣例模式後，所建構出具特殊性的歐盟國際身份認同。

然而，當歐盟開始試探軍事政策合作與軍力提升的可能性，使得歐盟在傳統上強調的非軍事解決方式，有可能被軍事面向的發展予以平衡，如此的「軍事化」發展是否將弱化了歐盟具「公民」特質的國際身份認同? 本文首先將討論學界對於歐洲「公民強權」的爭辯，藉以瞭解此一概念的演進與不同的意涵; 其次，當「軍事」面向加入歐洲統合的進程，歐盟的「公民強權」身份是否受到威脅? 之後，本文探討對於歐盟「公民」面向在政策實務與理論研究兩方面發展的批判，以釐清「公民強權」概念在理論層次的適用性，以及歐盟身份認同的可能其他選項。

在結論部分，本文提出對「公民」與「軍事」面向對立面的檢討，試圖將「公民」擴大為具世界主義精神的廣義概念; 同時，本文主張界定「權力」的意涵，必須更為重視非軍事的因素。綜合而言，由於歐盟所著重在社會經濟層面的應對方式，以及在全球推廣具普世價值的規範，再配合其所發展軍事化的政策以達成非傳統軍事的目的，因此，一個更為廣義的「公民強權」概念，應可彰顯歐盟具特殊身份認同的全球角色特質。

A half century of European intergration has had a profound effect on both policy practice and academic research in pursuing the distinctiveness of Europe's identity as a whole. In the process of finding an appropriate role based on its constructing identity, the EC/EU has shaped a distinct foreign policy and developed decisive normative power in world affairs. Along with the formation of foreign and security policy cooperation among EU member states, the academic circle has proposed the “civilian power” concept, referring to the construction of an international identity of the EU based upon the routine behavior model which is derived from the constant practice of actors at the union level solving international conflicts by non-military means.

However, the problem has arisen as to whether the “civilian” nature of the EU's identity has been undermined by its attempt to strengthen collective military power, by balancing its conventional non-military solutions with the development of military means. Therefore, the main purpose of this article is to examine whether the “civilian power” concept can represent Europe's special international identity when considering the change and developments of the EU's security and military policy integration. This article begins by discussing the academic debates on “civilian power” so as to understand the evolution and the varieties of the meanings of this concept. It is followed by a study into EU military integration and the implications for its international identity. This article also brings in critiques of the EU's “civilian” nature in order to clarify the applicability of the “civilian power” concept at the theoretic level as well as to identify alternatives, if any, to such an identity.

In conclusion, this article argues for the necessity of reviewing the contrasts between “civilian” and “military” dimensions and of broadening the concept of “civilian power” by involving the theory of the cosmopolitanism. Also, it advocates that discussing the meaning of “power”, we should further look into non-military factors.  As a result, a broadened sense of “civilian power” can better define the global actorness of the EU based on its distinctive identity given the facts that the EU has spread the universal values and norms through the social and economic means of its foreign policy, along with its increasing dependence on military policy to solve those non-conventional problems.