Brussels, 18/07/2006 (Agence Europe) - It was in a somewhat goading tone that the chairman of the sub-committee on defence at the European Parliament opened a hearing, on 13 July, devoted to EU Security Strategy and the future of European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). “We are on the road to a European army”, said German Christian Democrat Karl von Wogau, who is preparing a report on European defence.
Claude-France Arnould, Director of Defence Issues for the EU Council, focused much of her speech on capabilities. After stressing the importance of battlegroups that can be speedily deployed for “missions verging on prevention”, she stressed the need to work especially hard to make up certain shortcomings: - strategic airlift; - mobility on the ground (tactical airlift and helicopters); - and intelligence and reconnaissance including with the use of spatial means. On this subject, she announced that an agreement is ready between the Council and the countries taking part in Helios II (France, Spain and Belgium) to allow access by the Torrejon satellite centre to the images provided by Helios. It is expected the agreement will be signed in October. Claude-France Arnould regretted that the means pledged by Member States in the EU Force Catalogue did not tally with the means really made available and pointed out that a new solution for funding operation had to be found because in the current system, the more a State takes part in operations, the less means that State has to invest in future capabilities. Another problem lies in the refusal of Member States to accept battlegroup training at EU level, although it is at this level that they will work, Ms Arnould said, recalling that real training on the ground would enhance working practice and interoperability. She highlighted the fact that progress has still to be made in planning and operational capabilities, including civil-military means. Ms Arnould finally expressed regret that it is currently possible to use ESDP means to come to the assistance of populations in the event of earthquakes “in Rabat but not in Nice”.
After pointing out that the ESDP is a “success story” and that the“real problem of the ESDP lies in the fact that there is no common foreign policy”, Nicole Gnesotto said the addition of a collective defence mission to the current Petersburg missions is a “real political question” and “real impasse” because it is not negotiable today. On the other hand, a link should be made between external security and homeland security and it must be proven that external intervention is effective in enhancing homeland security, the director of the EU Security Studies Institute (Paris) said. Like Ms Arnould, Nicole Gnesotto urges for the means to use ESDP means for support in the event of disasters in the Union but also for the protection of infrastructures against terrorism in the context of homeland security. “One capacity should not make one forget the other”, she went on, noting that, in 2007, there will be two battlegroups, i.e. 3,000 troops, and that this objective seems to have overridden the earlier ambition of having a 60,000-strong corps deployable within 60 days. Nicole Gnesotto also stressed that the constitution of the European Defence College in the form of an addition to national colleges, without staff or budget, “defies common sense”. In the same way, the start up of the European Defence Agency with a low commitment on the part of Member States (to date none of the decisions have been binding) and a ridiculous budget of €4 million for research, does not inspire enthusiasm. The budget for the ESDP, on the other hand, is a “huge labyrinthine system totally incomprehensible and totally devoid of transparency”, Nicole Gnesotto said, deploring the lack of confidence between Member States and European institutions, especially the Parliament. (Source: our publication Atlantic News).