At the Capability Improvement Conference in Brussels on 19 November 2001, Defence Ministers from European Union Member States discussed the military assets that the Member States are willing to provide (see EUROPE of 19 and 20 November, pp. 5 and 6). The countries participating in the conference issued a statement after the conference that we are reprinting in full (in both French and English) in EUROPE/Documents.
- - - - - - - -
STATEMENT ON IMPROVING EUROPEAN MILITARY CAPABILITIES
EUROPEAN CAPABILITY ACTION PLAN
I. DEVELOPMENT OF MILITARY CAPABILITIES
1. In connection with the pursuit of the objectives of the CFSP, the efforts which have been undertaken since the Cologne, Helsinki, Feira, Nice and Göteborg European Councils aim to give the European Union the means to play a full part at international level in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter and to face up to its responsibilities to cope with crises by developing the range of instruments already at its disposal and adding a military capability to carry out all the conflict-prevention and crisis-management tasks as defined in the Treaty on European Union ("Petersberg tasks"). Such a development also calls for a true strategic partnership between the EU and NATO in crisis management, with due regard for the decision-making autonomy of the two organisations.
2. At the Capability Improvement Conference in Brussels on 19 November 2001(Denmark drew attention to Protocol No 5 annexed to the Amsterdam Treaty), the Ministers for Defence reaffirmed their responsibility for the development of the headline goal (being able to deploy 60 000 men in less than 60 days and to sustain them for at least one year). On that occasion, they emphasised their determination to seek solutions and new forms of cooperation in order to develop the necessary military capabilities and make good the shortcomings identified, while making optimum use of resources.
Member States reaffirm their steadfast commitment to meet the objectives set in Helsinki in full and to respond to the shortcomings which had been identified. Their revised national contributions strengthen the realisation of the headline goal. Member States also agreed on a "European Capability Action Plan" (see Chapter III) incorporating all the efforts, investments, developments and coordination measures executed or planned at both national and multinational level with a view to improving existing resources and gradually developing the capabilities necessary for the Union's activities.
That Conference represents an important stage in a demanding process for strengthening the Union's military capabilities, with the aim of achieving by 2003 the headline goal which has been set. That process will continue beyond that date in order to achieve the strategic capability goals within the framework of a dynamic and permanent process for adapting forces and capabilities.
II. CONTRIBUTIONS
3. General
At the Capability Improvement Conference, Member States voluntarily confirmed their contributions as established at the Conference in November 2000, and made significant improvements in terms of both quantity and quality, which enabled several shortcomings to be rectified. The multi-role possibilities of certain capabilities and the substitution process are also enabling other deficiencies to be made good in whole or in part.
An assessment of the revised national contributions confirms that the EU should be able to carry out the whole range of Petersberg tasks by 2003.
However, efforts must be made if the Union is to be able to carry out the most complex operations as efficiently as possible and to reduce any limitations and restrictions in terms of the breadth of the operation and the period of deployment as well as the level of risk.
4. Forces
Contributions and progress made
In quantitative terms, Member States' voluntary contributions confirm the existence of a body of resources consisting of a pool of more than 100 000 men, around 400 combat aircraft and 100 ships, fully satisfying the requirements defined by the headline goal to conduct different types of crisis-management operations. Ground element contributions meet the basic requirements for forces and support and back-up resources. Maritime requirements are well catered for. The air capabilities offered meet the quantitative requirements for air defence and ground troop support.
Member States have made substantial additional contributions, thus rectifying several shortcomings and deficiencies in whole or in part. In the case of land-based resources, this relates in particular to multiple rocket launcher, transmission, electronic warfare, armoured infantry and bridging engineering units. With regard to naval resources, progress has been achieved in the naval aviation sector. As regards aviation resources, additional contributions have been made in the fields of combat search and rescue and precision guided weapons.
Efforts to be made
Additional efforts must be made with regard to protecting forces deployed, commitment capability and logistics. The degree of availability of ground elements, operational mobility and the flexibility of the force deployed must also be improved.
Improvements in the fields of naval aviation resources and maritime medical evacuation must continue to be sought. There are still problems to be solved with regard to air elements, inter alia in the fields of combat search and rescue and precision guided weapons.
5. Strategic capabilities
Contributions and progress made
With regard to command, control, communications and intelligence resources (C3I), Member States are offering a sufficient number of headquarters at the levels of operation, force and component, as well as deployable communications units.
Member States have also offered a number of intelligence resources to contribute towards the EU's analysis and surveillance capabilities. The air and sea transport available will enable an initial entry force to be deployed; strategic mobility has also been improved.
Progress has been made in the C3I field and in maritime strategic mobility.
Efforts to be made
A qualitative analysis of certain C3I resources has yet to be made. If this analysis reveals certain deficiencies, they must be regarded as critical. Moreover, shortcomings exist with regard to deployable communications units.
Additional efforts must be made with regard to assistance for strategic decision-making as the possibilities for intelligence, achievement of goals, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISTAR) remain limited.
As regards strategic mobility, the main shortcomings relate to wide-body aircraft and roll-on/roll-off ships. However, the impact of those shortcomings could be reduced by making more effective use of existing resources (coordinated or joint use of resources, planning of movements, etc.) and using commercial resources on a methodical basis.
6. Qualitative improvements
In addition to these quantitative improvements, all Member States have - without exception -taken measures which will undoubtedly help to achieve the headline goal of crisis management by enhancing the qualitative aspects of their Armed Forces. Their many efforts are focused on the following eight areas: structures of the Armed Forces; budgets; staff; multinational cooperation; logistics; training; research and technology, industrial cooperation, public procurement; civilian/military cooperation. The steps taken by Member States, which they are planning to pursue, are likely to improve the availability, deployability, survivability, sustainability and interoperability of the Armed Forces.
The analysis of the progress and efforts to be made, in particular to ensure the easy availability of certain forces defined in the Helsinki headline goal, will be continued.
7. Contributions by the Fifteen and the Six
The non-EU European Member States of NATO and the other candidate countries for accession to the EU have also helped improve European military capabilities through the highly valuable additional contributions made at the Ministerial Meeting on 21 November 2000 and included in a supplement to the Forces Catalogue.
Those countries were invited to update their contributions at the Ministerial Meeting on 20 November 2001 in accordance with a procedure parallel to that applicable to the 15 Member States, as was the case last year. Their offers, revised in terms of both quantity and quality, are welcomed as additional capabilities which contribute to the range of capabilities available for EU-led operations. Those contributions will be evaluated in cooperation with the countries concerned in accordance with the same criteria as those applicable to the Member States.
8. Capability development mechanism (CDM)
As agreed at the Göteborg European Council, and in order to ensure the sustainability of measures to strengthen the EU's capabilities, Member States will recall the importance of adopting a detailed monitoring and evaluation mechanism for military capabilities in accordance with the Nice conclusions. To avoid any unnecessary duplication for the Member States concerned, that mechanism will take account of NATO's defence planning processes and the planning and review process of the Partnership for Peace (PARP).
III. EUROPEAN CAPABILITY ACTION PLAN
9. Introduction
In keeping with decisions taken at the Helsinki European Council and subsequent Councils, Member States have undertaken, on a voluntary basis, to continue improving their military capabilities with a view to boosting development of European crisis-management capabilities.
At the Capability Improvement Conference (CIC) on 19 November 2001, the Member States identified shortcomings and agreed on a plan of action for remedying them. This plan will help to achieve the goals set by the European Council in Helsinki. It is based on national decisions (a "bottom-up" approach). By rationalising Member States' respective defence efforts and increasing the synergy between their national and multinational projects, it should make for an enhanced European military capability. The European Capability Action Plan is also designed to back up the political plan which gave rise to the headline goal and to create the necessary impetus for achieving the aims which the Union set in Helsinki.
The European Capability Action Plan, which will be implemented in a spirit of transparency, is mainly designed to rectify the remaining deficiencies. The capability development mechanism (CDM), which will comprise the tools required for the permanent and detailed process, will make it possible to arrange for the monitoring and progress of the development of European military capabilities.
10. Principles of the European Capability Action Plan
The Action Plan is therefore based on the following principles:
Enhanced effectiveness and efficiency of European military capability efforts.
The current fragmentation of defence effort provides scope for Member States to rationalise. This might be done by stepping up military cooperation between Member States or groups of Member States.
A "bottom-up" approach to European defence cooperation.
Member States' commitments would be on a voluntary basis, with due regard for national decisions. The required capabilities will be achieved partly by carrying out national and multi-national projects which are already planned and partly by developing new projects and initiatives to make good remaining deficiencies.
Coordination between EU Member States and cooperation with NATO.
Application of this principle is essential to target specific shortcomings, avoid wasteful duplication and ensure transparency and consistency with NATO.
Importance of broad public support.
The public in the Member States must have a clear vision of the context in which CFSP development is situated, of the existing shortcomings and the efforts to be made to achieve the objectives set. This transparency of the Action Plan will help to make the action plan more effective and back up the political action and political will underpinning it.
11. National and multinational projects
It appears from an analysis of ongoing national and multinational projects, whether planned or envisaged, that if these projects are brought to a conclusion and the resources made available to the EU, they will enable the vast majority of existing shortcomings to be addressed in full or In part.
However, this analysis of projects and initiatives shows that they are not currently sufficient to remedy all the shortcomings which have been identified. It is therefore important to find ways of making good each remaining deficiency.
The action plan will be effective only if the Member States undertake to make good all deficiencies by bringing their current and future projects and initiatives to a conclusion and making these new capabilities available to the EU. The success of this process will necessitate major, on-going efforts from the Member States.
12. Implementation of the Action Plan
a. There is a very broad range of options available to remedy the remaining shortcomings:
if national forces and capabilities other than those already declared were made available and included in future projects and initiatives, this would enable some deficiencies to be made good, particularly those in relation to forces;
other alternatives would consist, first, of making existing capabilities more effective and efficient and, second, of seeking creative responses, going beyond the traditional framework of military procurement programmes;
multinational solutions might include the co-production, financing and acquisition of capabilities, particularly for large-scale projects but also for very specific capabilities. These solutions might also extend to the management and use of the equipment when it is use.
b. Taking account of the results of the meeting of senior national experts responsible for defence procurement and planning, whose role is important in this context, an analysis and evaluation, both in qualitative and quantitative terms, of all the shortcomings will be continued under the responsibility of the Military Committee. This analysis should produce detailed specifications which will assist the quest for appropriate solutions.
c. For the sake of efficiency and flexibility and in order to render Member States accountable, the HTF must be brought together, by type of capability, in the formation of panels of experts, adapted on a case-by-case basis. The panels' remit will be to analyse remaining deficiencies as a whole and to identify all the feasible national or multinational solutions. A pilot country (or group of countries) could be responsible for leading, coordinating and summarising the work of these panels.
d. In connection with its responsibilities as defined in the conclusions of the Nice European Council for the political management of military capability development, the PSC will report to the Council at regular intervals on the basis of the Military Committee's opinions.
IV. ARMS INDUSTRY
13. The Ministers assessed the progress being made towards a restructuring of European defence industries and towards strengthening the industrial and technological defence base, which has to be competitive and dynamic. This is a positive factor which constitutes a major step forward and contributes to the strengthening of the Union's capabilities and hence also to the success of the European Military Capability Action Plan.
The Ministers also acknowledged the importance of improving harmonisation of military requirements and the planning of arms procurement, as seen fit by Member States.
The Ministers also recognised the importance of collaboration between defence industries.