EU military to get a home base

[Skunk]

EU military to get a home base
Belgium said Tuesday that it would go ahead with plans to build a European military command headquarters near Brussels next year despite opposition from the United States and Britain.
.
Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt told a meeting of ambassadors to his country that the new headquarters was necessary for Europe to be able to "plan and execute European operations autonomously" - in other words, without interference from the United States.
.
The command center was first proposed following a mini-summit in April by Belgium, France, Germany and Luxembourg, the four European states that most vehemently opposed an American-led invasion of Iraq and that had for a time had blocked involvement by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
.
The European Union has long planned for a common European military capacity that would allow it to formulate and pursue a defense policy separate from that of NATO's, which is dominated by the United States.
.
In December 1999, the EU heads of state agreed that by the end of 2003 member states would be prepared to deploy up to 60,000 troops in EU-led military operations and that the union would eventually build the infrastructure necessary to direct such operations.
.
Many European officials believe an autonomous European military capacity is necessary for the union to have a meaningful foreign policy and give it a voice in world affairs. Otherwise, they argue, Europe's individual states are too weak to play a role independent of the United States.
.
The United States has opposed such a policy as an unnecessary duplication of NATO, which already pools European military capacities under a single command and plans to build a headquarters complex near Brussels in the next few years. NATO and the EU agreed in March that NATO would provide planning support and command facilities for EU-led "crisis response" operations.
.
Secretary of Defense Colin Powell of the United States said earlier this year that what Europe needs are more military capabilities, not more headquarters. The United States is sharply critical of its European NATO partners for lagging on military spending and letting their militaries slip far behind U.S. capabilities.
.
But the controversy ahead of the Iraq war convinced many Europeans, France and Germany in particular, of the need for a separate capacity and separate facilities that would allow them to pursue their own policies without the approval of Washington.
.
The headquarters proposal has yet to win full EU support, however. Britain, for one, opposes the move and has proposed the creation of a dedicated EU military "planning cell" to be based in NATO's military headquarters.
.
But Verhofstadt said Tuesday that his country would press ahead with the plan to build a separate headquarters at Tervuren, just outside of Brussels, by the middle of next year.
.
The plan will be discussed at an informal meeting of EU defense ministers in early October, before the European Union's powerful Intergovernmental Conference.
-------------------

And about time too - I was tired of all of the talking about creating the darn Combined EU Force - and no action. Suprised that the UK wants to base it in Nato headquarters though; surely Britain realises that this would run counter to the EU Constitution?

[Dreamer128]

They're actually going through with this? I wonder where they found the money...

[johnny]

Originally posted by Dreamer128: They're actually going through with this? I wonder where they found the money...

Not just the money, how about mutual agreement ? Who's in command ? Maybe i'm judging too soon, but i don't think it will be a very impressive force.

[Skunk]

Not just the money, how about mutual agreement ? Who's in command ? Maybe i'm judging too soon, but i don't think it will be a very impressive force.

Whose in charge of the Netherlands-Belgium Naval training accademy? Command is rotated...

[Stratos]

Most European countries are still more tied up with the interest of their own country than that of Europe as a whole. What would happen if one country propose a military intervention somewhere while another is against it? What if one country has a economic interest to see a regime go while another want it remain?

[Skunk]

Originally posted by Stratos: Most European countries are still more tied up with the interest of their own country than that of Europe as a whole. What would happen if one country propose a military intervention somewhere while another is against it? What if one country has a economic interest to see a regime go while another want it remain?

As you know, EU security will be bound to a majority decision under the new constitution - no 'powers of veto' there (thankfully). Should the EU majority vote go against a member state seeking action, then that member state will still have the right to act unilaterally. In the reverse case, it is not inconceivable that a member state would withhold troops - although I have no doubt that, at a later stage, there may be a financial penalty to pay for going against EU decisions as this has always been the case in economic areas.

[Dreamer128]

Originally posted by Skunk: quote: Originally posted by Stratos: Most European countries are still more tied up with the interest of their own country than that of Europe as a whole. What would happen if one country propose a military intervention somewhere while another is against it? What if one country has a economic interest to see a regime go while another want it remain?

there may be a financial penalty to pay for going against EU decisions as this has always been the case in economic areas. [/QUOTE]Unless you are France or Germany...

[ 09-06-2003, 02:33 PM: Message edited by: Dreamer128 ]

[Skunk]

Unless you are France or Germany...

Why do you say that? France had to pay some very hefty fines for refusing to import British beef not so long ago. The rules are fair and applied fairly...

[Dreamer128]

Originally posted by Skunk: quote: Unless you are France or Germany...

Why do you say that? France had to pay some very hefty fines for refusing to import British beef not so long ago. The rules are fair and applied fairly... [/QUOTE]I was actually talking about the fact that they've gotten away with having a shortage of more then 4% of their BNP for the second year in a row. They're really putting the stability pact to shame.

[Spelca]

Originally posted by Dreamer128: quote: Originally posted by Skunk: quote: Unless you are France or Germany...

Why do you say that? France had to pay some very hefty fines for refusing to import British beef not so long ago. The rules are fair and applied fairly... [/QUOTE]I was actually talking about the fact that they've gotten away with having a shortage of more then 4% of their BNP for the second year in a row. They're really putting the stability pact to shame. [/QUOTE]But aren't they allowed to have a shortage two years in row? It's only the the only third year that they have to pay a penalty...

[ 09-07-2003, 12:14 PM: Message edited by: Spelca ]