GEN-EU Force Will Not Need Nato

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Current News : One Thread

Electronic Telegraph

ISSUE 2133 Wednesday 28 March 2001

EU force will not need Nato, says French military chief By Carey Schofield and Michael Smith, Defence Correspondent

Actualités - Ministère de la Défense Common Foreign and Security Policy - European Union News - Foreign & Commonwealth Office Latest news - Nato THE head of the French armed forces has insisted that the EU rapid reaction force must be independent of Nato and have its own planning staff. Gen Jean-Pierre Kelche, France's Chief of Defence Staff, said the force would be declared operational by the end of the year even if agreement was not reached with Nato. He also said that France saw a strengthening of EU military capability as a way of shifting the balance of power within Nato away from America and towards Europe.

His comments will cause anger and concern in both Washington and London. Talks between Nato and the EU on how the new force will be controlled are deadlocked over demands by Turkey, which is not a member of the EU, for a bigger say in operations.

However, Gen Kelche told The Telegraph: "We have our own timetable. If everything is blocked in Nato it is not our fault. It is clear that by the end of this year the EU must declare that it has an operational capability."

He rejected last month's claim by Tony Blair, in an address to the Canadian parliament, that the EU force would have "no separate military planning structures". It must have its own planning staff, Gen Kelche said. "European politicians need to know what is going on. They need to be able to select options and then conduct operations. Why should we have to go through Nato?"

He stressed that France was fully committed to the transatlantic alliance but said the balance of power needed to be changed and France saw the new force as a way of doing that. "If Europe becomes more serious about improving its capabilities, it will earn the right to greater influence within the alliance."

However, he poured scorn on the alliance's desire to retain "a right of first refusal" over the use of European troops allocated both to Nato and to the new force. "There is no question of a right of first refusal. If the EU works properly, it will start working on crises at a very early stage, well before the situation escalates. Nato has nothing to do with this. At a certain stage the Europeans would decide to conduct a military operation. Either the Americans would come, or not."

As with Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, his British equivalent, Gen Kelche could not make such controversial comments without knowing that his views reflected those of his political masters and in particular President Chirac. France's insistence that the force must have a separate planning staff and the attitude to Nato and the Americans will infuriate President Bush. It will also embarrass Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, who appears before the Commons select defence committee today to try to allay fears over how the force will work.

Concerns that it may be far more independent of Nato than Britain and America would wish were heightened this week with the appointment of a Finnish general as the EU's chief military adviser. Finland is not only not in Nato but has a long tradition of neutrality. Even Gen Gustav Haggland admitted he was "very surprised" to be chosen over his colleagues from Nato countries.

Britain has repeatedly sought to play down the role of the new rapid reaction force, giving the impression that it would be no more than a European extension of the Nato alliance. Mr Hoon and Mr Blair insist that it would not have its own planning staff, that on any major operation it would be controlled by Nato, and would never be allowed to become a European army.

Mr Hoon said last night: "The new EU arrangements will complement and strengthen Nato. The EU will not divert resources from Nato, duplicate its arrangements, create separate military structures, or conduct operational planning."

Gen Kelche appeared to disagree. He admitted that Europe was "not yet a mature military power" and would need America's help on some types of operations. But he added: "Later, we must be able to act alone."

He risked further irritating the Bush administration by ridiculing US plans for a missile defence shield and suggestions that it could be extended to cover Europe. He asked: "To do what? What is the threat? Would it work? Could it be bypassed? Even on the threat, there is no common view. There is a distinction between a risk and a threat. A threat encompasses both risk and hostile intention. This distinction is lost on the Americans. For them, any risk is a threat."



-- Anonymous, March 28, 2001

Answers

mornin` Maggie,

this just burns my ....well, you know! what arrogant fools, eh? wonder if those awful, paranoid Americans will be welcome to save their butts [again] when Germany and Russia team up and come down on them again? [to be a live event on the future netwrork]

-- Anonymous, March 28, 2001


It seems, in some ways so odd to see the pieces of the puzzle going together before your eyes. EU coming together, more and more.

-- Anonymous, March 28, 2001

Moderation questions? read the FAQ