EUROPEAN DEFENCE: THE NEXT STEPS by Christoph Bertram, Charles Grant and François Heisbourg
October/November
2000 - CER BULLETIN, ISSUE 14
EUROPEAN DEFENCE:
THE NEXT STEPS Christoph Bertram, Charles Grant and François
Heisbourg
Last year, the
Kosovo air war highlighted the impotence of Europe's armed forces.The Americans
provided more than three-quarters of the bombs dropped, and most of the advanced
communications equipment. Whereas the European members of NATO spend about 60
per cent of what the US does on defence, their ability to deploy force in a
region such as the Balkans is a meagre fraction of the Americans'.
The Helsinki European Council of last December agreed on the "headline
goal" of a 60,000-strong Rapid Reaction Force. This represents a major
step forward, so long as the force is - as planned -deployable within 60 days
and able to operate for at least a year. Because of the need to rotate troops
in and out of the area concerned, this implies a manpower pool of around 200,000
soldiers. However, the fulfilment of the headline goal alone will not be enough
to ensure that Europe is truly capable of mounting autonomous military missions.
Europe also needs, for example, more command, control and communications systems,
and more capacity for moving men and equipment.
Furthermore, given the unceasing pressure on defence budgets, Europe needs to
find ways of delivering better value for money. Europe's governments should
therefore consider further, more radical options. In particular, they should
define the areas in which armed forces can be pooled without an excessive loss
of sovereignty, and then develop common capabilities in those areas.
The prospects of such an approach appear promising. For one thing, it is hard
to imagine that any major European country would wish to act alone in a military
operation outside its homeland. For another, there has been much convergence
among the armed forces of the major European countries, a process which is continuing.
Spain is establishing a professional army, while Italy has declared its intention
to do so. And Germany, following defence minister Rudolf Scharping's response
to the recent Weizsacker Commission, has at last decided to develop the capabilities
that are suitable for deploying troops outside the European Union.
The European Council has already proposed the establishment of an EU air transport
command. Such a scheme, which could be called "Eurolift", would make
a much bigger impact if most European countries purchased the same military
transport aircraft. This may happen, since Britain, France and Germany have
recently announced their intention to develop and buy the Airbus A400M. Joint
logistics, training and maintenance for these aircraft, along with the establishment
of a joint command, would enhance military efficiency and provide substantial
savings in an area that is crucial for the ability to send forces overseas.
Eurolift could also embrace sea transport.
Eurolift need not
provoke too many worries about national sovereignty. Each country would retain
ultimate control of its transport assets, and have the right to withdraw them
in the case of a national emergency; but these are likely to be few and rarely
long-lasting. In any case, transport operations are less politically sensitive
than combat missions. It should not be too much to expect the Europeans to achieve
as much integration in this area as NATO already has with its fleet of AWACS
early-warning aircraft.
A more sensitive common capability would involve the Eurofighter combat aircraft,
which will become the mainstay of the airforces of at least four EU countries
(Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain) for several decades to come. It is likely
that other EU countries will also buy the Eurofighter, which will be by far
the most costly weapons system in the European inventory. Thus any method for
reducing the life-cycle costs of the aircraft, that also boosted operational
efficiency, would be particularly desirable. In issue nine of the CER Bulletin,
Tim Garden and John Roper argued the case for integrating the training, maintenance,
logistics and command of the various Eurofighter squadrons as tightly as possible.
There is also the all-important human dimension. Europe's armed forces need
to learn to think in common if they are to act effectively in common. This calls
for the creation of a European Defence Academy, to provide a common educational
basis for the officers from the various EU countries. Such an academy would,
at minimal cost, promote the long-overdue convergence of defence policies, structures
and doctrines.
Of course, such initiatives will not in themselves give Europe the Common Foreign
and Security Policy to which its governments aspire. But the delivery of more
effective capabilities would contribute to the material basis for that ambition.
Along with the Rapid Reaction Force, these initiatives would help to establish
the sort of solidarites de fait which have traditionally proven so effective
in bringing Europeans together. They would also deliver better value for money,
which electorates and finance ministries expect of their defence ministries.
And by showing the Americans that the Europeans can and will do more for themselves,
as well as for their common alliance, they would help to establish the credibility
of a European foreign and security policy.
Christoph
Bertram is director of the Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik;Francois Heisbourg
is Chairman of the Geneva Centre for Security Policy. A longer version of this
article has appeared in both the FrankfurterAllgemeine Zeitung and in Le Monde.