| Author (Person) | Beatty, Andrew |
|---|---|
| Series Title | European Voice |
| Series Details | Vol.11, No.41, 17.11.05 |
| Publication Date | 17/11/2005 |
| Content Type | News |
|
Date: 17/11/05 In a back-handed compliment about the state of European defence, the then NATO secretary-general George Robertson famously described Europe as a "flabby giant", rather than the mere military pygmy it was often thought to be. Almost a year after Robertson's jibe, the EU announced a move that it hoped would trim some of that flab by increasing co-operation on military spending. In July 2004, the EU created the European Defence Agency (EDA) as an offshoot of the Council of Ministers, to provide some 'added value' for military spending across the EU. The aim was to get more bang for the buck, from a leaner, more streamlined procurement policy. Today, more than a year on, with the vast majority of defence spending still directed at and through national projects, the agency is frequently criticised for being ineffective and for not pushing member states hard enough towards co-operation. In the agency's defence, some argue that it has an inadequate budget (EUR 20 million a year) and too few staff (fewer than 80) to have any major impact. Whatever the reason, despite collective spending of around EUR 160 billion a year and despite France, Germany, Italy and the UK being among the biggest military spenders in the world, Europe as a whole is still struggling to stop the gap in capabilities compared to the US from widening still further. According to Mark Joyce, an expert on NATO at the UK's Royal United Services Institute, experiences in Robertson's own organisation could explain some of the EU's continued under-performance. "The agency faces many of the same problems that NATO has faced in its transformation agenda," he said. "[The agency] faces very high expectations with very limited ability to take initiatives in its own right." According to Joyce, after 40 years of grand strategic debates NATO still does relatively little in terms of common hardware procurement. NATO's fleet of AWAC surveillance and command and control planes is the exception rather than the rule. Similarly the EDA has had trouble convincing member states to pool efforts, even when, it argues, doing so would be "safer, cheaper and better". This year the EDA is trying to convince member states to harmonise armoured fighting vehicles and if possible to use one type of vehicle, allowing different EU contingents on the same mission to exchange parts and work more easily together. So far member states have been reluctant. Part of the reason may be economic. Although not covered by the EDA's latest efforts, the choice of tanks is instructive. The UK government favours the Challenger II tank, made by UK giant BAE Systems while France favours the Leclerc tank made by the state-owned defence firm Giat Industries. Both are major employers in the respective countries. On Monday (21 Nov- ember) the EDA will adopt a code of conduct on defence equipment procurement, Although it is voluntary, the agency hopes that with most of the member states likely to sign up, buying decisions will be more transparent, discouraging states from picking the national champion as a matter of course. Another problem the EDA faces is NATO itself. The ongoing debate over the compatibility of NATO and the EU has made some member states reluctant to push ahead with moves towards common EU defence. While France increasingly sees the EU as the main instrument for European security, many of the new member states do not. According to Joyce, in the end, like NATO, the work of the EDA and its success in achieving its goals largely depends on the goodwill of the member states. But the EDA has had some impact in changing attitudes. "Its principal value is in its permanent staff. It is useful that there are people waking up every day thinking about this," he said. The EDA itself hopes that by acting like a mirror, showing the member states what is going on across the Union, it can make them a little more self-conscious about that collective flab. Military expenditure US EUR 398bn China EUR 30.2bn (official) - EUR 72.6bn estimated France EUR 41.8bn UK EUR 40.4bn Germany EUR 30.5bn Italy EUR 25bn Russia EUR 16.6bn India EUR 12.8 Source: SIPRI Author takes a look at the European Union's attempts to increase co-ordination of Member States' military spending and the work of the European Defence Agency, which was set up in July 2004 for this purpose. Article is part of a European Voice Special Report, 'Defence'. |
|
| Source Link | Link to Main Source http://www.european-voice.com/ |
| Related Links |
|
| Subject Categories | Business and Industry, Security and Defence |
