Brussels, 21/06/2002 (Agence Europe) - "We have noted the complaint. If there is a technical problem, we shall have technical talks with the United States. A we stand, the American concerns are not warranted". It is in these terms that Gilles Gantelet, spokesman for the Transports Commissioner, Loyola de Palacio, summarised the Commission's stance faced with the statements made by Robert G. Bell, assistant to the Assistant Secretary General for Defence at NATO, which were published in Friday's Financial Times, claiming that "the use of certain signals by Galileo could endanger the lives of NATO military officials".
The "problem" in question is said to be overlapping frequencies between the future European satellite navigation system (Galileo) and the modernised American system (GPS). According to the Financial Times, Galileo will use frequencies (for civil and/or military issues) that may overlap with the encrypted waves used by the United States and NATO during military operations. If, for strategic reasons, the United States wants to jam Galileo frequencies, it would also jam its own. Recalling the bitter negotiations between Americans and European during the World Conference of Istanbul on Telecommunications (see EUROPE of 9 May, 2000 and 6 June 2000), Community sources close to the issue state that "the United States has always been against the allocation to the Union of certain frequencies it coveted". "Technically, European experts say that these overlaps, inevitable as there are few frequencies, will be marginal. It is a political problem and not technical" comment other European sources.
Two years ago, the Commission received a Council mandate to discuss different aspects concerning Galileo with the United States. Several meetings have already taken place between the two sides. However, a meeting scheduled precisely to discuss the technical aspects at the beginning of May was cancelled by the Americans for an "problem of agenda", said Gilles Gantelet. This meeting should take place before the end of the year. Whatever happens, "it is a question of a European project, thus the problem needs negotiating between the United States and the Union and not by NATO", he concluded.