European defence: hidden agendas?
Topic
Country/Region
01 March 2001
According to International Herald Tribune writer John Vinocur there is hardly a strict consensus between Germany, France and Britain about how the “decision making capacity” of the common European defence force will evolve. Without this capacity “our undertaking makes no sense” (French Defence Minister Richard). The essential ambiguity in the project is that each of the European countries have different strategic motives.
As to the British position on the distance such a project would create between America and NATO, British defence expert Charles Grant has declared that “Britain may be disingenuous”. In the view of Grant, and his fellow strategic experts Gilles Andreani (France) and Christoph Bertram (Germany) in their book Europe's Military Revolution, Europe must be autonomous in defence matters because “[she] has to learn to develop the mentality of the major power which she could become”. Since European defence resources are only now developing a European force the EU requires NATO assets for the period of the next ten years. But in the long run “autonomy should become a reality” and the US should use the long transition period to adapt NATO so that Europe can become a more equal partner.
The International Herald Tribune observes that no one in the governments of Britain, Germany and France talks about the issue publicly in this way. But “a strong case can be made that this is the direction pointed to by the EU's explicit goal of military and diplomatic integration.” According to the newspaper all three leading European players have different motivations in moving ahead with the European force. Britain wanted, being outside the eurozone, to create an ambitious undertaking at the centre of Europe. Germany needed, in light of its history, full inclusion in an integrated foreign and security policy but with a continuing American guarantee as a “safeguard against the resurgence of rivalries in Europe” (Karsten Voigt of the German Foreign Ministry). France sees defence as the most hopeful area to assert its international influence.
Before long these differences could grow into contradictions. Francois Heisbourg, a professor at the Institut des Etudes Politiques has already spoken of “Nice: A Diplomatic Suez”.
International Herald Tribune 9.4.01.