Galileo – on Giant Leap for Europe

Europe’s Position in Security and Defence Issues –a Capacity to Act is Desperately Needed by Oliver Bruzek, Director International Markets, CAE, Stolberg (Rheinland)

Europe’s days of comfort are now certainly a thing of the past. For many decades the European Union in the fold or - depending on one’s view - the shadow of the super powers had plenty of time to attend to its own organisational development, the expansion of the economic performance of its member states and the shaping of a sustainable civil society. After the upheavals in the late 1980s it was again Europe that was able to benefit most from the changed political situation. The borders of the European Union have extended and the scope of economic prosperity and democratic social order has almost doubled, while the USA, as the only remaining super power, became a victim of hegemonic politics under the cloak of global democratisation and Russia was busy with the stabilisation of its own country and trying to find its future self-conception.

The new geopolitical facts The situation today is quite different. With the partly failed mi - li tary mission in Iraq, which has driven the country to its eco - nomic limitations, and one of the greatest financial crises in recent history, the USA will – at least in the next ten years –have to focus all its energy on consolidating its national finan - ces. After the bitter experience in Iraq most of the American people are war-weary and want their Administration to con - cen trate on the domestic affairs that concern them. On a glo - bal level the United States operations will be clearly more reserved than in the past. There is a growing understanding for the ne ces sity of closer cooperation and coordination with the European partners. The previous latent mindset as to the Euro - pean states - if necessary – “divide et impera” is changing towards a desire for strong allies and a single reliable partner on this continent. Thanks to its sheer geographical size, its energy-political resources and the economic performance that goes with that, Russia, on the other hand, is gaining in self-assurance and is in this self-concept calling for a reinstatement of status of a glo bal power. Russia’s position should not be underestimated. Against the background of the collapse of the former Soviet Union, which was not so long ago, some people, going by the winner’s rules, still tend to assume the natural subjugation of the loser of the Cold War as something quite normal. And it is in the end this characteristic style that has led to - and will always lead to - an inappropriate fierceness in any discussions. However, all this does not mean a return to a bipolar world order, alone for the reason that with China there is a third po wer with global importance also playing a part. In fact

Oliver Bruzek born in 1968 since 2008: Director International Markets, CAE (Stolberg) 2007 - 2008: Director General, Brain-World (Ulm) 2002 - 2007: Director Government Relations, EADS Defense and Security (Ulm) 1999-2002: Consultant Marketing, Euromissile (Paris) 1997-1999: Advisor on Defense- and Security Politics, German Parliament (Bonn) 1992-1997: Eurocorps, (Strasbourg) Author of various published articles and books, i.e. “Wörterbuch zur Sicherheitspolitik” with Bühl and Kujat (Hamburg, 2001)

in future it will be a case of defending regional interests on the one hand, and at the same time – with everyone cooperating –dealing with the challenges of globalisation, be it the ecological and economical challenges or the dangers of international terrorism.

Europe has to create new capabilities in Security and Defence Europe will have to learn that the possibilities of exercising influence on the developments in Russia or in China are limited. This will certainly be the case if Europe itself is in principle not capable of acting to its full extent. An effective European diplomacy – and this was and is without doubt one of the most effective weapons of ensuring the interests of our civil societies – can in the long run only be based on a plausible ability of assertiveness on Europe’s part. What is more important, however, is the fact that there is now a much slimmer probability of others extinguishing the fires on Europe’s forecourt, as was previously the case in various African states and during the Balkan conflict. When it comes to finding a common security and defence stra tegy the European Union will no longer be in position for de lay ing things, or indeed as in the Iraq conflict not reaching a common agreement at all. Special paths for individual states to gain a national advantage in the one or other case will have to be a thing of the past, if in the long run the Union does not want to lose both its strength and its credibility. It remains to be seen to what extent in future it will be possible to transfer national sovereignty to the EU from areas where, if we are to be honest, there has been no national independence for a long time, and

The most modern training center for simulation in Bückeberg (Germany) would be an example for EU-Simulation Centers.

certain scepticism is not out of place here. In the constellation we have today it would in any case be unforgivable if it were not possible to mobilise the right means to provide the capacity to act for such a vital interest. There are three essential criteria here: • All available resources must be mobilised. • Synergies must be created, as regards both systems and personnel. • The procurement and expansion of unavailable resources must not be directly focused opposed to Russia or another power, they have to present a potential for a securitypolitical and economic network.

How to close the helicopter EU/NATO gap? Any amount of examples could be specified here. The latest and perhaps the most severe example is the lack of transport helicopters within the European Union and NATO. Nowadays injured soldiers might die because they have to be transported out of operational areas by jeep instead of being flown out and receiving prompt medical service. The capacity foundation for future deployments necessary is completely jeopardised. There is no budget for new helicopters and the order situation with the manufacturers means that if at all possible they would not be available before 2015. And it is not just a question of a lack of material, the existing military commitment means that there are not enough pilots and other crew members. Various attempts to eliminate this lack of helicopters as soon as possible – or at least bridge the gap – have to date failed. The main reason for this is that up until now only the western helicopter industry has been taken into consideration, and we are still waiting for answers from that address. So, how can we find a way out of this calamity that will meet the demands of the armed forces, accommodate the rightful interests of the helicopter industry and, at the same time, take the basic political framework into consideration. A large number of Russian-design transport helicopters, mostly Mi-8 and Mi-17, are available in the newer member states of the European Union and NATO. However, some of them are grounded due to a lack of repair work and maintenance, and also their equipment does not meet with today’s standards as far as safety and operational capacity are concerned. At the same time they are the only aircraft available in these states. That these helicopters are not serviceable is really negligible in two respects. First, the gap could be closed with a refurbishment and upgrade to NATO and EU standards, which could be carried out relatively quickly. Second, after an appropriate training of pilots and other crew members, personnel would be ready for action.

The European Parliament has recognised this situation and has in the meantime not only taken note of the fundamental availability of these resources, but also called for the utilisation of these resources. No way was it only the economic dimension that the Parliament had in mind. In fact, if Europe were to do without these platforms it would also have to do without the willingness of the new Eastern European partners to take on the appropriate operations in the future and existing deployments and do without these well-trained pilots. Such a solution is of interest for both sides. While the European institutions and NATO see a prompt and cost-effective way of filling the gap within the planning of the corresponding missions, the countries, which only have Russian platforms at their disposal, see a possibility of achieving an integration of their own military operational capacities. Win-win situation for all involved certainly be possible.

Industrial cooperation with Russia in EU-Projects The global market leader for the simulation of civil and military aircraft CAE, has therefore proposed setting up a joint training and simulation centre for these helicopters not far from Pra - gue, and together with other partners ensuring an appropriate upgrade to a NATO standard still to be defined. In this venture CAE will be supported not only by the Czech government but also by other EU member states which also have Mi-17 helicopters and also by countries which have recognised that it is time to take action. The biggest worry for the sceptics is the regular availability of the necessary spare parts and the fear that

Russia could freeze the deliveries or licenses at short notice in the event of ‘special’ political developments. However, looking at it more closely this reservation is not sustainable since on the one hand it misappropriates not only the industrial intents of the Russian government but also on the other hand the political significance of such a cooperation. Just a short time ago President Putin declared the aerospace industry as a strategically important commercial sector for Russia, making it clear that on a long-term basis the Russian Federation wants to face up to the competition of the existing global players. To this end every effort necessary will be made from an industrial, technical and technological point of view, as well as on a commercial level. The Russians too are well aware that this cannot be achieved without technology transfer, a division of labour with regional and local partners and certainly not without cooperation. If we were to assume so, this would be tantamount to a negligent underestimation of the free-market capacities of that country. In the long run the Russian aerospace industry simply cannot work off its capacities in its domestic market, it will on a long-term basis have to rely on successful exports. A second aspect is just as important: in a phase in which the political relations between the West and the Russian Federation may develop one way or the other, both sides are aware that there is no alternative other than a continuing cooperation. The challenges of today are simply too global and can no longer be divided by national borders. The latest events in the Georgian conflict happened in the middle of the US presidential election campaign and this not only impacted the communication between the USA and Russia but also caused NATO to discontinue discussions in the NATO-Russia Council – a paradox insofar as such a council is virtually created for just such a situation, to continue discussions in such critical times. The apparent dead-end the two sides are stuck in can only be solved in two respects. On the one hand discussions on a political level: here the Europeans have found the right way in expressing their disapproval of the Russians’ course of action without ceasing communications. On the other hand, it will be the medium-term and long-term measures that for instance are anchored in a closer networking of industry and – even better – in the defence-industrial basis.

European Industries is willing to proceed The project of the Centre for Training, Simulation and Upgrade of Mi-17 helicopters accommodates these concerns. Of course the above mentioned reservations will also be fuelled by some western helicopter manufacturers who fear the competition from the Russian manufacturers. But again here the focus is on a very short-term observation that cannot be sustained on a long-term basis. In the first place this competition will in any case come sooner or later, and second, the enormous chances Russian sourced Mi17 Transport helicopter – Reforbishment and Training/ Simu - la tion could help to close EU/NATO helicopter gap at relatively short notice.

that will automatically arise when Russia does open up more for foreign products than is now the case will be suppressed. Having said that, there are western manufacturers who have recognised the chance such a cooperation can bring and who, alone for economic reasons, are willing to support the Czech centre. At the end of the day it is not just a case of which helicopter is flying, but also which technology has been used. In the past Europe has realised key projects of strategic importance: Galileo or the A-400M to name only two. A joint training centre for Mi-17 helicopters would be a further step in the right direction with similar strategic, economic and political significance, even if with another, namely a short-term objective. As to the European Union’s actual capacity to act in this respect there is no other alternative, and the soldier severely wounded in action will hardly be asking what make the helicopter is that is transporting him swiftly to the military hospital and saving his life. However, the loved ones of servicemen may well ask why not all resources were used to save the life of their son or husband.

Documentation

Report EP from 6 May 2008 on the development of the ESDP in 2007 Paragraph 24 “Welcomes the Franco-German heavy transport helicopter project, but is also aware of the complex reasons for the shortage of avai - lable and operational helicopters, mostly related to the high costs of flight hours and maintenance; invites the Council to explore possibilities designed to bridge the gap for the near future, either by a joint action or by supporting Member States in the refurbishing and upgrading of Russian-built helicopters as well as estab - lishing a helicopter training centre; urges the Member States to envisage an increase in defence expenditure for the purpose of being able to make efficient use of acquired helicopters;”