Expectations for a rapid initiative for launching a Europe of defence are not just spin. At the end of last week, the Belgian Prime Minister announced a summit for mid April between his country, France and Germany and open to other Member States. Jacques Chirac and Gerhard Schröder immediately confirmed that they would be attending, as well as Luxembourg, which is already involved in it. The doors are open to everyone, as "this in no way involves keeping anyone out of a Europe of defence", explained the German Chancellor. But at the same time, Belgian sources have mentioned preparations for a "hard core", which clearly indicate that for the moment they are not expecting huge numbers of participants. A British Minister was sarcastic about an initiative that came from a country that had practically reduced its defence spending to nothing and which had no credible forces available. He also stated that a Europe of defence was unthinkable without the United Kingdom and France, the only countries which make any effort in these areas.
I would like to provide the readers with some information that could help to clarify the importance of what is happening.
1. The President of the Convention, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, and the European Commissioner and President of the Convention's "Defence" group, Michel Barnier, had indicated a few weeks ago that the Europe of defence project to be inserted into the constitutional treaty will only involve some (not all) of the current and future Member States. This involves "strengthened cooperation" or, according to Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, "a more imaginative formula". The Barnier report mentions a similar system to that used in the creation of the single currency: a project open to all those who want to participate, together with admission criteria that allows entry into the club.
2. Methods for announcing the "defence" summit could lead to a belief that the initiative does not come from Belgium alone, with France and Germany supporting the idea later, but rather that it came from Paris and Berlin and that it was considered opportune by another country that gave out the invitations. Belgium did not hesitate, given the very clear position it had taken in support of the Franco-German theses at the beginning in both the EU and NATO.
3. The objective of the summit is not to launch a complete and structured Europe of defence (that's the job of the Convention) but to discuss the idea of a "hard core" (even if the terminology is different) and to focus on the "the way to correctly organise the Europeans arms industry in order to make it competitive" (as indicated by Chancellor Schröder to the press in his country). The countries organising are highlighting from the outset, the most sensitive, concrete and urgent aspect, as pressure from the USA on Member States (current and future ) to "buy American" are well known and has already brought about significant results. All governments have received the communication of 11 March from the Commission to the Council, European Parliament, Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions ("European Defence - Issues linked to the Industry and Market"), which describes the situation and formulates the "action proposals". The report by Michel Barnier thus indicates that, "the credibility of European defence policy is based on the existence and development of European capacity and the strengthening of the industrial and technological base of the defence sector".
4. Central and East European countries are certainly not being criticised for having chosen US weapons. We have to understand their view points. Belgian Minister, Louis Michel said that, "the problem is that they don't trust European military capability for guaranteeing their security and freedom". The Polish Foreign Affairs Minister, Vlodzimierz Cimoszewics replied to a question concerning the attitude of his country with regard to a European defence policy by stating that, "We support it. But we have to be realistic: NATO is currently the only structure that can guarantee security for all". It is up to the EU to make sure that this domain becomes credible.
5. With regard to the United Kingdom, we get the impression that France, Germany, Belgium and the other countries supporting the initiative are ready to go further, at least at the beginning. Michel Barnier wrote that, "I deeply believe that we will only have a European foreign policy once a genuine European defence capability is constituted". I believe that following recent events, this assertion is also valid in another sense: a defence capability is only useful if it is at the service of a European foreign policy. Why create it if it is, a priori, to be positioned on the policy choices of some one else? The countries that reject the principle of an autonomous foreign policy are superfluous to a Europe of defence.