Brussels, 19/12/2002 (Agence Europe) - The final report of the working group on defence, chaired by Commissioner Michel Barnier, stresses that "European defence policy cannot be defined without reference to NATO" and that "the security and defence policy strongly contributes to the Union's international credibility". "When defining this policy, it is not a question of transforming the Union into a military alliance, but to provide it with the necessary instruments to defend its goals and values and to contribute to peace and stability in the world", says the report that broaches successively:
- Updating Petersberg missions: the group recommends that these missions be complemented with other tasks: - conflict prevention; - joint actions in matters of disarmament; -* advice and assistance in military matters; - stabilisation operations a the end of conflicts; - support at the request of the authorities of a third country in the fight against terrorism.
- Arrangements to ensure coherence and efficiency when carrying out crisis management operations: the group recommends the strengthening of the role of the High Representative who should have a right of initiative in crisis management, the decision on launching an operation remaining in the hands of the Council. It would be up to him or her to present the Council with a proposal setting out the type of operation envisaged and the means necessary to carry it out. The co-ordination of crisis management operations would go to the High Representative. The commander of the military operation and those responsible for the civilian aspects should answer to the High Representative. Co-ordination between military and civilian aspects on the ground will be attributed to Special Representatives or failing that, to a person appointed for this job by the Council. All arrangements must, however, respect the integrity of military command. A majority was in favour of creating a fund, based on the contributions of Member States, for the funding of preparatory stages for a military operation, as well as the setting up of a specific mechanism (outside the Community budget) for assuming responsibility for common costs for military operations. The suggestion concerning the creation of a common military academy provoked a certain interest.
- Improvement to decision-making procedure: In light of the next Union enlargement, most members of the group felt it is more important than ever for Member States to agree to change from unanimity to other methods of decision-making which call more for consent and a culture of solidarity between Member States. Engagement in an operation would be done unanimously, with, however, application of rules for constructive abstention, which could, moreover, be made more flexible. Once underway, the States that abstained would not participate in operational decision-making. They would, however, be able to join in at a later date and take part in decisions that would fundamentally change the concept of the operation, over and beyond the initial mission. Several members of the group proposed that provisions relating to enhanced cooperation should apply.
- Solidarity clause: A broad move in favour was reached regarding a new clause that would allow the principle of solidarity to be explicit between Member States, appearing at the first Article of the constitutional treaty. This clause would allow mobilisation of all instruments made available to the Union (military, police and judicial cooperation, civil protection, etc.) for actions on EU territory intended to prevent a terrorist threat, protect the civilian population and the democratic institutions and provide assistance to a Member State on its territory to face up to the implications of any potential terrorist attack. This clause would not be a collective defence clause involving a military assistance obligation, the report states. The group did not come to an agreement on a collective defence clause advocated by some of its members. It was considered by some to be unacceptable because of the non-aligned status of some Member States whereas others consider that collective defence is assured within NATO.
A large part of the group also took a stance in favour of (1) the creation, on an intergovernmental basis, of a European Armaments Agency, also for strategic research, which could contribute to the exercise of assessment and surveillance of military capabilities, and (2) the creation of a Defence Council.
