A Belgo-Hungarian-Polish paper on common defense
(BRUSSELS2) “We shall take concrete steps, as appropriate, to implement all provisions and articles of the Lisbon Treaty relevant to CSDP” Belgium, Hungary and Poland intend to make this sentence, which appeared in the ministerial declaration adopted in November 2009, on the 10th anniversary of the ESDP, a reality.
These three countries agreed on a "Non-paper" (unofficial paper setting out a political position) to put in place the new CSDP instruments of the Lisbon Treaty. Document that I was able to consult for a long time exclusively.
This three-man configuration is original on defense. But she doesn't hold randomly. These three countries will hold the presidency of the EU in turn: Belgians in the 2nd half of 2010, then Hungarians in the 1st half of 2011, and Poles in the 2nd half of 2011. France was not a signatory to this document. But she was involved in the discussions or, at least, kept closely informed of its realization...
An explanation of text, policy
This document is not a roadmap, an operational work program. It consists more of a joint analysis of the new PeSDC provisions of the Lisbon Treaty. A kind of text explanation, Politics, very useful, given the lapidary side of certain provisions and on which the 27 are at least divided.
The trio does not hide the difficulties. The common understanding of these instruments still remains very early stage they write. For come to such an understanding, a "considerable amount of work is required ». This work must begin right now ».
And the three countries display an ambition, measured, reasonable (achievable). This work must be carried out in mind to use these instruments in the best possible way to advance solidarity between Member States, promote CSDP and continued European integration, and the role of the EU as a global actor. They thus detail five of the main provisions of European defense in the future.
1. Permanent structured cooperation (CSP).
« We see a real added value ". This cooperation should lead to operational advantages, more effective defense spending, the elimination of current duplications and gaps. It must be seen as the means of generating a "political will" between the Member States as a "incentive to enhance the effectiveness of their defense effort". Everything remains to be done, however. And the trio is aware of this. The modalities which will govern the CSP as the methods of evaluation remain to be fixed. But, in any case, the approach must be "open and inclusive" (i.e. to be able to include all countries).
2. The mutual aid and assistance clause (Article 42 of the EU Treaty).
This clause is a modern clause, reflecting that threats must be resolved in a comprehensive manner. For the NATO allies, the treaty is very clear; NATO is the "forum for the implementation" of this clause. But in "in a context of increasing interdependence, this clause has a
key significance. It should facilitate cooperation between Member States wishing to pool, share and specialize capabilities. »
3. The solidarity clause (Article 222 TFEU).
Although not in the PeSDC chapter, this clause is "clearly related" to the PeSDC, the paper points out. " In other words, it opens the possibility of using the instruments of the CSDP within the borders of the EU”, thus reflecting the reality of a continuum between internal and external security”. Thus, even if the legal context is different, it can reasonably be expected that capacities, procedures, agreements on command and control (C2) structures will be discussed within the framework of the debate on humanitarian intervention or EU disaster relief.
4. The launch fund - start-up (article 41 EU Treaty).
The text points out the differences of views that exist on the nature and purpose of this fund. For some, it is related to the Athena mechanism, for others not. For some it is purely military in nature, for others it could involve funding both military and civilian efforts. " Our reflections on this clause should take into account the lessons of recent missions and operations and the potential for added value of the early assessment phase, based on the recent example of EUCO Haiti.i”.
5. vanguard group (article 42§5 and 44 EU Treaty).
This article " gives us the possibility of entrusting the execution of certain tasks to a group of Member States. Which raises some questions for the Trio. Do these tasks refer to operations or capabilities as well? What does the "management" of a mission mean? What are the financial consequences, if any? Does this clause codify existing practices or does it aim to strengthen rapid response, including in cases of extreme urgency? " This article is applicable immediately but there is no common understanding of what this may mean in practice. The Union needs to avoid being in a situation where this clause could be used without having reached a common level of understanding ».
(Nicolas Gros-Verheyde)
(photo credit: Polish police in Kosovo - Eulex)