EU on the offensive about defence by Daniel Keohane
EU on the offensive about defence
by
Daniel Keohane
Published
22-28 July 2004
Despite a large budget, the EU's defence lacks coordination. Its new
agency could change that, writes Daniel Keohane
The 25 EU governments
spend roughly €160 billion on defence, second only to the US which spends
€330bn. On paper, that amount of money should be enough to cover Europe's
defence needs. But despite their considerable financial resources, Europeans
do not have nearly enough useful equipment or professional soldiers, because
they spend defence money ineffectively.
Too much European
cash is wasted on conscript troops and outdated equipment. The US has more than
200 long-range transport planes that can carry the heaviest loads. In contrast,
EU countries have four such planes all of which are used by the UK. Even
allowing for the fact that Europeans do not have nearly so many global commitments
as the US, that number is unacceptably low.
No single European country can afford to buy or develop every conceivable category
of weaponry. Governments, therefore, have to combine their resources to acquire
major new capabilities. But the record for multinational defence in Europe is
poor: attempts have often been dogged by delays and budget overruns. For example,
the first deliveries of the Eurofighter jet a four-country venture
arrived in 2003, ten years after the original target date. It therefore follows
that governments need to improve how they cooperate on purchasing and developing
weapons systems.
To improve their defence performance, on 12 July governments finalized the details
of a new EU defence agency, tasked with encouraging the member states to boost
their military capabilities.
All EU members may join the agency, which will start work by the end of 2004
and focus on harmonizing military requirements, coordinating research and development,
and encouraging convergence of procurement procedures. Javier Solana, the EU's
high representative for foreign and security policy, will head the 80-person
agency. The agency will not have a procurement budget, so it will not buy equipment
nor manage multinational programmes. Instead, it will provide political guidance
to all the existing armaments-related institutions in Europe and ensure they
work together more efficiently. The new agency will need to work closely with
NATO. Both NATO and the EU are trying to improve European military capabilities
and it is important that they work together in a mutually reinforcing way.
Another organization the agency will work closely with is Bonn-based OCCAR (the
Organization for Joint Armament Cooperation), a five-country organization that
brings together Belgium, the UK, France, Germany and Italy. OCCAR will not form
part of the agency, since its membership and that of the new defence agency
will not coincide. Its key task is to bring about more efficient management
of multinational armaments programmes. Its first major programme is the seven-country
A400M transport plane, built by Airbus, and the first deliveries are expected
in 2009. The defence agency should also promote the integration of Europe's
defence markets. Governments have allowed some cross-border consolidation in
the defence sector, which has led to the creation of transnational companies
such as the Franco-German-Spanish EADS (the European Aeronautic Defence and
Space company).
But the European defence market, unlike the single market for commercial goods
and services, remains fragmented. Estimates state a single defence market would
save Europe some e6 billion per year. The six main European arms-producing countries
signed the so-called Letter of Intent in 1998. This was supposed to make it
easier for companies such as EADS to operate in those six markets and simpler
for those governments to organize joint projects such as the A400M. But the
Letter of Intent has not had much impact. The European Commission would like
to take up this issue and is preparing proposals to open up Europe's defence
market. However, the main arms-producing governments are reluctant to give regulatory
power to the Commission, in order to protect their defence markets. Thus, a
single defence market remains some way off.
But perhaps the most important role the new agency could play is a political
one. EU governments have signed up to a new 'headline goal'
a list of capability commitments that governments have agreed to meet by 2010.
This requires member states to acquire assets, such as transport planes, to
increase their military prowess. The agency will evaluate and report annually
on member- state progress towards meeting those commitments.
If those reports were made public, the agency could then 'name and shame'
those member states that are holding up progress and put them under political
pressure to improve their performance. In short, if the EU agency does manage
to improve European cooperation in armaments, the beneficiaries would be a more
competitive defence industry; armed forces that would get badly needed military
equipment at a better price, and; taxpayers who would get better value for money.
Daniel Keohane
is research fellow at the Centre for European Reform, an independent think-tank
based in London. www.cer.org.uk