EU Defense Ministers will have their “decision-making” Council. Soon ?

(BRUXELLES2 / A Palma de Majorque) C’était une demande de plusieurs ministres de la Défense de l’UE : avoir des réunions plus régulières et surtout « formelles » c’est-à-dire ayant une capacité autonome de décision. « Tout le monde est d’accord sur cette question » a précisé Carme Chacon lors de sa conférence de presse finale. Et d’expliquer : « The Lisbon Treaty strengthens defense policy. Ten years after the launch of the European defense policy, we must strengthen our role, institutionally. It is obvious. We need a body at European level that can formalize all the decisions we have to take on military operations, defense capabilities, the implementation of mutual defense and solidarity clauses. »

 

The position of C. Ashton. This statement fits perfectly with the words of Catherine Ashton (the High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and the Common Security Policy). And Carme Chacon referred to it. In the letter that it sent to the Ministers (and which reached me, by mistake), the HR specifies that: “ Regular meetings of defense ministers are essential to guide the work at the heart of the PeSDC, in particular to effectively launch military and EU operations and continue our capacity development work. "" I am personally committed (on this issue) She adds.

 

Pourquoi un Conseil « formel » ? Today, there is an informal (non-decisional) meeting and a formal meeting of Defense Ministers every six months. But this latest meeting is being held within the framework of a Council of Foreign Ministers. And any decision by Defense Ministers (for example the launch of a military operation, such as Atalanta) is formally taken by their Foreign Affairs counterparts. Which is embarrassing, from every point of view (political, security, operational, visibility, etc.). Additionally, the agenda is completely cluttered, leaving very little time for real discussions.

 

Concretely ? Il y aurait un Conseil des Ministres des Affaires étrangères, en format ministres de la Défense, avec capacité décisionnelle autonome pour eux (comme il y a un Conseil des Affaires étrangères en format « Commerce » ou un Conseil des Ministres de l’Economie, en format Budget). On ne semble pas s’acheminer – pour l’instant – en effet, vers la création d’une nouvelle formation en tant que telle pour les Ministres de la Défense. Pour diverses raisons. Cela supposerait de réviser le règlement intérieur du Conseil, d’avoir une décision du Conseil européen voire (et surtout) de modifier le Traité. Celui-ci prévoit, en effet, formellement un Conseil des Affaires étrangères et un Conseil des Affaires générales (article 16). Et il précise que tout Conseil hors les Affaires étrangères est présidé par la présidence tournante de l’UE. Toute formation nouvelle ferait ainsi perdre à la Haute représentante de l’UE, son rôle d’unité de la politique étrangère et de la sécurité commune. Impensable… Sans compter que cThis could arouse some jealousy (the Ministers of the Interior operate in the same Council as their Justice counterparts, etc.).

 

A few questions to settle. If there is agreement, it is for the moment political. It remains to be seen the concrete modalities, in particular: how many meetings to hold? Is it at the same time and in the presence of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs? What about informal meetings? Will the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, who are primarily concerned, also all agree? Etc… the discussion will now continue. The next scheduled meeting is the (jumbo) council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Defense, on April 26 and 27 in Luxembourg, where a debate at ministerial level will take place, again, on the question. The move to action could therefore take place under the Belgian presidency of the EU (in the second half of 2).