Το όραμα του πρόεδρου της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής Ζαν Κλοντ Γιούνκερ για εναν ευρωπαϊκό στρατό που θα ειναι ο ενοποιητικός παράγοντας σε καταστάσεις κρίσης στην Ευρώπη προκάλεσε μεγάλη συζήτηση, αλλά σε τελική ανάλυση, δεν έχει καταφέρει να συγκεντρώσει καμία ευρεία υποστήριξη.
Εν όψει της ρωσικής επιθετικότητας, οι Ευρωπαίοι προφανώς δεν θέλουν μια άλλη στρατιωτική οργάνωση που θα καλύπτει τις λειτουργίες του ΝΑΤΟ.
European army idea not gaining steam despite Russian aggression
by Edgars Skvariks
The idea put forward by European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker in March for the creation of a pan-European army, pointing out that such a step would have symbolic importance in the wake of increased tensions with Russia, has not gained much support , even within the current country presiding over the EU, Latvia.
Does common foreign policy also mean a common army?
The idea of establishing a common European army, like Juncker suggests, is not a new one. This has been proposed in the past by European leaders and officials from various countries, however, it has never gained the necessary support. ''Juncker is not the first to mention this idea. This has been discussed in the past – that on the European level we would be able to reduce considerable expenses by having armies which are better coordinated with one another,'' European Movement in Latvia President Andris Gobiņš points out. ''This can be called a European army or just improved cooperation, however, it looks like the term itself has scared-off many Europeans,'' Gobiņš added.
Juncker himself previously pointed out to the "Welt am Sonntag" newspaper that a common European army would help create a common foreign and security policy, and allow Europeans to jointly take responsibility for events around the world. The EC president’s proposal is not likely to be a popular one with Great Britain, which does not wish to see further integration of the bloc, but in Germany it seems to have gained support from many.
German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen even recently expressed hope that ''if not her children, her grandchildren will experience being a part of a European armed forces''. Meanwhile, the German Bundestag's Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Norbert Röttgen also pointed out recently that the time has come to create a European army. According to Juncker, this does not mean that such an army should be immediately put into action, but would be a sign to Russia that Europe is prepared to defend its values, while at the same time showing the world that there will never be war between EU members.
The matter of a common EU foreign policy, also proposed by Juncker, is being perceived quite seriously at the moment, taking into account the efforts made by EU foreign ministers to dispel rumors on a possible divide between EU members. EU foreign relations chief Frederica Mogherini, as well as Latvian Foreign Minister Edgars Rinkēvičs, whose country is currently presiding over the EU, have been especially active in emphasizing that the EU remains united. It is the Baltics, including Latvia, which are directly being mentioned in the context of Russia’s aggressive foreign policy and the need for the EU to find fast solutions.
NATO functions cannot be duplicated
However, it is in Latvia, not in Germany for example, where Juncker’s idea has not been able to garner enough support. Latvian Defense Minister Raimonds Vējonis says that it is Latvia’s priority, as the presiding country over the EU, to review Europe’s security strategy, and that this matter is on the agenda for June’s European Council meeting. Defense and security is at the center of attention for EU members and institutions at the moment, when the priority is to maintain peace and security in the bloc, as well as outside EU borders, at a time when Russia has chosen confrontation instead of cooperation. The cornerstone of European security is the trans-Atlantic link, which must be taken into account in discussions on the development of Europe’s military capabilities. At the same time, he also made it clear that the idea of an common European armed forces would first need to have clear objectives, and that projects which duplicate NATO’s functions cannot be supported.
''I certainly do not support anything which would duplicate NATO’s functions, squander already limited resources and weaken NATO. There are many related decisions which the EU has not been able to agree on for many years, including the use of the EU Battlegroup. I think it would be more useful to come to a common agreement on Europe’s role around the world, admit to the security challenges we are facing and stop reducing our defense budgets,'' the Latvian defense minister emphasized.
However, Gobiņš does not agree with this, and points out that analysts have calculated that a common armed forces would allow Europe to save between EUR 300 to 400 billion. He also points out that in the current situation, not only is taxpayer money being squandered, but also Europe’s ability to counter the challenges it may face.
''And this is only because each country needs their own two or three divers, a diving school and so on. Why do we not offer our own Liepāja Diving School to our allies, where their divers could train?'' Gobiņš asks. ''Maybe we, together with the Spanish and Danes for example, could ensure the training of allied divers?''
However, former Latvian foreign and defense minister and current European Parliament Member Artis Pabriks has a similar view as Vējonis. Speaking about Juncker’s idea, Pabriks calls it a peculiar proposal, and asks whether the European Commission chief doubts NATO’s collective defense capabilities. The MEP believes that, overall, a majority of Europeans could emotionally agree to the necessity of a common foreign and defense policy, however, the idea of a common armed forces is still way off, even taking into account Russia’s aggressive activities against its neighbors and near Baltic borders.
Out of Latvia’s top officials, only President Andris Berziņš has not expressed a clear ''no'' to this idea, and pointed out that this matter is a debatable one. ''Overall, such a proposal is debatable. However, it must be emphasized that the foundation of Europe's security is the trans-Atlantic link, which must be taken into account when discussing the development of Europe's military capabilities. At the same time, we must continue cooperation and interoperability of the armed forces of member states,'' the Latvian president said.
Adding to what he said before, Gobiņš says that he is surprised that Latvian officials have brushed-off this idea. ''In this case, of course we must look whether there are no contradictions with NATO, so that there would be perfect interaction,'' he emphasized. ''The U.S. has on many occasions expressed hope that Europe would take more responsibility over its security, and not always rely on trans-Atlantic links and agreements. We are speaking about the whole of Europe, and not just separate member states. I believe that it would be beneficial for us for this to become something which supplements our trans-Atlantic cooperation formats. This is a very serious point which we must not just think about, but purposefully work to implement,'' Gobiņš said.
EU remains evasive
However, the European Commission itself is speaking evasively about the plan. Those EC representatives, including commissioners and vice presidents, who have been approached for comment, were reluctant to speak about Juncker’s idea, and claimed that the situation in Greece is a more actual problem for Europe at the moment. NATO has also been relatively quiet on this matter.
As the chairman of the Latvian Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee and the head of the Latvian delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly Ojārs Ēriks Kalniņš explains, this idea is not being discussed in the hallways of NATO, as the planned activities of NATO itself are seen as more important.
''We have not heard much else about this idea recently. I think that it just does not have the necessary support,'' said Kalniņš. ''The EU is speaking more about security in regard to Russia’s aggression, furthermore, there are countries that are not EU members, but are more frequently speaking about the necessity to strengthen security. Even Mogherini herself is speaking about a new security strategy. There are several matters that need to be solved at the moment. The Netherlands, for example, remains active in reminding about the necessity for the creation of a battlegroup. Now, we will most likely be discussing the EU’s role in defense and cooperation possibilities with NATO,'' Kalniņš points out, while at the same time reminding about Great Britain’s position on this matter. At the same time, he also mentions Sweden and Finland, and whether they would be prepared to participate in the implementation of these ideas.
Kalniņš also points out that NATO holds various meetings, conferences and seminars. One such meeting will be held in Armenia, where representatives from Azerbaijan will be invited to discuss the security situation in the region.
''We are truly not speaking about this idea of a common European army. Instead, we are speaking about ways to improve EU-NATO cooperation,'' he explained. ''A big opportunity has presented itself in strategic communications, where Latvia has a large role. I think that if NATO concentrates more on military cooperation, then Europe must think about the political and economic situation, as well as strategic communications, taking into account the activities of the Islamic State. Russia has moved ahead of us a bit in this area, but the processes within the EU have been set into motion, and we have convinced our colleagues on the necessity,'' he added.
More work should be put in for actual European unity
Meanwhile, Latvian Foreign Policy Institute researcher Andris Banka points out that Juncker should be thanked for expressing his idea on a common European army, which has reminded Europeans that, taking into account that many EU members are also NATO members, they should be substantially improving their military capabilities at a time when Russia is implementing an aggressive expansion policy. He points out that the EU has too often been balancing on its geo-political borders, while at the same time neglecting to strengthen its military capabilities. However, despite its position on many matters, Europe has been frequently been laughed at regarding its role in foreign policy.
''At a time when all eyes are on Ukraine, discussions on European defense are more than welcome, but just not in the way Juncker is offering,'' Banka believes. He explains that the idea on an independent and common European army, the way Juncker sees it, has been poorly formulated and on the border of being dangerous. According to Juncker, such an army would defend Europe’s values, which already at the root sounds like something which would be very difficult, taking into account the recent talk on maintaining European unity, which seems to be wavering.
''Only a handful of the 29 EU members are capable of agreeing on what actually are European values, and we are not even speaking about fundamental interests, which are frequently very complicated and even conflicting. Even if such an army is created, it should instead be aimed at defending national sovereignty and territorial integrity, instead of some kind of values which not all can even agree upon,'' he explained.
At the same time, Banka, similar to other experts and Latvian officials, points out that idea itself conflicts with the already functioning military alliance – NATO, which serves as Europe’s security guarantee. He also pointed out that the creation of such an alternative institution, which would be based on EU bureaucracy, would be wasteful. Furthermore, Banka asks would Europe be able to put together the necessary financing for the creation of such an army?
''If NATO members themselves cannot even ensure defense spending at 2% of GDP, such an alternative does not look very realistic. The U.S. has always been forced to subsidize Europe’s security and keep it under the defense umbrella. Because of this, Europe should instead concentrate on ensuring adequate defense spending within the current alliance. The creation of a new bureaucratic institution will not deter Russia’s ambitions. In the end, Juncker’s idea can be achieved by enhanced cooperation between Europeans and fulfilling their previous commitments,'' Banka emphasized.
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου