UK, Germany and France battle over defence agency

THE launch of the EU's first agency dedicated to boosting armaments cooperation risks being delayed by a row between the three largest member states over how much flexibility it should have.

Ambassadors meeting in Brussels yesterday (26 May) were unable to make any progress on removing the obstacles to creating the European Defence Agency and have decided to refer the matter back for further discussions by foreign policy officials at the Council of Ministers.

Due to the wrangle it is doubtful whether the goal set by EU leaders of agreeing on the agency's formation by the beginning of next month can be realized.

“We are not getting closer to a solution,” said one EU official, attending the talks.

The UK and France, whose combined defence expenditure of more than €63 billion is the Union's largest, have been unable to reconcile their differences over the voting system that should apply to the agency's steering board. This is due to be made up of EU defence ministers, the agency's head (British official Nick Witney) plus a representative of the European Commission.

France is adamant that all decisions about the involvement of other countries - such as non-EU members of NATO - in the agency's work should only be taken by unanimity. Greece, which has anxieties about a possible role for its historical enemy Turkey, agrees as do some of the new EU entrants, which are worried about Russia's eventual involvement. Yet while the UK is fiercely fighting to keep national vetoes on foreign and security policy in the future EU constitution, it is leading the camp arguing that the agency's work should be subject to qualified majority voting. A British diplomat said its position is motivated by a desire to have “the agency work as effectively as possible”. Germany wants to limit the steering board's flexibility and autonomy, saying all decisions relating to the agency's budget and its programmes should be taken by the Council.Ireland's EU presidency has identified Berlin's position as the main factor that could prevent a deal by the end of June. The Irish have drafted a plan aimed at reconciling the concerns of France, Greece and Germany with the UK position. The paper, seen by European Voice, suggests the Council would issue guidelines to the steering board on its “overall and financial priorities”. The board could then take decisions by a majority requiring support from at least two-thirds of member states eligible to vote. But there would also be the possibility of applying an 'emergency brake'. Where an EU government, "for important and stated reasons of national policy", opposes a decision to be taken by a qualified majority, it could have the matter referred to the Council.One source said the presidency document had “been put into the mix, not necessarily as an ideal solution but as a basis for further work”. Defence is traditionally the preserve of national governments, yet a majority of states have signalled they believe the agency's job of improving fragmented cooperation in developing and procuring armaments would be hamstrung if some countries could wield the threat of a veto. But a French official defended his country's stance on involvement of non-EU states: “The agency should be a servant of the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy, so requiring unanimity for cooperation with third countries is logical.”