EU Combined Military Thread
- The Armchair Soldier
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1756
- Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
- Contact:
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
Some points in that article:
"
“Those that exist have never been tested,” Camporini said about EU battle groups, and it is true. To such an extent that even some framework nations (for a battle group that is stood up for a rota period) have now got their parliaments questioning the value for/ waste of money in doing it all. What have we had so far:
- democratic elections in the not so Democratic Congo?
- a land dispute in the Sahel ( a climatology crisis that has turned violent along ethnic lines; why is this a EU problem?)
... and that's it, so far
"Camporini said the military cooperation deal struck by the UK with France in 2010 was emblematic of the UK approach to European defense."
- how is France different?
- both saw a need and acted on it (very slowly, though: to bypass any bureaucracy and political haggling/ vetoing in cases where national interests require swift action)
“The treaty clearly stated it was not to be extended to other countries. When a few months later as Chief of Staff I met in a ‘quad’ format my colleagues from France, Germany and UK, [then-Chief of the Defence Staff for the UK] Gen. [David] Richards and [then-Chief of the Defense Staff for France] Adm. [Edouard] Guillaud were really embarrassed to have to admit to this," Camporini said.
- well, that is only because they are made to wear so many hats simultaneously
[...]
If Europe does now create a military capability, it will lack a British contribution, but Camporini said declining UK capabilities meant that was no longer a problem.
- err, the so-called multinational division in A-stan was coordinated by whom?
“If anyone had proposed building a European capability in 1999 without the UK, I would have said they were crazy, but during the last few years, UK governments have been greedy with the peace dividend and they gave up their sea projection capability, which they will not get back before their new carriers arrive,”
- both parts of the statement are true, but through two thirds of the coming decade that capability will be unmatched in Europe
"
“Those that exist have never been tested,” Camporini said about EU battle groups, and it is true. To such an extent that even some framework nations (for a battle group that is stood up for a rota period) have now got their parliaments questioning the value for/ waste of money in doing it all. What have we had so far:
- democratic elections in the not so Democratic Congo?
- a land dispute in the Sahel ( a climatology crisis that has turned violent along ethnic lines; why is this a EU problem?)
... and that's it, so far
"Camporini said the military cooperation deal struck by the UK with France in 2010 was emblematic of the UK approach to European defense."
- how is France different?
- both saw a need and acted on it (very slowly, though: to bypass any bureaucracy and political haggling/ vetoing in cases where national interests require swift action)
“The treaty clearly stated it was not to be extended to other countries. When a few months later as Chief of Staff I met in a ‘quad’ format my colleagues from France, Germany and UK, [then-Chief of the Defence Staff for the UK] Gen. [David] Richards and [then-Chief of the Defense Staff for France] Adm. [Edouard] Guillaud were really embarrassed to have to admit to this," Camporini said.
- well, that is only because they are made to wear so many hats simultaneously
[...]
If Europe does now create a military capability, it will lack a British contribution, but Camporini said declining UK capabilities meant that was no longer a problem.
- err, the so-called multinational division in A-stan was coordinated by whom?
“If anyone had proposed building a European capability in 1999 without the UK, I would have said they were crazy, but during the last few years, UK governments have been greedy with the peace dividend and they gave up their sea projection capability, which they will not get back before their new carriers arrive,”
- both parts of the statement are true, but through two thirds of the coming decade that capability will be unmatched in Europe
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
Clearly the force would be an equal opportunity employer and the Germans would opt out from making the ladies' boots as the Spaniards are in fact making them so much better (even Italy can't compete, and will be given something in compensation... for the sake of the troops I hope it will be the daily rations).arfah wrote:What happens when a national defence manufacturer wins more than its fair share of defence contracts?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
I'd have thought that the biggest problem with a combined EU military is that the decision to use it would rely on agreement between the Council of Ministers. That said, a trio of 80,000 tonne EU carriers by mid-century is a nice idea.
- GibMariner
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1351
- Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
Jean-Claude Juncker again pushing for a joint EU military in his "state of the union" address: http://news.sky.com/story/jean-claude-j ... t-10577421
Follows moves by Germany & France earlier this week with their joint paper. Read this article yesterday: https://euobserver.com/foreign/135041
Seems to me more like France using Germany and the rest of the EU to lend them a hand with their post-colonial African conflicts rather than a coherent strategy for EU defence.
Follows moves by Germany & France earlier this week with their joint paper. Read this article yesterday: https://euobserver.com/foreign/135041
Seems to me more like France using Germany and the rest of the EU to lend them a hand with their post-colonial African conflicts rather than a coherent strategy for EU defence.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
From the linked euobserver:
A new instrument to deal with the southern border of Europe, beyond Frontex, should be welcomed (and SAS can continue doin what they are doing within Libya, where is the problem? The problem is "too little" not too much, and that includes the number of instruments available).
"France and Germany said they drafted it in the context of the recent Islamic State-linked terrorist attacks in Belgium, France, and Germany.
They spoke of military assistance to states in “key zones … where our common security is at stake”, but mentioned only the Mediterranean region and former French colonies in western and central Africa.
They gave as examples of model EU missions its operations in the sea near Libya and Somalia, in Mali and in Central African Republic, and they mentioned EU territorial integrity only in the context of military support for an EU coast guard and border guard force in order to help manage the migration crisis.
The paper did not mention Russia or Ukraine, which has been calling for EU peace monitors"
First, as for the bolded, neither NATO's nor Frontex's toes get trodden on.
Second, some crises/ situations are more geopoliical/ diplomatic than military in their nature, and therefore it is good to have instruments that have more legitimacy than the UN (all the banana republics and microatolls missing from membership, and therefore not skewing the vote), like in the mentioned Ukraine case OSCE, with its 57 member states and focus on Europe:
"Ambassador Ertugrul Apakan of Turkey was appointed Chief Monitor of the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine on 2 April 2014 by OSCE Chairperson-in-Office, Swiss Foreign Minister Didier Burkhalter.
Ambassador Apakan has had a longstanding diplomatic career, most recently as the Permanent Representative of Turkey to the United Nations (2009 – 2012)"
A new instrument to deal with the southern border of Europe, beyond Frontex, should be welcomed (and SAS can continue doin what they are doing within Libya, where is the problem? The problem is "too little" not too much, and that includes the number of instruments available).
"France and Germany said they drafted it in the context of the recent Islamic State-linked terrorist attacks in Belgium, France, and Germany.
They spoke of military assistance to states in “key zones … where our common security is at stake”, but mentioned only the Mediterranean region and former French colonies in western and central Africa.
They gave as examples of model EU missions its operations in the sea near Libya and Somalia, in Mali and in Central African Republic, and they mentioned EU territorial integrity only in the context of military support for an EU coast guard and border guard force in order to help manage the migration crisis.
The paper did not mention Russia or Ukraine, which has been calling for EU peace monitors"
First, as for the bolded, neither NATO's nor Frontex's toes get trodden on.
Second, some crises/ situations are more geopoliical/ diplomatic than military in their nature, and therefore it is good to have instruments that have more legitimacy than the UN (all the banana republics and microatolls missing from membership, and therefore not skewing the vote), like in the mentioned Ukraine case OSCE, with its 57 member states and focus on Europe:
"Ambassador Ertugrul Apakan of Turkey was appointed Chief Monitor of the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine on 2 April 2014 by OSCE Chairperson-in-Office, Swiss Foreign Minister Didier Burkhalter.
Ambassador Apakan has had a longstanding diplomatic career, most recently as the Permanent Representative of Turkey to the United Nations (2009 – 2012)"
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
Just to piss of junker a little bit more
No rivals to NATO: Britain will veto joint EU army as long as it’s in the bloc
UK will not allow the creation of a joint European army and does not want “a rival to NATO” to emerge, the Defense Secretary said. This remarkable warning came as EU leaders welcomed the move to set up common armed forces at the summit in Bratislava.
“That is not going to happen,” British Defense Secretary Michael Fallon told The Times on Saturday. “We are full members of the EU and we will go on resisting any attempt to set up a rival to NATO.”
Britain was not invited to the meeting given its souring relations with Brussels after the Brexit vote. The EU summit in Bratislava discussed,
among other issues, a set of measures meant to create and develop Europe’s own military force.
https://www.rt.com/uk/359654-uk-block-european-army/
No rivals to NATO: Britain will veto joint EU army as long as it’s in the bloc
UK will not allow the creation of a joint European army and does not want “a rival to NATO” to emerge, the Defense Secretary said. This remarkable warning came as EU leaders welcomed the move to set up common armed forces at the summit in Bratislava.
“That is not going to happen,” British Defense Secretary Michael Fallon told The Times on Saturday. “We are full members of the EU and we will go on resisting any attempt to set up a rival to NATO.”
Britain was not invited to the meeting given its souring relations with Brussels after the Brexit vote. The EU summit in Bratislava discussed,
among other issues, a set of measures meant to create and develop Europe’s own military force.
https://www.rt.com/uk/359654-uk-block-european-army/
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
Doubt it, he knows there is a rapidly running down clock on the UK membership.JayDee wrote:Just to piss of junker a little bit more
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
As per muttbutt, this newly found enthusiasm must berather amusing to those who watch from the outside?JayDee wrote:Michael Fallon told The Times on Saturday. “We are full members of the EU and we will go on
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
- GibMariner
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1351
- Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
Michael Fallon: UK will oppose plans for EU army
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-374 ... ws_centralThe UK will oppose any attempts to create an EU army because it could "undermine" the role of Nato, Defence Secretary Sir Michael Fallon has said.
Nato "must remain the cornerstone of our defence and the defence of Europe", he said, ahead of informal talks with EU defence ministers in Bratislava.
Sir Michael said the UK was not alone in opposing a common EU defence policy.
European Parliament President Martin Schulz has said the UK would not have a veto over closer defence co-operation.
France and Germany are set to make the case for increased military co-operation at the informal meeting in the Slovakian capital later.
Speaking in Bratislava, Sir Michael said the UK "remains committed" to Europe's security despite the vote to leave the EU, and said the bloc needs to "step up to the challenges" of terrorism and migration.
"But we're going to continue to oppose any idea of an EU army, or an EU army headquarters which would simply undermine Nato.
"Nato must remain the cornerstone of our defence and the defence of Europe."
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
The formation of an EU Army would give the next US President an excuse to withdraw its remaining forces from Europe saying NATO is compromised. It is NATO that needs a serious shake up and reorganisation. The Treaty needs to be revised to lock all nations into supporting any nation attacked with no opt outs. The definition of being attacked needs to be revised and clarified as a matter or urgency.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
LordJim wrote:. The Treaty needs to be revised to lock all nations into supporting any nation attacked with no opt outs. The definition of being attacked needs to be revised and clarified as a matter or urgency
I think the first part (sentence) is OK; but the latter is a valid concern.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
https://www.thelocal.de/20161005/german ... s-aircraftFrance and Germany to share military facilities and aircraft
Germany and France announced plans Tuesday to share an air base and transport planes as part of a military shake-up in the wake of Britain's vote to quit the European Union.
The two countries signed an agreement with a view to sharing C-130J Super Hercules military transport planes, French Defence Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said in Paris.
His German counterpart Ursula von der Leyen, in Paris to sign the deal, told reporters both countries wanted to have the new arrangement in place by 2021.
France ordered four C-130Js from US company Lockheed in January.
Germany was looking to acquire between four and six of the same aircraft and to base them in France, said Von der Leyen. The two countries were looking at using an air base in Orleans, central France, she added.
A member of Le Drian's team said the idea was to make the planes operational for both French and German crew in a first for the two air forces.
This will be a combined SOF support unit. Talking to some folks in and around the German military the plan is to eventually also have helos there too.
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
......................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
Of course European industries are, they want the sole rights to build vessels for the entirety of Europe, keep their order books nice and full!
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
......................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.
- GibMariner
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1351
- Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
European Defence Agency finally gets a budget increase
http://www.janes.com/article/65534/euro ... t-increaseEuropean defence ministers agreed on 15 November to raise the European Defence Agency's (EDA's) budget after a six-year freeze.
The breakthrough came after London, for the first time, declined to veto the rise. All European Union countries except Denmark belong to the EDA.
The decision raises the agency's annual budget from EUR30.5 million (USD32.7 million) in 2016 to EUR31 million in 2017. "It was a symbolic but clear demonstration of support by all 27 countries, as we task the EDA with more work. The increase will be reflected in future years," Federica Mogherini, the EDA's head, told reporters after the decision.
- GibMariner
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1351
- Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
German lawmaker says Europe must consider own nuclear deterrence plan
More here: http://www.reuters.com/article/uk-germa ... SKBN13B1GOEurope needs to think about developing its own nuclear deterrent strategy given concerns that U.S. President-elect Donald Trump could scale back U.S. military commitments in Europe, a senior member of Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservatives said.
Roderich Kiesewetter, foreign policy spokesman for the conservative bloc in parliament, told Reuters that Germany could play an important role in convincing nuclear powers France and Britain to provide security guarantees for all of Europe.
"The U.S. nuclear shield and nuclear security guarantees are imperative for Europe," he said in an interview. "If the United States no longer wants to provide this guarantee, Europe still needs nuclear protection for deterrent purposes."
Kiesewetter's comments reflect grave and growing concerns across Europe about what Trump's election will mean for the United States' commitment to NATO and to providing a strategic nuclear deterrent against a potential attack by Russia.
In his campaign speeches, Trump repeatedly called for Europe to do more for its own defence and said Washington might not defend a NATO member that had not shouldered its fair financial share of the costs of the alliance.
He also praised Russian President Vladimir Putin despite his annexation of Ukraine's Crimea region in 2014 and his intervention in Syria, where Russian air strikes have killed many civilians as well as insurgents.
Kiesewetter said he was not reassured by President Barack Obama's comments on Monday that Trump would maintain core strategic relationships, including with NATO.
"That's all fine and good, but we have to measure Trump by his actions," Kiesewetter said. "Europe must start planning for its own security in case the Americans sharply raise the cost of defending the continent, or if they decide to leave completely."
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
Fail to see the connection?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
The time has come to explain to our partners and the services of the European Commission that the first imperative of a government is to ensure the protection of the property and people who live on its territory. France must therefore explain, gently but firmly, to Brussels and to Germany, that it is thus and not otherwise. There is a very simple way for us to respect the budgetary treaties: getting defense spending out of the Maastricht criteria. This is the time or never to demand it.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
Sensible enough, but, to the Commission, and most of the political class across Europe, the first imperative is to protect and promote The Project. It's because of this view that we now have the unravelling of The Project...with possibly more votes against the establishment position on December 4th...Frenchie wrote:The time has come to explain to our partners and the services of the European Commission that the first imperative of a government is to ensure the protection of the property and people who live on its territory. France must therefore explain, gently but firmly, to Brussels and to Germany, that it is thus and not otherwise. There is a very simple way for us to respect the budgetary treaties: getting defense spending out of the Maastricht criteria. This is the time or never to demand it.
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
https://euobserver.com/foreign/136091?u ... ign=bufferEU to propose joint defence fund
The European Commission is planning to propose the creation of a new fund for military procurement and research, as part of wider plans for an EU defence union.
The proposal, due out in Brussels on Wednesday (30 November) and seen by the Reuters news agency, says member states should pool money into a “European Defence Fund” that could be used to purchase items such as helicopters, warships, and drones.
Terrorist attacks in Belgium, France, and Germany have increased a sense of insecurity (Photo: Alice Latta)
It says participating states would be able to borrow from the fund to buy assets for their national militaries and would be able to offset their contributions from their EU budget targets
It also says the EU should lift a ban on using its existing budget, as well as using European Investment Bank lending, to pay for research into new technology, such as drones or cyber-defence, in a related European Defence Research Programme.
The European Defence Fund would aim to save €25 billion to €100 billion a year in procurement costs.
The EU could also allocate €90 million between 2017 and 2019 and up to €3.5 billion between 2021 and 2027 from its joint budget for the European research fund.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
That fund is a follow-on from EIB saying "non" to funding military kit projects (presumably leading to joint purchases by member nations, and thus saving them money - and OCCAR already exists as a "managing agent" for such prgrms); they are, though, quite happy to fund dual use, like satellites.
Funny (?) in a way as they were v keen to fund "co-prosperity" projects in the East, esp. in Russia, to cement the economic ties and market economy prevailing (yeah, that went well).
... now: why has the UK confirmed that we will retain our 18% in that institution even after Brexit?
Funny (?) in a way as they were v keen to fund "co-prosperity" projects in the East, esp. in Russia, to cement the economic ties and market economy prevailing (yeah, that went well).
... now: why has the UK confirmed that we will retain our 18% in that institution even after Brexit?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: EU Combined Military thread.
The reason why I opened the thread about NATO E-2As is because I think that something similar could be the way ahead for European defence cooperation. So, strategic transport ( no more C-17, but they could buy the surplus of A400M ), air-to-air refueling ( buying additional air tankers ), AWACS aircrafts and other similar force multipliers like RO-RO ships. Serving under joint EU command, with each participating country getting it's share of use ( something similar to NATO Strategic Airlift Capability )...
What do you think?
What do you think?
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…