Brussels, 26/11/2003 (Agence Europe) - The second European parliamentary symposium on defence organised on 25 November at the seat of the Economic and Social Committee (ESC) in Brussels placed emphasis on the need to make the European Union, the inevitable economic player on the global scene, a valid discussion partner on defence and security matters faced with the power of the United States. Many of those taking the floor felt that the Council's decision of 17 November to create a European Defence Agency, operational in 2004, is a step in the right direction. Emphasis is also placed on the need to promote research programmes on defence and to increase European defence spending. This need is all the more pressing as the United States devotes twice as much funding as Europe to the military sector.
The First Round Table was on what kind of military Europe there should be. It was chaired by MEP Philippe Morillon (UDF) who felt the war in Iraq has heightened awareness of the need to step up European defence spending. "Do we want the United States to continue to carry out the 'dirty work' while we simply 'wash up'", he said, also stressing the need to redefine the role of the Atlantic Alliance in security issues. In his view, NATO should above all take over from the United States in a number of joint actions and become more actively involved in ensuring that bordering regions are secure, such as Africa or the Mediterranean Basin. General Wolf Dieter Löser, Eurocorps' second in command, mainly considers, for his part, that it is essential to determine which combat forces should be mobilised in times of crisis, and insists on the need to clearly define the troop commander's scope of action. Furthermore, he stresses the importance of Eurocorps as an instrument that is available to the European institutions, ready for action and able to carry out a large range of missions.
The theme of the Second Round Table was on the kind of common doctrine, decision-making mechanisms and the implications for NATO architecture. Discussions were conducted by MEP Gary Titley (British Labour member) who insisted on how dangerous it was to have a large number of mechanisms at the same time as a large number of military structures. François Auque, President of EADS, the European Aeronautic, Defence and Space Company, insists for his part on the need for Europe to clearly define its strategy while objectively assessing the threat it faces; to effectively structure operations (with an integrated and effective command chain); and to define the categories and the kinds of units to be deployed. On the industrial front, Mr Auque recommends the creation of a real European defence equipment market. Philippe Humbert, associate director for international affairs at SNECMA, considers a small group of States wishing and able to conduct missions should be able to do so, subject to certain conditions. As far as the European defence industry is concerned, he notes that it is suffering from heavy "fragmentation" and that it lacks ambition.
The Third Round Table, chaired by Piia-Noora Kauppi (EPP-ED, Finland) was on the theme: What European Armament Policy is Best for Europe? Should preference be given to "transitional groupings" or "European or transatlantic groupings", and "what policy framework do we need". Eneko Landaburu, Director-General at the DG External Relations at the European Commission, recalled the role of the Commission mainly concerning standardisation (announcing a document for end 2004) and the internal defence market. Klaus von Sperber, OCCAR Director (joint armament cooperation body) stressed the importance of harmonising European policies, and welcomed in this context the creation of the EU Defence Agency (which must have powers in the field of research, he insisted). "Technology has been cited as key to modernisation and improvement, and thus deserves our economic and operational attention", he stressed. He also recommended more coordination in the arms budget, saying: "national behaviours, wishes and sovereignty play a major role (…). No European Agency will be able to function without a core budget that can span the transition from the research stage to the project stage". Bruno Cotte, Executive Vice President-International, Dassault Aviation, considers for his part that, in Europe, contrary to the argument often put forward, there is "a great deal of money available" but there must be the political will to release it. He was cautious when speaking of transatlantic cooperation and technological exchange, insisting that, as far as possible, "one should not depend on foreign skills and know-how". As far as European cooperation is concerned, he is in favour but warns, "cooperation is a good idea but is not always the most effective method" as "instead of merging programmes and competencies, we tend to merge incompetencies! (…) A European Agency, in contrast, might be very effective, provided it is not a Trojan Horse".