Weaponization of Interdependence: Unpacking European Ontological Anxieties?

Traditional scholarship on economic interdependence assumes that economic ties primarily function as stabilizing mechanisms (Keohane & Nye, 1977) or strategic tools for leverage (Farrell & Newman, 2019). However, they neglect how identity and ontological concerns can securitize interdependence. This study addresses this critical gap by integrating Ontological Security Theory (Mitzen, 2006) to move beyond materialist explanations and offer a novel framework for understanding how economic ties are redefined in response to crises. Using an interpretative process-tracing approach, combined with Critical Discourse Analysis, the study examines how EU institutional narratives reconstructed interdependence with Russia from a cooperative mechanism into an existential security threat. Unlike conventional sanctions research focused on costs or strategic outcomes, this analysis spotlights the discursive mechanisms that enabled the EU's shift from managed interdependence (pre-2022) to economic coercion (post-2022). The findings identify a three-phase transformation: (1) Managed Interdependence, (2) Ontological Crisis and Reflexive Routinization, and (3) Weaponized Interdependence and Strategic Deterrence. The EU’s move from “smart sanctions” to full-scale economic coercion was driven not solely by material interests, but by the need to reaffirm its normative identity amid ontological insecurity. This perspective offers new insights into economic statecraft, international political economy, and EU security policy.