The European Security and Defence Union Issue 34 by The European-Security and Defence Union

ISSN 2192-6921

Independent Review on European Security and Defence

Volume NÂ° 34

The EU27 in a multipolar world Should the European Union learn the language of power?

The European Union needs to change dimension

Is the EUâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s foreign policy prepared for Brexit?

Jean-Dominique Giuliani, President Robert Schuman Foundation

Hilde Vautmans MEP, AFET Committee, European Parliament

www.magazine-the-european.com

Edition 1/2020

Editorial

The worldwide Coronavirus pandemic has reached Europe. We are afraid of how insufficient the medical precautions in some countries are and how unprepared the Union itself is in this civil security sector. Covid-19 is putting Europe to the test in a time when the global power situation is changing, and re-nationalisation is progressing. Only a sovereign European Union will overcome this crisis and be able to act in the future as a global strategic player. However, the worst case for the Union is now, and it must show that it is more than a conglomerate of nations. The medical situation is one aspect, but the Union also has to prepare for a shutdown of the worldwide economy and be prepared to help save the economy and industries in Europe and abroad. Globalisation will continue, but it has to be adapted to the lessons learned from this crisis. The Union has the chance to influence new rules for globalisation, taking into account its own global ambitions. What direction will the Union take in the future? Europe must strongly defend its interests and sovereignty, and it will be important not to confound tolerance with weakness. 2020 will be a decisive year for Europe and it could become a good one, if the Union with its Member States succeed in mastering the coronavirus pandemic. The policy of the new president of the Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, and her strategic objectives are trying to meet the urgent requests of citizens in European societies. They have the willingness to look for concrete answers to the most crucial problems of the population and the inescapable tasks in foreign, defence and security policy, but also in industry policy, the digital revolution and research. Strategies for migration and ecology are of utmost importance. The Commission must try more than it did before to reach people in

societies through adapted communications. The Union must reach the hearts of its citizens! In all these fields, the priorities are to consolidate the Union internally and protect it against external threats. Its first task is to Hartmut Bühl address how it can consolidate Europe internally: where do we need European common solutions and where should competences be transferred back to nations. The Union, together with its Member States, must make it clear that it will not become a playground for anti-global disinformation and the home of populists. The second task is more than evident: we must prepare Europe to be resistant to all external threats. Europe has to react to crisis situations through prevention and response. We need strong civil security and a competent European defence, not positioned against NATO but within it. Only a strong Union with internal solidarity and the means to secure peace for Europe, but also ready to engage globally, will meet the future. Our European Union is a club, and in every club, members have to follow rules. Without a superior authority setting a course and watching over them, the club will not function. Without the willingness of the Member States to cooperate and to share responsibilities, the Union will be a pile of junk. Ursula von der Leyen has the power to set the Union’s policy. She has decided, with her Commission, to make the Union more human and develop it into a political power and strategic actor. To achieve these objectives, she needs a lot of sensitivity, but also resoluteness and perseverance. This is her chance!

Photo: private, LISphoto.com

The Union put to the test

IMPRESSUM: The European − Security and Defence Union Headquarters: International Consulting 6, Rue du Château, F 28260 Berchères-sur-Vesgre (FR) E-Mail: hartmut.buehl@orange.fr Publisher and Editor in Chief: Hartmut Bühl, Berchères-sur-Vesgre (FR) Phone: +49/172 32 82 319 E-Mail: hartmut.buehl@orange.fr Deputy Editor-in-Chief: Nannette Cazaubon, Paris (FR) E-Mail: nannette.cazaubon@magazine-the-european.com

Editorial Assistant: Céline Merz, Linz a. Rhein (GE) E-Mail: editorial.assistant.esdu@gmail.com Translater: Miriam Newman-Tancredi, Castres (FR) and London (GB) Layout: Beate Dach, SpreeService, Berlin (GE) Advertisement & Sales: Andy Francis Stirnal, Berlin (GE) Phone: +49/175 6686 1543 Print: Polyprint GmbH (GE) © 2020 by International Consulting, France

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION Vol. No. 34

Content 3 6

13–40

MAIN TOPIC

Editorial, Hartmut Bühl News, Nannette Cazaubon

EU27 in a multipo A new role for the European Union?

8–12 In the Spotlight Brexit – what next?

Dr Gordan Grlić Radman, Zagreb Croatia’s EU chairmanship - a historic moment for the country Overcoming challenges through unity and strength

Sir Graham Watson, London The United Kingdom after Brexit Damage to the integrity of the UK Hartmut Bühl, Brussels/Paris Auld Lang Syne Will the UK accept EU standards?

The European Green Deal Documentation

Jean Dominique Giuliani, Paris Learning the language of power Change of dimension Dr Hans-Gert Pöttering, Berlin Europe and its external challenges in uncertain times Europe’s defence through a pillar in NATO Hilde Vautmans MEP, Brussels/Strasbourg Is the EU’s foreign policy prepared for the consequences of Brexit? Brexit is a historic mistake

Brexit and the changes in EU institutions Documentation

Interview with Jānis Garisons, Riga NATO is our security – Europe is our soul! It’s too early to bury NATO Dr Nadezdha Arbatova, Moscow The EU in a polycentric world: what next? A view from a Russian Europeanist Gerald Knaus, Berlin Hamster in the wheel: credibility and EU Balkan policy The need for change in the EU accession process Christina García Fernandez and David García Cantalapiedra, Madrid Climate change: a challenge for international security A cascade of uncertainty

The von der Leyen Commission 2019–2024 Documentation Photos (cover): © The_lightwriter, stock.adobe.com; © Charly Gallo MC (left); © European Parliament (right)

page 4: © Fabrizio, stock.adobe.com (left); © ktsdesign, stock.adobe.com

Content

olar world 28

41–53 Security and Defence

Interview with Helmut Sorge, Rabat/Marrakech Power play in the Middle East Europe’s missing influence

Europe as a global security provider

31 The Berlin Conference on Libya Documentation

Dr Rachel Suissa, Haifa Worldwide geopolitical changes and the role of Europe The last of the Mohicans

Towards a EU-ASEAN strategic partnersip Documentation

Hideshi Tokuchi, Tokyo EU-Japan Maritime Security Cooperation in East Asia Recovery of the regional balance of power Barry Desker, Singapore Competing strategic visions in the Asia-Pacific Changing relationships in the region Debalina Ghoshal, Brussels/Kashmir The India-China nuclear equation The nuclear threshold remains high

Interview with Mohamed Salami, Rabat The African CBRNe Masters – a high level training course Taking account of regional specificities Dr Hans-Peter Bartels, Berlin On the way to a Europe of Defence Striving for practical international cooperation Christian Cambon, Paris Europe’s strategic autonomy A precondition for European security

Nannette Cazaubon, Paris JEYRAN 2019 – a successful CBRN counter-terrorism excercise A field report from Uzbekistan

List of Authors 2019

The European – Security and Defence Union is the winner of the 2011 European Award for Citizenship, Security and Defence, and was awarded in 2019 the Jury’s Special Prize of the same competition. page 5: © Ingo Bartussek stock.adobe.com

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

CORONAVIRUS

The European Union has come up with a coordinated response to help tackle the current

Efforts to develop vaccines and treatments

crisis after the outbreak of COVID-19. The aim is to reinforce the public health sectors and

The funding of research and innovation projects

mitigate the socio-economic impact in the European Union. Commission President Ursula

aimed at finding a cure for Covid-19 is a vital part

von der Leyen has established a Coronavirus response team at political level to coordinate

of the European Unions coordinated response to

a European response to the pandemic.

the current worldwide Coronavirus crisis.

A European response to the pandemic

The European Commission has allocated €47.5 million for 17 research projects within Horizon 2020, the EU’s framework programme for research and innovation. The result of the 137 research teams will be shared to speed up the public health response. Researchers work on: • improving preparedness and response to outbreaks by developing better monitoring systems to prevent and control the spread of the virus; • rapid point-of-care diagnostic tests, enabling quicker and more accurate diagnosis; • new treatments, and • developing new vaccines. The Commission also issued a call for research proposals by the end of March focusing on developing treatments and diagnostics. It falls within the framework of the Innovative Medicines Initiative, which is a public-private partnership between the EU and the pharmaceutical industry (also funded through Horizon 2020). A €90 million total investment is expected – up to half coming from the EU budget and the rest from the industry. graphik: © European Union, 2020

> web https://www.imi.europa.eu/

CIDAN AWARD

A European prize awarded to our magazine Dear Readers, We are proud to share that on 26th November 2019, our Editorial Team was awarded the Jury’s special prize as part of the European Award for “Citizenship, Security and Defence”. They praised the quality of the articles and interviews that have enabled European citizens to better understand Europe’s defence and security issues and policies, and have shown the impact these policies can have on their daily lives. During the award ceremony in Berlin, our editorial team also had the honour of receiving a medal in the name of French President Emmanuel Macron. We are grateful to all our guest authors for making this magazine an international success! The European Award for Citizenship, Security and Defence rewards outstanding efforts towards promoting European citizenship, and awareness of European security and defence. The prize was first awarded in 2011, under the High Patronage of the President of the European Council to our magazine.

Our editorial team at the CIDAN award ceremony in Berlin, 26.11.2019 From the left: Céline Merz, Hartmut Bühl, Nannette Cazaubon, Alexa Keinert, Miriam Newman-Tankredi

photo: @ Marie Beeser?

The prize is organised annually by the association “Civisme Défense Armées Nation” (CiDAN), together with the European Interparliamentary Security and Defence Association.

> web https://cidan.org/home/

News

SECURITY & DEFENCE

EUROPEAN DEFENCE AGENCY

The Munich Security Conference 2020

The EDA appointed a new Chief Executive On the recommendation of EU High Representative/Vice-President Josep Borrell, who is the head of the European Defence Agency (EDA), the EDA

photo: EDA

Steering Board appointed Jiří Šedivý, former the defence minister of the Czech Republic, as the new executive director. Succeeding Jorge Domecq, he will take office in April 2020. Mr Šedivý earned his PhD in Political Science at Prague’s Charles University and his MA in War Studies of King’s College London. He has extensive experience in the political Opening of the 2020 Munich Security Conference

photo: © MSC/Kuhlmann

and defence domain: between 1999 and 2004, he was the director of the Institute

or fifty years the Munich Security Conference (MSC) has been a star of the international political calendar. 500 participants, including 30 heads of state and government and more than 100 foreign and defence ministers discussed this year a world that is forsaking what has been its credo until recent years: the alliance of the western world as an element of global stability. Never before have so many leading representatives from Asia and Africa been present. “Westlessness” was the keynote theme of the conference, that was held in Munich from 14th to 16th February 2020 under the skilled guidance of the MSC Chairman, the former diplomat Wolfgang Ischinger. The German President, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, set the tone for this year’s conference in his address. He warned of the danger of a breakdown in transatlantic relations and expressed grave concern over what he sees as a selfish and deliberate high-handedness replacing tried and tested rules and institutions and the long-standing traditions of American diplomacy. It was very soon clear to the conference participants that a predictable US foreign policy can no longer be taken for granted. This much emerged from the speeches of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Defence Secretary Mark Esper, who appeared fairly indifferent to European concerns. They were not able to make a convincing case that the USA is “the leader in transatlantic relations”. Both attacked the new strategic, military and economic enemy, the People’s Republic of China. Astonishingly, there was no mention in their speeches of the current American President. The French President, Emmanuel Macron, participated in the conference for the first time, his criticism of NATO being “brain-dead” in everyone’s mind. His offer to open a strategic dialogue with his European partners, in which French nuclear weapons would be included, aroused only limited interest. He stated that European strategic autonomy was the goal of French policy, to be incorporated into the political strategy of the new European Commission. There are still grounds for believing in the security umbrella of the USA. Many still see an opportunity for a rebound of NATO, as described by its Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg. One thing became very clear at the conference: both the USA and Europe are seeking to redefine their future roles. It is comforting that Europe, in considering its security policy, sees itself as a pillar of NATO, an alliance that is still very much alive. (ed/Hartmut Bühl)

of International Relations in Prague, assistant professor of International Relations at Charles University, Prague, and professor of European security at the University of New York in Prague. He played an important role in the Czech Republic’s accession to NATO, and during this period, he served as external adviser to President Václav Havel.

He became defence minister in 2006 and then served his country as deputy minister for European affairs (2007), NATO assistant secretary general for defence policy and planning (2007–2010), and the Czech permanent representative to NATO (2012–2019). On 1st September 2019, the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs appointed Mr Šedivý as the special representative for resilience and new threats. From 2016 to 2018 he was the president of the Berlin Security Conference (BSC). Jiří Šedivý has published several books on policy and security, and has regularly published articles in our magazine over the last 10 years.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

In the Spotlight

+++ EU Presidency +++

“A strong Europe in a world of challenges”

Croatia’s EU chairmanship – a historic moment for the country by Dr Gordon Grlić Radman, Minister of Foreign and European Affairs of Croatia, Zagreb

roatia’s presidency of the Council of the European Union comes at a challenging and complex time for the EU, faced with numerous internal and external challenges such as terrorism, security, cyber and hybrid threats, migration, conflicts in our neighbourhood, disinformation, and the rise of populism. It is important that we adapt and build resilience to these. The best way to succeed is by working together. The EU Member States can best overcome the challenges of the 21st century through unity and strength. The further development of capabilities and instruments for common action is the only way to strengthen the Union’s leading role as a global actor and partner.

Plenkovic said, “a more agile, coherent and outward looking European Union”, fit to proactively tackle all the challenges ahead. During our Presidency, we plan to focus on the areas where we feel that the EU can deliver the most, fostering a sense of unity, consensus and convergence. We shall strive to give further incentives to proposals and initiatives contributing to uniform and sustainable economic growth, increasing in convergence and strengthening the competiveness of the EU, promoting connectivity and enhancing the security of our citizens. We shall also continue to advocate the active role of the EU on the global scene and in its neighbourhood, especially our closest one in south-eastern Europe.

The priorities of our EU presidency

The EU as a strong global actor

Strengthening multilateralism, implementing the United With the motto “A strong Europe in a world of challenges”, Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals and there will be four overarching priorities to our programme: a promoting European values and interests remain the main Europe that develops, a Europe that connects, a Europe that points of reference for the Union’s external action. Its crediprotects and an influential Europe. bility in international relations is reflected in its responsible Within the framework of the fourth priority, “an influential Euapproach towards its own neighbourhood, to the east and rope”, Croatia’s presidency will concentrate its work on further south, as well as towards countries in south-eastern Europe. strengthening the EU as a united and strong global actor, partThe Croatian Presidency of the Council of the EU will strive for ner and security provider with multilateralism and a rule based a continued credible and consistent enlargement policy, as an international order at its core. The EU is, to us, an actor that investment in the stability and security is influential in international relations of the European continent. This will also and a leader in promoting fundamental strengthen the EU’s leading role in the values and the projection of peace and neighbourhood. security. It is also a partner that assists Dr Gordon Grlić Radman The role of the EU Presidency is very others in addressing global challenges has been the Minister for Foreign and Eurodear to us, not only because it means and threats. pean Affairs of the Republic of Croatia since leading the Council’s work, but most mid-2019. He was born in 1958 and studied importantly because it also represents Emphasis on the EU’s surroundings agriculture economics, and later international the success of Croatia’s own European The emphasis will be on stability and relations, at the University of Zagreb where he path. As a country that has suffered security in the EU’s surroundings. obtained a PhD in 2007. Mr Radman started war and aggression, we have managed Here the work will focus on supporthis professional career in business in Switzerto recover, reform and develop to the ing stability, security, resilience and land (1984–1991). He then served in different point that we will take leadership of the reform efforts. In this regard, we shall embassies and became Ambassador of Croatia EU Council. This makes us particularly be working on advancing enlargement to Hungary in 2012 and in 2017 Ambassador proud. Being at the helm of the EU for as an investment in the security and to Germany. Since 2017, he has been the the first time will be an opportunity for stability of Europe and the resilience President of the Danube Commission seated Croatia to shape, jointly with our partof Western Balkan countries. During in Budapest. ners, as Croatia’s Prime Minister Andrej Croatia’s presidency, we will organise

+++ EU Presidency +++

and a leader in promoting fundamental values and the projection of peace and security.”

an EU-Western Balkans Summit in May 2020 in Zagreb. This socalled enlargement summit is even more important because we will define what we want in the next decade – the method, the pace, the political and security messages we wish to send to south-eastern Europe. Croatia will advocate for a revitalisation and strengthening of the EU’s prospects for south-eastern Europe, based on complete fulfilment of the membership criteria. Furthermore, our priorities lie in the EU Neighbourhood – to the east and south. Here we intend to work on strengthening cooperation with Eastern European partners in the framework of Eastern Partnership policy. The Eastern Partnership summit during our Presidency will be dedicated to defining post-2020 priorities and objectives. As a Mediterranean country, we place particular emphasis on security and stability in the southern Mediterranean region, Africa and the Middle East. We believe it is important that the EU joins efforts with international partners to resolve crises and address the challenges in these regions. The Presidency believes it is important that the EU engages in addressing the consequences of crises and conflicts through our support to peaceful, inclusive and democratic solutions, sustainable development, as well as to humanitarian, stabilisation and reconstruction efforts. Particular emphasis should be put on addressing the challenges of migration, countering terrorism, radicalisation and violent extremism. Strengthening international partnerships We shall continue to work on promoting transatlantic relations and strengthening the partnership with North America. With regard to Asia, efforts will continue to improve connectivity in all its aspects – economic, infrastructural, digital, and human. Work on the strengthening and deepening of the Alliance with Africa has to continue, especially when it comes to addressing common threats and challenges, including migration. The focus should be on youth. Our presidency will also work

Photo: Foreign Affairs Ministry, Croatia

see the EU as an actor that is “Weinfluential in international relations

on strengthening strategic partnerships with Latin America. Here we expect that particular attention will be given to helping countries by addressing the migration pressure.

Security and defence When it comes to security and defence, we have placed our priorities broadly around four areas. First, work should continue on further implementation, consolidation and coherence of security and defence initiatives (PESCO, CARD, military mobility, EDF), while ensuring complementarity with NATO. Second, we lay particular emphasis on further strengthening EU-NATO cooperation, especially by working together with partners in the Western Balkans and developing their capacity building to be able to withstand threats and challenges on their own. Third, we believe that efforts to strengthen the EU’s defence industry and the development of a European defence technological and industrial base must continue. Here we put particular emphasis on strengthening the role of SMEs and research capabilities. And last but not least, we plan to continue work on further strengthening the civilian Common Security and Defence Policy, to enable the EU to respond to crises in a more capable, efficient, responsive and integrated way.

Enhance dialogue and avoid divisions Croatia’s priorities have been attentively chosen to address the challenges the European Union is facing today. In today’s complex setting, Croatia is confident in taking an important role at the helm of the joint European project in further building a strong Europe in a challenging world. Croatia is dedicated to conducting its presidency as a mediator and builder of compromise based on shared values and respect for mutual interests between Member States: by enhancing dialogue, promoting consensus, and seeking compromise rather than creating divisions. > web https://eu2020.hr/

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

In the Spotlight

+++ Brexit+++

Damage to the integrity of the UK may be the greatest risk

The United Kingdom after Brexit

by Sir Graham Watson, Managing Director, Global Policy Advocacy, Bagehot Ltd, London

Sir Graham Watson is the Managing Director of Global

aking up on Monday 3rd February, as business resumed after the UK left the EU on Friday 31st January, I felt no different. My wife is Italian. My work is mainly in Brussels. Like other Brits who have the opportunity, we have rearranged our lives to cope with whatever challenges Brexit brings. We are aware, however, that for many UK citizens less fortunate than we are, particularly the educated young, there is a tangible sense of loss.

Policy Advocacy, Bagehot Ltd, London. Born in 1956 in Scotland, he graduated from the University of Edinburgh in 1979 with a Bachelor Photo: private

of Arts in modern languages. He first worked as an interpreter before

starting work in 1988 with HSBC in London and Hong Kong. From 1994 to 2014, Sir Watson served as a MEP in the European Parliament and he was elected as President

Might the UK tire of Boris and Brexit? It is hard to find a historical parallel for Brexit. Probably the closest one comes is 1649, when England chose to decapitate King Charles l and become a republic. There followed eleven years of bloody autocratic rule under the self styled ‘Lord Protector’ Oliver Cromwell before the people tired of him and restored the monarchy. Will the UK tire of Boris and Brexit? Much will depend on the state of the nation’s economy. A slow decline, widely predicted, may lead to the English frog being boiled alive before it senses the danger of the slowly heating pan of water. The economic damage has already been substantial, witnessed not least in the devaluation of the sterling. The Bank of England – whose Canadian Governor, Mark Carney, is leaving to deal with climate challenges for the UN – predicts that economic growth will be two digit percent lower than if the UK had remained a member. British business, generally, is worried. Investors are holding back. But the damage to the integrity of the United Kingdom may be greater. In Northern Ireland and in Scotland, both of which voted to remain, the speed of development of the debate about how to secure a return to the EU fold has been breathtaking. In the former case, most likely through reunification with the Republic of Ireland, in the latter, through independence and an application to rejoin. For the UK to leave the EU on the basis of so divisive a referendum result

to find an historical paral“ItlelisforhardBrexit. Probably the closest one comes is 1649, when England chose to decapitate King Charles l and become a republic.”

of the European Liberal Democrat party in 2011.

was always going to be a brave decision. Perhaps the greatest damage could yet be the global political ramifications. The American historian Robert Kagan, in his new book “The jungle grows back”, points out how active US and UK involvement in maintaining the institutions of global democracy which they did so much to create has ensured their survival. There is no certainty their strength will hold if both countries pull out. A Europe in which England’s choice were mirrored by Matteo Salvini’s election in Italy next year and Marine Le Pen’s in France the year after would look a very different place.

The future of the UK’s alliances As Ian Bond of the Centre for European Reform reminds us in a timely contribution, nobody works in the UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office for long without hearing the dictum of 19th century Conservative Foreign Secretary Lord Palmerston: “We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow”. Palmerston may have treated Britain’s relations with other states as ephemeral, but from the beginning of the Cold War until the Brexit referendum, the UK treated the preservation of its alliances as one of its perpetual interests. The UK’s current ‘integrated security defence and foreign policy review’ will “reassess the nation’s place in the world, covering all aspects of international policy from defence to diplomacy and development”. This could lead to a radical reshaping of the UK’s approach to its relations with other European powers. The ‘common interests’ and ‘close alignment’ which have dominated debate across the Channel in recent weeks may turn out to count for little. Thus is the task of those who believe that the English Channel is narrower than the Atlantic Ocean doubly important.

+++ Brexit+++

Will the British government accept EU standards?

Auld Lang Syne

by Hartmut Bühl, Publisher and Editor-in-Chief, The European – Security and Defence Union, Brussels/Paris

hortly after the memorable vote on Brexit, officialising the withdrawal of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the Union at the European Parliament in Strasbourg on 30th January 2020, the deputies felt deep grief. They felt lost, and when some Scottish deputies started singing “Auld Lang Syne”, the other MEPs joined in the chorus. They sang together, emotional, and hugged each other. Tears trickled down their cheeks. A memorable event indeed.

The challenges to face In the meantime, the Union Jack has been rolled up and life in Brussels and Strasbourg goes on. Detailed discussions on how the United Kingdom will leave will entail hard and fair negotiations. There will be two challenges for the European Union in the next ten months of negotiations on the conditions of future cooperation between the UK and the European institutions. The Union has to devise a new and positive relationship with the United Kingdom and at the same time foster “internal” cohesion within the Union. Will this be possible without a “positive compromise” with London? This is how Boris Johnson, the British Prime Minister, has described the position of his country, hoping to extract from the negotiations maximum benefit for the UK, and putting pressure on Brussels by threatening to implement a “no deal” hard Brexit at the end of 2020. This is precisely what the Union does not want. Negotiations to prepare Brexit were difficult enough, but defining a smooth path to the future relationship in only ten months will be even more difficult. The crucial question is whether the British government will accept current EU standards, which are non-negotiable for the 27.

post-Brexit trade negotiations, which started at the beginning of March. As the BBC reported, Frost confirmed the British position on 18th February in Brussels. He underlined in a speech to students and academics that the UK “must have the ability to set laws that suit us.” That is why London would not agree with the EU’s idea, that an EU court would have a role in future trade disputes, and London would claim the right that every other non-EU country in the world has. Frost also said that “to think that we might accept EU supervision on so-called level playing field issues simply fails to see the point of what we are doing.” He added that London wants to negotiate a Canada-type free trade agreement with the EU. Mr Frost left no doubt that London will not extend the transition period beyond the end of this year (this transition period, during which the UK continues to follow EU rules, including freedom of movement, runs until 31st December 2020). Will a post-Brexit agreement be achievable? It seems to me that, in the game of Brexit poker, both sides will start negotiations without any space for compromise. Will there be one in the end? Personally, I fear that Member States, having a special relationship with London, will undoubtedly call for compromise. Michel Barnier’s primary mission for me is to safeguard the Union, and if there are possibilities to keep the British close to the European Union, he should consider them.

Space for compromise? For the EU, a “level playing field” is the condition for free access to the single market. And the crucial point for the EU is that a non Member State should not enjoy the same or even better conditions than a Member State. This is the condition sine qua non on which Michel Barnier, the proven EU negotiator, will insist. For the moment, it does not appear acceptable to the British Prime Minister. The UK’s Brexit negotiator, David Frost, has set out the British objectives ahead of

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson in Brussels

documentation

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Towards a climate-neutral Europe

The European Green Deal On 11th December 2019, the European Commission presented the

opportunities, and improve the quality of life of our citizens. We

“European Green Deal”, a new growth strategy with the objective

all have an important part to play and every industry and country

of making Europe the first climate-neutral continent by 2050,

will be part of this transformation.”

and at the same time boosting the economy and improving

The European Green Deal was backed by the European Parliament

people’s health. The European Green Deal covers all sectors of

on 15th January 2020.

the economy, notably transport, energy, agriculture, buildings, and industries such as steel, cement, ICT, textiles and chemicals.

The first European Climate Law To write into legislation the political ambition of being the world’s

Main objectives of the European Green Deal

first climate-neutral continent by 2050, the Commission presented

• Make Europe climate-neutral by 2050 by decarbonising the

on 4th March 2020 the first “European Climate Law” which aims

energy sector including private and public transport

to ensure that all EU policies contribute to this goal and that all

• Protect human life, animals and plants, by cutting pollution

sectors of the economy and society play their part. The objectives

• Support industries to innovate and to become world leaders

are to set the long-term direction of travel for meeting the 2050

in clean products and technologies (green economy) • Help ensure a just and inclusive transition

climate-neutrality objective through all policies. They will do this by creating a system for monitoring progress and taking further action if needed, as well as providing predictability for investors

Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans in charge of the Green

and other economic actors and ensuring that the transition to

Deal said: “We are in a climate and environmental emergency.

climate-neutrality is irreversible.

The European Green Deal is an opportunity to improve the health and well-being of our people by transforming our economic model. Our plan sets out how to cut emissions, restore the health of our

> web The European Green Deal: https://bit.ly/2vF2gGZ

natural environment, protect our wildlife, create new economic

> web The European Climate Law: https://bit.ly/2wG3YIh

“Green, green, it’s green they say…”

Kolumnentitel

MAIN TOPIC:

EU27 in a multipolar world

photo: ÂŠ LaCozza, stock.adobe.com

With the world in turmoil, the European Union is trying to avoid being squeezed out by the big powers. The new European Commission seems determined to develop a geopolitical strategy for a sovereign Union. But now that Brexit has become a reality, the EU27 may first need to gain a renewed sense of internal cohesion to be able to influence world policy. So, should the European Union learn the language of power?

photo: © European Union, 2019, Audiovisual Service / Etienne Ansotte

Learning the language of power The European Union needs to change dimension by Jean-Dominique Giuliani, President of the Robert Schuman Foundation and President of the ILERI School of International Relations, Paris

he construction of Europe is, internationally, one of the biggest successes of the second half of the 20th century, despite tragedy and conflict in the first. Europe could have been excluded from history. Instead, it peacefully rebuilt itself with an unparalleled level of cooperation between the states that form it. The progressive integration of the continent allowed its rapid reconstruction and brought it prosperity. At the turn of the 21st century, Europe is an economic giant that must be reckoned with. However, the beginning of this new century marks a sudden and accelerated decline of the strategic context. The access of new continents to growth and wealth was good news for hundreds of thousands of people; it marked a new balance of power. Russian and Turkish revisionism accompanied a return of nationalism and caused conflict near Europe, as well as causing pressing tensions and potential problems.

The EU needs to become more political The European Union needs to change dimension and finally become more political, agreeing to pool its strengths and weaknesses to weigh in the world at the height of its past successes. Indeed, nothing would be worse for the European Union than continuing to reason and act as in the past. It must take off geo-strategically, something it finds difficult. A number of Member States are satisfied with the current situation and do not see the value of further integration. Others are ashamed of their laws and their past. Finally, others are inward-looking, victims of the fashionable “anti-globalisation and anti-multilateralism” syndrome. To preserve its achievements, the Union must now be able to speak and act internationally in the same way as the most important powers. It is neither a state nor an empire and it was deliberately built against these models. However, it must learn the language of the balance of power, that of the return of power states, to avoid being taken hostage and suffer decisions made elsewhere, inconsistent with its interests. It needs to give credibility to its fledgling diplomacy through a military capability. It does not have to embark on expansionist or interventionist adventures, it is simply a question of being

credible for, precisely, not having to use force, which most of its members are reluctant to do.

Waking up to global strategic realities At the beginning of February, the French President, after his predecessors, took another step towards a slowly progressing defence cooperation. He offered to talk to his partners on nuclear deterrence, of which France is now the only holder within the Union. Those who are not familiar with the most sophisticated diplomacy should remember the characteristics of nuclear weapons. They are the ultimate guarantee; not intended to be used, but to deter, because they promise unacceptable damage to aggressors. They cannot be put under joint command, and there is no example of this ever being done, including NATO in which it is discussed, but where only the American President has the final capacity to use them. Given the evolution of the United States, so caricatured by the extreme sensitivity of its current president (!), the French offer is an unexpected opportunity to give European diplomacy, and still too limited military capabilities, credibility on which a European defence can gradually be built. NATO will continue to exist because it is not incompatible. It is even necessary at this time. But there will be no peaceful, sustainable future for Europeans without their own coordinated deterrent capacities. To guarantee peace, one must be ready, if necessary, to wage war. It is – alas – the law of nations since the origin of the human race. This is likely the reason why the German minister of defence officially accepted the French offer. In parallel, the two partners, France and Germany, are accelerating their defence industrial cooperation. It seems that Europe is waking up to the global strategic realities, with a delay it must urgently make up. May our European leaders finally respond to the requests of their fellow citizens by building a more sovereign and independent Europe that defends its interests all over the world! This may be the condition for the continuation of the European adventure. > web: www.robert-schuman.eu

> web: www.ileri.fr

MAIN TOPIC: EU27 in a multipolar world

Strengthening Europe’s defence through a pillar in NATO

Europe and its external challenges in uncertain times by Dr Hans-Gert Pöttering, Former President of the European Parliament and President of the Berlin Security Conference, Berlin

mong the security challenges facing us, I would pinpoint the following main issues: the balance of power within the transatlantic alliance – particularly between the USA and the European Union – our relations with Russia, the relationship with China and other Asian countries, destabilisation in the Near and Middle East, failing states in Sub-Saharan Africa.

A comprehensive security concept In order to meet these challenges, we need a comprehensive security concept. It encompasses political, psychological, diplomatic, economic, technological and military aspects. None of them can be effective in isolation. We can only make them effective if we attach enough importance to each one of them and ensure that they work together. What worries me is the disconnect between the current security situation and its perception by public opinion in our societies. Demands for a stronger commitment to security policies are often countered with the argument that the necessary resources could be much better spent on social programmes. The challenges facing Europe are in my opinion underestimated in public debate. This is also a consequence of politicians’ reluctance to spell out uncomfortable truths. We are witnessing with surprise or dismay the rise of populist

movements, extremist and even nationalist parties. But in the 21st century, retreating behind national borders is no way of protecting one’s people. Nationalism eventually turns against the people because it is a threat to peace, and therefore to freedom, the rule of law and democracy. We must also develop, and particularly in Germany, a more realistic relationship with our armed forces. The paradox is that since the collapse of the Soviet Union, we have tended to view our Bundeswehr as a relic of the cold war and have therefore shamefully neglected it. A generation later, we have doubts about the military preparedness of this very Bundeswehr and

develop and particularly “Weinmust Germany, a more realistic

relationship with our armed forces.”

fail to see the vicious circle of neglect and loss of preparedness for which we are ourselves responsible. We therefore need an urgent reappraisal, something that is already starting to happen. I wish our defence minister, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, every success in rising to this essential challenge. Just as crucially as democracy needs democrats, it needs people who are willing to defend it – and who must also be in a position to do so.

Europe needs a defence capability

Dr Hans-Gert Pöttering is a German politician, who was born in 1945. He studied at the universities of Bonn, Geneva and New York and completed his PhD in political science and history in 1974. A member of the European Photo: Klaus Dombrowsky

Parliament from 1979 to 2014, he

was the chairman of the European Peoples Party (EPP) from 1999 to 2007, and President of the Parliament from 2007 to 2009. Dr Pöttering was Chairman of the Konrad Adenauer Foundation from 2010-2018. He is currently President of the Berlin Security Conference (BSC).

The strength of Europe and the Western alliance is based on our common values: respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, the rule of law and peace. We must not underestimate the capacity for our western community of values to reform and rejuvenate itself. This is equally true of the European Union as it is of NATO. Our goal must be to strengthen the European pillar of NATO through a defence union, a European army. In particular, we should make use of the two percent target to increase our European capabilities. But we should also realise that anyone who questions the role of NATO is not promoting the sovereignty of Europe but dividing it. In spite of all the difficulties and unwelcome developments, I remain convinced that both institutions, the European Union and NATO, are successful models that have served us well in the past. And as long as we all work together to strengthen them, they can also do so in the future.

documentation

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

BREXIT – what will change in Europe As a result of the British withdrawal from

at least 65% of the EU population. As the UK

future of our relations with the United King-

the European Union, there are a number

was the third largest country, its withdrawal

dom. And we will enter these negotiations

of changes in the European Parliament

has resulted in an increase in the relative

with the highest ambition. Prime Minister

and the Council.

power of Germany and France, which now

Johnson said in Greenwich, earlier this

account for 33% of the EU population.

month, that the United Kingdom will be

Parliament

Blocking of legislation: Legislation cannot

‘a global champion of free trade’. Frankly,

Most legislation needs a majority vote in

be adopted if there is a blocking minority

this is music to our ears.

Parliament to be adopted. The British with-

against it. Four countries, representing at

And when we agreed the Political Decla-

drawal has led to changes in the strengths

least 35% of the EU population, can block

ration with the United Kingdom, we ambi-

of the parliamentary groups. The number of

the adoption of any legislation.

tioned a zero tariffs and a zero quotas trade

parliamentary seats has been reduced by

relation for all goods. Something we have

46 and the remaining 27 seats have been

What else is new in Europe?

never ever before offered to anybody else.

redistributed mathematically. France and

After Brexit, the European Union will have

A new model of trade, a unique ambition

Spain are the biggest winners, gaining five

a new geographical centre: on the basis

in terms of access to the Single Market.

extra seats each (see figure). But there are

of calculations by the French IGN (Institut

But of course, this would require corre-

also changes in the relative strengths of the

Français de l’Information Géographique

sponding guarantees on fair competition and the protection of social, environmental

their 15 British members, have lost the

and consumer standards. In short: this is, photo: Christoph Rose

parliamentary groups. The Liberals, with most, whereas the conservative European People’s Party, which has had no British members for some years, is strengthened. However, it remains true that the two largest groups in Parliament still need a third partner (or even a fourth if there are internal

We are ready to discuss all different models of trade agreement. But all these models, whatever you choose, have one thing in common: They all come not only with rights but also with obligations for both sides…

divisions within the groups) for legislation to be adopted.

plainly and simply, the level playing field.

(…) We can trigger an upward dynamic et Forestière), it will be a small village in

competition that would benefit both the

Franconia (Bavaria) near Würzburg, with

United Kingdom and the European Union. To

Council

the name of Gadheim: 9°, 54 min, 7 sec

our British friends I say: it is in our mutual

The balance of power within the Council

East and 49°, 50 min and 37 sec North.

interest. And most importantly – it would

has also shifted. This will affect most legis-

be consistent with the values we share.

lation, that has to be adopted by qualified

What’s next?

Values of openness, values of fairness and

majority voting, requiring a “double ma-

On 11th February 2020 President Ursula

values of social justice and free enterprise.

jority”. But it will also affect the chances

von der Leyen discussed the post-Brexit

These are not only values for good old times.

of forming a blocking minority to block

period with the European Parliament.

These are values to stay”.

legislation.

Source: European Commission

Voting procedure (majorities): legislation

Excerpts of her speech:

can only be adopted if at least 15 member

“It is just two weeks ago that we bid farewell

> web Commission proposal

states vote in favour of it. The problem is

to our British friends by singing ‘Auld Lang

https://bit.ly/38NkHqi

that these member states must represent

Syne’. Since then, we set our sights on the

Graphik: ESDU/Celine Merz

Redistribution of seats in the EP after Brexit

MAIN TOPIC: EU27 in a multipolar world

Brexit is a historic mistake Photo: © European Parliament

Is the European Union’s foreign policy prepared for the consequences of Brexit? Hilde Vautmans MEP was born in 1972. She has been a Member of the European Parliament since 2015. She sits in the Foreign Affairs Committee (AFET) and is a member of the Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamen-

by Hilde Vautmans MEP, Member of the AFET Committee, European Parliament, Brussels/ Strasbourg

rexit is a historic mistake, which will have consequences for decades to come. A mistake with consequences that are still unknown for the relations between the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom (UK), particularly in the area of defence, security and home affairs. Nevertheless, we must assume that without the necessary deepening and strengthening of the Union that is now needed to compensate for this loss, our Union risks being poorer.

A lack of clarity on security and defence matters If focusing on the Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), we can expect Brexit to ease the traditional pressure on CFSP. Here, the integration was often hampered due to longterm British opposition and this should now no longer be the case. Analysing Brexit from a broader defence point of view, the situation changes dramatically, depending on the negotiations over the future relationship and the UK’s intentions, which remain unclear. The British military commands a wide array of troops, advanced military technologies and weapons as well as possessing a high degree of military expertise. To add to this, the EU post Brexit has lost one of its permanent seats within the UN Security Council. Moreover, the Union, in the context of nuclear deterrence, lost a Member State with nuclear capabilities. The withdrawal of the UK must also be assessed in regard to the fight against terrorism. While the United Kingdom and the European Union committed to addressing potential disruptions to intelligence sharing and justice and home affairs cooperation, there is a distinct lack of clarity on these matters.

tary Assembly (DACP). In the European

For decades, the UK’s oppoParliament, Ms Vautmans is the foreign sition to defence integration affairs coordinator for the Renew Europe was one of the biggest obstaGroup and acts as delegation leader of cles for the EU’s foreign and the Open Flemish Liberals and Democrats security policy. Without the party (Open Vld). Before becoming a British “resistance” to deeper MEP, Ms Vautmans was a member of EU security integration and the Belgium House of Representatives cooperation, the potential from 2003 to 2010. for previously unimagined political commitment is now tangible and the Union must take this new reality as a fundamental and game changing opportunity. One of the key remaining challenges for the Union to overcome, which will define once and for all our Union’s ambition or lack thereof to be a de facto global actor, is the need to abolish the rule of unanimity. We cannot build a sizeable CFSP if permanently hostage to this rule, which even recently has stymied the development of a coherent and united external policy. It is high time for the European Union to play a stronger role, both in our neighbourhood and by using its potential power effectively on the world stage. This is especially pressing in the current geopolitical climate where certain state actors actively try to undermine the Union’s internal and external political agendas. But for this to work, the European Union must commit and speak with one voice. As the British Winston Churchill once said: “A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.” It is of vital importance than we shed the current pessimism and rise to the occasion. The European Union must take its security concerns in its stride and use them to its benefit. It is crucial to act now.

A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the “opportunity in every difficulty.” Winston Churchill

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

NATO is our security – Europe is our soul! It’s too early to bury NATO Photo: © ESDU

Interview with Jānis Garisons, Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence of Latvia, Riga

he European: Mr Garisons, you are the Secretary of State of the Ministry of Defence in Latvia. Some weeks ago, the French President shocked the community by saying that the Alliance is “brain-dead”. How was that received in Riga? Jānis Garisons: Of course we had and still have discussions in Latvia regarding that comment, but let us be serious: I think it’s too early to bury NATO. The Alliance has gone through difficult periods. Latvia is one of the youngest members of NATO, but even in our experience from 2004 to today, we have had different and difficult discussions in and with NATO. Finding common solutions is one of its strengths. We discuss issues and agree on decisions – we don’t receive orders and we are grateful for ideas that push the Alliance forwards. And this is the case with Macron.

The European: Do all NATO members have the willingness to follow the current logic to do more for our common defence? Jānis Garisons: I am convinced they do. The time when Europeans could assume that the United States would take care of our security for granted is over. The European: So can we say that Macron got the ball rolling and Member States came together to find common solutions? Jānis Garisons: I think that it was President Trump himself who started the polemic. The outcome of our discussions is very positive because we now have a better common understanding and we are having very intense discussions on financial issues. But we can’t even blame President Trump. It was the American administration that warned us long before about the need for more European defence spending, and we somehow ignored it. I think President Trump simply put it more in a straightforward way.

The time when Europeans “could assume that the United States would take care of our security for granted is over.”

The European: Will NATO be able to adapt to the new political and strategic situation in the world? Jānis Garisons: I believe that we are going through a period of transformation. Not only in NATO, but in general, because geopolitics change and the field of security and defence is very much concerned. Consequently, we also have to change our attitude towards security and defence issues.

The European: Would you say that Europeans have understood that they have to spend more on defence, because if they don’t, the US will no longer be the reliable security provider for Europe? Jānis Garisons: Yes, we have to make efforts and the more we do for our defence, the more we can rely on the US. The European: You mentioned that the geopolitical situation is changing. Russia is still occupying part of Crimea and is becom-

MAIN TOPIC: EU27 in a multipolar world

Jānis Garisons ing the security provider in other regions. is State Secretary of the Ministry of DeWe make the population aware that our China is becoming more and more effecdemocracy is under foreign pressure, fence of Latvia since August 2015. He tive with its economy and, at the same thereby building up the resilience of the holds a MA from the University of Latvia time, is raising the quality of its armed society. and a MA in Strategic Studies from the forces. How do you see the geostrategic US Army War College. Mr Garisons first situation of your country? The European: Let me come to Europeestablished his career at Latvia’s Ministry Jānis Garisons: For the Baltic States, an defence. What could be done to give of Foreign Affairs, where he served as there is always pressure from Russia. the EU more of a profile in defence? the Director of the Security Policy DeGeopolitical shifts are only the beginning Jānis Garisons: My first point is reiterpartment, before joining the Ministry of of a process and they have consequencating that we should not write off our Defence. In his position as Undersecretary es for everybody. Will it be the end of transatlantic ties and NATO. Looking of State - Policy Director, he has been dominance or will there be new dominant globally, Europeans, Americans and an architect and organiser of Latvia’s powers? In parallel, there is an ethical Canadians are part of one world and as defence policy, defence planning and shift: the attractiveness of democracy democratic countries we shouldn’t have international operations’ policy. is actually diminishing. The number of differences in global competition. countries all over the world following democratic developments is lower than before, but this is not The European: And what do you propose? due to our own policies. But I do see a certain danger for our Jānis Garisons: As Europeans, we have to start to understand democracies. what capabilities we need, and fill the gaps where we need money. We also have to define our common strategic goals as a The European: Could it be that the complexity of governance in pillar in NATO. democracy, with all the internal problems and external threats, has become difficult? The European: But don’t we have a common security strategy Jānis Garisons: Our society has become more and more in the Union? complex. This complexity has made us very vulnerable. It is imJānis Garisons: Yes, we do, but there is still a variety of goals in portant to understand that security is not only defence against security policy. And finally I would say that we need a leaderconventional threats. We are also facing asymmetric threats: ship in Europe. information warfare, psychological warfare, cyber issues and don’t forget social media via the internet. It is difficult to find The European: Whom do you see playing this role? Great Britsolutions for law and order in democracy, and in principal peoain as a nuclear power is out and the other nuclear power and ple like order. They often look to authoritarian regimes where member of the UN Security Council is France. you can control everything and where you can live law and Jānis Garisons: I am convinced that Germany, as the economic order in another, repressive, way. power in the centre of Europe, can lead the EU and strengthen its military capabilities, because without a powerful Germany The European: The question is how to make democratic societhere will not be no credible European defence. ties resilient to dangers to democracy. What means do you apply to make your society confident that you, as a government, The European: You mentioned the European pillar in NATO. have the adapted solution against outside and inside threats? How would the US react to a real European pillar? What is your experience? Jānis Garisons: In the previous years, I had many meetings in Jānis Garisons: Yes, in Latvia, we are trying to make our society Washington and I would say that the US is very interested in become somewhat resilient. We are working in parallel with Europeans being capable of reacting and supporting the NATO the population. We are strengthening our defence capabilities pillar. I don’t see big differences in that. against exterior threats, and we have allies, because we are not able to achieve external – or as we say, territorial – security The European: Allow me a final, very personal question. If you alone. And we show solidarity by supporting NATO and the EU had to decide between NATO and the European Union, what in out of area missions. would be your decision? Jānis Garisons: There is no decision to make because NATO is The European: This is visible, but how are you strengthening our security and Europe is our soul. Latvian society in general? Jānis Garisons: We started doing this by introducing, for examThe European: Thank you, State Secretary Garison, for this ple, defence curriculum in schools, teaching first aid and basic exchange of ideas. military knowledge. We teach cyber security and what can be done to prevent it, or how to act in the case of a cyber-attack. The interview was led by Hartmut Bühl and Céline Merz.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

The European Union in a polycentric world: what next? A view from a Russian Europeanist

by Dr Nadezhda Arbatova, Head of European Studies, IMEMO, Academy of Science, Moscow

he end of the East-West confrontation removed the threat of a global conflict. This has, however, resulted in the crisis of the Euro-Atlantic partnership, namely the growing security gap between the USA and the European Union, the emergence of a new China with global ambitions, the rise of the assertive post-Soviet Russia and numerous regional actors – India, Japan, Turkey, Iran, Brazil and others. Compared to the European “concert of nations” of the nineteenth century and the bipolarity of the twentieth century, today’s international system is far more complex and global in scale. States and transnational players can be simultaneous rivals and partners at different levels and on different issues.

Multilateral cooperation versus new bipolarity However, the modern polycentric world is strongly influenced by the evolving balance between two opposite trends – multilateral cooperation on global challenges and a new bipolarity. This new bipolarity is developing within the same capitalist system and can be defined as a growing divide between liberal and authoritarian capitalism. The former is most vividly represented by the EU, the USA and their allies, while the latter by China and Russia. Strictly speaking, nowadays, the only fully-fledged power centre is the United States, whose economic and military potential guarantees its political influence in the world’s affairs. China is approaching these standards. The EU and Russia represent two opposite models. The former is an economic power centre while the latter is a military one. In order to become a real centre of power, Russia needs to modernise its economy based on exports of raw materials.

There is a growing understanding in the most liberal part of the Russian political elite that without radical modernisation, it will be marginalised in the modern world. However, economic modernisation cannot but go hand in hand with Russia’s political modernisation. In order to attract FDI into non-oil and gas industries, Russia will have to re-establish a reasonable and balanced division of state powers and create an independent judiciary as well as arbitration bodies able to manage and restrain the bureaucracy and corruption. It is also recognised that Russia cannot achieve modernisation outside the technologically advanced international community, first and foremost represented by the United States, the European Union, Japan and others. The current crisis in the Russia-West relations makes modernisation prospects unlikely. Aside from this, the modern polycentric world is strongly influenced by a relatively new phenomenon – the global spread of anti-globalism or populist nationalism. Despite the common features, this phenomenon has a pronounced national specificity – egoistic nationalism in the US, neo-imperial nationalism in China, great power nationalism in Russia and anti-European nationalism in the EU. These trends are developing in the context of increased regional conflicts, the threat of international terrorism and the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

Strategic autonomy for Europe There is a recognition of these profound changes and a growing understanding that the security of Europe is becoming more and more a European cause. This is reflected by the idea of EU strategic autonomy, PESCO, and the heated discussions about the creation of a European army. The Euro-Atlantic partnership, as it was during the Cold War, no longer exists today. And with the current uncertainty about the readiness of the United States to come to the aid of its allies, Europeans have no other

MAIN TOPIC: EU27 in a multipolar world

Putin has openly recognised that the desire of “Vladimir Europeans to be independent, self-sufficient and sovereign

Photo: ChiralJon, CC BY 2.0, Flickr.com

in the field of defence and security is completely natural.”

choice than to think about their own defence. In order to become an influential power centre in international relations, the European Union needs strategic autonomy. It should be noted that the desire of the EU for military autonomy does not cause much concern at the official level of Russian leadership. Russian President Vladimir Putin has openly recognised that the desire of Europeans to be independent, self-sufficient and sovereign in the field of defence and security is completely natural. Apparently, this can be explained by, firstly, the fact that in the eyes of the Kremlin, the creation of a fully-fledged European army seems to be a very distant prospect. Secondly, the growing discrepancy between the Euro-Atlantic allies fully meets Russia’s interests, given its troubled relations with NATO. Nowadays, the prospects for security cooperation between Russia and the EU look illusory, but in the case of solving fundamental contradictions in their relations resulting from the conflict in Ukraine, they could cooperate in countering common threats, above all at the regional level.

Europe’s way ahead No doubt, European integration is the greatest project of all times. But it is also true that the European Union is currently experiencing the most difficult period in its entire history, being under the pressure of several crises – consequences of the world economic and financial crisis, migration crisis, crisis in relations with Russia and others. But it is an anti-European nationalism in some of the EU Member States – and nothing else – that creates a truly existential threat to European integration and its proper place in a polycentric world. It is obvious that the vector of the EU defence policy will be largely determined by the EU’s relations with its key partners. Most likely, NATO will be transforming towards a functional division of labour between the allies, where Europe will play a regional role in ensuring international security, and the US a global one. The Chinese challenge – China’s growing economic and military power, doubled with its global ambitions – will also remain in the foreseeable future a strong incentive to build the EU defence potential, and under the best scenario to meet this challenge together with its allies and partners including Russia.

The normalisation of Russia-West relations? There is no doubt that peace in Ukraine is a fundamental precondition for the normalisation of Russia-West relations. However, Russian leadership sees the current international order as being dominated by the United States and NATO, presenting an existential threat to Russia’s security and interests. This system, found generally satisfactory by the West, has failed to satisfy Russia in its recovery from the crisis of the 1990s. Attempts to transform the existing Euro-Atlantic security system have not yielded any noticeable results. On many occasions Russia sent messages (Putin’s Munich speech of 2007, Medvedev’s proposal on a new European Security treaty of 2010) to its Western partners about its deep dissatisfaction with the existing system of European security. Consequently, the appeal to the international community to come back to the unfinished business of the past and create a genuine post-bipolar order, or at least commonly agree on rules of behaviour, appears justified.

Dr Nadezhda Arbatova is head of the department of European Policy at the Institute for World Economy and International Relations (IMEMO) within the Russian Academy of Science. She Photo: private

leads the discussion forum “European Dialogue” and is Vice-Presi-

dent of the Russian Pugwash committee. Ms Arbatova is also member of the Council on Security and Defence Policy and member of the French Institute for Higher Studies on National Defence (IHEDN). Her publications cover the relations between the European Union and Russia, European security and Russia’s foreign policy.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Enlargement policy must be credible, merit based and serious

Hamster in the wheel: credibility and EU Balkan policy by Gerald Knaus, Founding Chairman, European Stability Initiative (ESI), Berlin

alkan enlargement was in crisis even before EU leaders failed to agree in 2019 to open accession talks with North Macedonia and Albania. Unless there is a change in methodology and pace, no Western Balkan country is likely to be a member of the EU by 2030. On the issue of North Macedonia and Albania, the European Union remains divided. There are three groups of countries: The Netherlands supports opening accession talks only with North Macedonia. France is opposed to separating North Macedonia and Albania and argues that it is better not to start talks with either. Italy insists that talks must start with both. The result of this division is a stalemate. If Paris, Rome and The Hague could find a joint common position, the rest of the EU might rally around it. How might this be achieved? The French position is that the accession process itself needs to change. Without changes in the way talks are organised, Macedonian and Albanian reformers will soon feel like hamsters in a wheel, realising that, regardless of how much effort they make, they are not getting closer to joining the EU even by 2030. To understand why, look at what happened to Montenegro. In eight years, Montenegro managed to close only three negotiating chapters. Two of these were opened and closed on the same day. Did the government in Podgorica stop working? Did the EU decide, politically, that it simply does not want to close any chapters?

Reforming the accession process According to the Commission’s assessments, between 2015 and 2019 Montenegro made no progress in 23 chapters; advanced (slightly) in nine; and was backsliding in one. At this time Montenegro is “well advanced” – the best grade – in zero chapters. The focus on opening chapters has misled political attention. It is no indicator of progress. Credible scorecards are. Today, the EU needs to square the North Macedonia/Albania circle. But it must also reform the process, make it truly merit based and offer a credible interim goal that inspires real change. This is possible through a reform that builds on the current system but makes four crucial changes.

1. A two-stage process: the goal of talks remains full accession, while the intermediate goal is to offer Single Market entry. In a paper circulated in late 2019, France suggested different stages. This idea can be simplified: there are two stages. The first stage is joining the Single Market in the way Finland, Sweden and Austria did in 1994. Joining the Single Market by 2025 would be a realistic goal for Balkan frontrunners. Joining the Single Market by 2030 should be a realistic goal for all Western Balkan countries. This should only depend on them. They would then enjoy the four freedoms – the free movement of goods, capital, services, and labour – that Norway and Iceland enjoy today. 2. Opening and closing all chapters together: instead of opening and closing chapters one by one, they could all be opened at the beginning and closed all at once. The key measure of progress is not a formal one, but substantive changes measured in progress reports. 3. The rule of law becoming truly central: all democracy, rule of law and human rights conditions must be fully met before any country can join the Single Market. Rule of law conditions would be as demanding for joining the Single Market as for full membership, and the monitoring of these even stricter. 4. Reversibility: if any country seriously violates basic human rights or undermines the independence of the judiciary it should be possible to suspend the accession process with the votes of a simple majority. Suspension should have real effects, including freezing pre-accession funding. And it should also be possible to restart talks with a simple majority. Gerald Knaus Carrying out the reforms needed to is ESI’s founding chairman. join the Single Market and to join the He spent five years working EU has been phenomenally benefifor NGOs and international cial for peripheral economies. North organisations in Bulgaria Macedonia today is at the level of and Bosnia and Herzegodevelopment where Lithuania was in vina. From 2001 to 2004, Photo: private 1999. Serbia today is where Estonia he was the director of the was in 1999. 2018 Bosnia is the RoLessons Learned Unit of the EU Pillar of the UN mania of 1999. Countries can change. Mission in Kosovo. He is a founding member of Enlargement policy can have a major the European Council on Foreign Relations and impact. For this it must be credible, for five years he was an Associate Fellow at the merit based and serious. It has hapCarr Center for Human Rights Policy at Harvard pened before. It can happen again. University’s Kennedy School, where he was a Visiting Fellow in 2010/2011.

> web: www.esiweb.org

MAIN TOPIC: EU27 in a multipolar world

Photo: desert, pixabay.com

Climate Change: a challenge for international security Uncertainties as a result of inaccurate, absent or non-representative data

by Cristina García Fernández, Professor, Department of Economy, and David García Cantalapiedra, Professor, Department of International Relations, Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM), Madrid

n recent decades, climate change has quickly become a problem that causes great concern in our society. It is a reality that climate change and its adverse consequences do not affect all regions equally: they especially harm less economically developed areas. These are generally the most fragile and least resistant to the challenges to peace and security. However, the scope of the global phenomenon implies that no country, continent or hemisphere can be exempt from suffering its impacts directly or indirectly. Therefore, there is a close link between climate change and international security, a relationship that was already pointed out, over a decade ago, in a document of the High Representative of the European Union (EU) for the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP).

Taking climate change impacts seriously This document asserted that climate change should be considered “a multiplier of threats with extreme existing trends, tensions and instability”. However, despite the urgency with which the international community should have acted given the irreversible nature of many of the materialisations of climate change, it does not usually appear as a priority on the international agenda. Therefore, in relation to the different security policies, we consider it necessary to focus on the holistic analysis of the close relationship between climate change and global security. Besides, the selection of proposals with a focus on

these two items will prevail in a multidisciplinary and transversal way, taking into account aspects such as: armed conflicts caused by environmental degradation; intra and interstate tensions caused by the scarcity of resources (especially highlighting the case of water stress and food crises); the migratory movements caused by the drastic environmental changes; the multilateral consequences that variations of the climate system may cause for international security.

A cascade of uncertainty The creation of an agenda for security policy planning is in great difficulty due to the uncertainties and the different scenarios resulting from climate change studies. First, as an integral factor, uncertainties are inherent to climate change since we are dealing with a non-deterministic chaotic system. Only probabilistic projections can be made in the form of models that establish future scenarios or sets of (assembled or coupled) scenarios. The process to carry these out introduces a number of uncertainties, called a cascade of uncertainty, especially structural uncertainty and lack of certainty, which together form the so-called “knowledge uncertainty”. That is the non-predictability relative to projections of human behavior (for example, evolution of political systems) and to chaotic components of complex systems; the structural uncertainty derived from inadequate models, incomplete or competing conceptual

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

A peacekeeper of the UN Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA) offers a boy a drink of water. Photo: © UN Photo/Sylvain Liechti

Expectations about future trends in climate change have been worsening “rapidly, and, as a consequence, so has its negative impact on international security, human security, and more specifically on food security.”

frameworks, disagreement on the structure of the model, ambiguous limits or definitions of the system, significant or relatable processes omitted or incorrect. There are uncertainties as a result of inaccurate, absent or non-representative data, inadequate special or temporary resolution, changing or poorly defined parameters. Difficulties to adapt climate models Second, there are technical difficulties in adapting the Global Climate Models (GCMs), designed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), to valid Regional Climate Models (RCMs). These and the creation of alternative RCMs (even sub regional), not only by the IPCC, but by other programmes, actually prevents the creation of a whole series of long-term policies due to the large differences between the forecasts of the models used. This is mainly observed in the impacts of the main parameters that will severely affect safety in general, such as temperature increase, rainfall and Sea Level Rise (SLR). In this sense, expectations about future trends in climate change have been worsening rapidly, and, as a consequence, so has its negative impact on international, and therefore on human, security: “Most don’t remember what caused the Syria conflict

to start. It started because of a 10-year drought.” “And folks having to move from their family farms into cities where they then were not getting any support, and therefore a civil war began”1. A serious threat to security 58 senior retired US military and national security leaders are advocating for the view that climate change is a serious threat to security. The group gave a few examples of these challenges in an open letter from 5th March to the Trump administration. The letter was sponsored by CCS and the American Security Project: “Around the world, climate change is a ‘threat multiplier,’ making other security threats worse. Its effects are even used by our adversaries as a weapon of war; ISIS used water shortages in Iraq, in part driven by a changing climate, to cement their hold on the population during their reign of terror from 2014 to 2017.”2

Future trends and expected impacts The negative impact on food security has also been worsening. From this point of view, the latest report of the National Intelligence Council, “Global Trends 2030: Alternative

MAIN TOPIC: EU27 in a multipolar world

Dr Cristina García Fernández is a professor of economy at the University Computense

Worlds”, echoes the IPCC studies that point to the increase in extreme weather events: persistent droughts during the development seasons of crops and flooding of large river basins are reducing agricultural productivity. This, together with national protectionist policies, have reduced food security. Thus, SLR will affect population concentrations in coastal regions and cities, through the reduction of arable land at a faster rate than expected according to the predictions for all 2030-50 IPCC climate change models.

de Madrid (UCM). She received a PhD in economics and

Pressure on military forces In this sense, the projected impacts of climate change will put pressure on our military forces in the coming decades. More forces will be required to respond due to extreme weather events in the country concerned and abroad, which will limit their ability to respond to other contingencies. The projected climate change will make training difficult and, at the same time, will put at risk the critical military logistics, transport systems and infrastructure, both inside and outside the infrastructure base. The impacts of projected climate change can be detrimental to the physical components of national critical infrastructures, while limiting their capabilities.

is a professor of public law and international relations

Damage of critical infrastructure States and the EU depend on critical infrastructure for economic prosperity, security and the essential elements of everyday life. We are already seeing how extreme heat is damaging transport infrastructure, such as roads, rail lines and airport runways. We also note that much of the energy infrastructure, including oil and gas refineries, storage tanks, power plants and electricity transmission lines, are located on coastal floodplains, where they are increasingly threatened by more intense storms, floods and SLR. Far-reaching economic impacts The projected increase in temperatures, fires and droughts will strain energy systems with a greater demand for refrigeration, possibly dislocate and reduce food production, and cause wa-

States and the EU depend on “critical infrastructure for economic prosperity, security and the essential elements of everyday life.”

business administration from the UCM in 1998. Ms García Fernández coordinates the international masters “The European Union and the Mediterranean” at the EuroMediterranean University Institute (EMUI) in Madrid and received the CIDAN Special award “European Awareness of Security and Defence” in November 2019 in Berlin.

Dr David García Cantalapiedra at the University Computense of Madrid (UCM). He holds a PhD in political science and sociology from the UCM. He is the Director of the research programme on US foreign policy at the Instituto Franklin-UAH in Madrid. Mr García Cantalapiedra is also a member of the NATO Defence Threat Reduction Agency in Brussels. His main areas of research are geopolitics & strategy, and the militarisation of space.

ter shortages. Since much of the critical infrastructure is owned or operated by the private sector, government solutions alone will not address the full range of climate-related problems. The projected impacts of climate change will also threaten the main sectors of the economy. Observed warming and other climate changes are causing far-reaching impacts, including international trade, and will be affected by the projected climate change. Vulnerability of populations The projected impacts of climate change will affect the main sectors of our society and will accentuate social support systems. As coastal regions become increasingly populated and developed, more frequent or severe storms will threaten vulnerable populations in these areas and increase the requirements for emergency services in terms of frequency and severity of storms. Extreme weather events and / or simultaneous or widespread forest fires, accompanied by massive evacuations and degraded critical infrastructure could exceed local and federal government resources and require greater use of military and private sector support.

1 US Congress. The Need for Leadership to Combat Climate Change and Protect National Security. April 9, 2019. https://bit.ly/2Udxtt9 2 https://bit.ly/2xslT5q

The von der Leyen Com President Executive Vice-President for the European Green Deal and Commissioner for Climate Action Policy Leading the work on the European Green Deal for enshrining the 2050 climate neutrality target into EU law/ Extending the Emissions Trading System to the maritime sector/Designing the Biodiversity Strategy FRANS for 2030/Supporting the zero-pollution ambition TIMMERMANS

Vice-President for Values and Transparency Coordinating the European Democracy Action Plan/Building resilience of democratic systems/Countering disinformation while preserving freedom of expression, freedom of the press and VĚRA media pluralism/Coordinating JOUROVÁ upholding the rule of law

Make the Union more strategic in external relations/Building a strong European Defence Union/Meeting regularly with national parliaments/Taking part in Citizens’ Dialogues across the Union/ChairJOSEP ing the Commissions’ Group on a BORRELL FONTELLES stronger Europe

Promote a power system largely based on renewables increased interconnectivity and improved energy storage/ Support Europe’s electricity interconnection target and developing cross-border cooperation on renewaKADRI ble-energy installations and networks SIMSON

Commissioner for Budget and Administration Developing a new human resources strategy to continue the modernisation of the Commission/Ensuring adequate financial, human and institutional resources/ Achieving the EU’s goals and ensure JOHANNES a smooth and swift transition to the HAHN long-term EU budget

Commissioner for Innovation, Research, Culture, Education and Youth Creating by 2025 a European Education Area 2025 by making it easier to move between countries/Ensuring swift agreement on, and full implementation of the future Horizon MARIYA Europe programme/Ensuring implementaGABRIEL tion of New European Agenda for Culture

The six Priorities of the Commission for 2019–2024

Vice-President for P our European Way

Vice-President and EU High Representative for CFSP

Commissioner for Energy

1. A European Green Deal 2. An economy that works for people 3. A Europe fit for the digital age 4. Promoting the European way of life 5. A stronger Europe in the world 6. A new push for European democracy

Representing the Commission in Council a Parliament and at international summits/ a new momentum for democracy, pro values and social democracy combine URSULA efforts for a stronger Europe in the wo VON DER LEYEN

Coordinating the New Coordinating the deve European Security Un the strengthen detection and MARGARÍTIS in hybrid threa SCHINÁS against anti-Se

Commissioner for Economy Designing Unemployment Benefit Scheme/Launching Invest Programme/Implementing Sustainable Europe Investment Plan/Reviewing Energy Taxation Directive/Preparing proposal for a Carbon PAOLO Border Tax and/Continuing to fight tax fraud. GENTILONI

Commissioner for H Safety

Ensure Europe’s sup icines/Support the E industry leadFocus of the EU One Hea Europe’s B STELLA Put forward zero-polluti KYRIAKIDES

Commissioner f Oceans and Fis

Commissioner for Trade Leading the reform of the WTO on subsidies, forced transfer of technologies and dispute settlement/Strengthening Europe’s leadership in trade/Monitoring implementation of climate, environmental and labour protections in trade PHIL agreements, with zero-tolerance of HOGAN child labour

Putting forward a Strategy for 2030 2000: defores Protected s sustainab VIRGINIJUS Working o and towar SINKEVIČIUS

Commissioner for Internal Market Enhancing Europe’s technological sovereignty/Investing in the next frontier of technologies/Leading the work on EU approach on artificial intelligence: Building a market for cyberseTHIERRY curity/Developing a European strategy on data BRETON

Commissioner for Justice Leading the work on consumer protection, notably for cross-border and online transactions/Focusing on awareness raising to promote a rule-of – law culture among EU citizens/ DIDIER Improving judicial cooperation REYNDERS in the EU

Commissi Enlarge

Strength bouring c institutio Optim

OLIVÉR VÁRHELYI

Com

Stre inclu r

HELENA DALLI

mmission 2019–2024 Executive-Vice President for an Economy that Works for People, and Commissioner for Financial Services

Executive Vice-President for Europe fit for the Digital Age, and Commissioner for Competition Steering work on a new Digital Services Act/ Strengthening enforcement of EU rules on competition/Co-leading build-up of a strategy for small & medium-sized businesses and start-ups/Developing a long-term strategy for Europe’s MARGRETHE industrial future/Ensuring synergies between civil, defence and space industries. VESTAGER

Promoting y of Life

Vice-President for Democracy and Demography

Pact on Migration/ elopment of a nion/Coordinating ning of prevention, d response measures ats/Leading the fight emitism.

Preparing Conference on the Future of Europe/ Responding to challenges of the demographic change/Supporting groups affected to reconcile work and family, aging workforce in rural and urban areas / Paying attention on ŠUICA long-term impacts, notably care and penDUBRAVKA sions, and on how to foster active aging.

Health and Food

pply of affordable medEU’s pharmaceutical s on full implementation alth Action Plan and Beating Cancer Plan/ d sustainable food and ion

Implementing the European Pillar of Social Rights/Strengthening the role of social dialogue at European level/Helping to prepare the Tripartite Social Summit/Strengthening the accountability of the economic governance/ImVALDIS proving financial stability for investors and savers. DOMBROVSKIS

Vice-President for Interinstitutional Relations and Foresight Strengthening the special partnership with the European Parliament and being responsible for relations with the Conference of Committee Chairs / Leading the relations with national parliaments, MAROŠ advisory bodies and the European ŠEFČOVIČ Ombudsman

Commissioner for Agriculture Developing a long-term vision for rural areas/Realising food security, environmental and climate objectives/ Contributing to the new ‘Farm to Fork’ strategy for sustainable food by improving the agriJANUSZ food sector in sustainability WOJCIECHOWSKI including organic production

for Environment, sheries

a new Biodiversity 0/Looking at Natura station, land degradation/ species habitats, and ble seas and oceans/ on zero-pollution ambition rds plastic-free oceans

ioner for Neighbourhood and ement

hening relations with the EU’s neighcountries / Speeding up structural and onal reforms in the Western Balkans/ mising EU financial instruments through innovative approaches to financial support and public-private partnerships

mmissioner for Equality

engthening EU’s commitment to usion and equality irrespective of sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation/ Leading the fight against discrimination and developing EU anti-discrimination legislation

Commissioner for Home Affairs Developing new EU internal security strategy/ Implementing laws on the interoperability of EU’s IT/Improving cooperation in law enforcement/Developing a New Pact on Migration and Asylum/Advancing measures to prevent and respond YLVA to terrorism JOHANSSON

Commissioner for International Partnerships Building inclusive and equitable partnerships to reduce global poverty and support sustainable development / Surveying EU’s international cooperation and development policy / Promoting EU’s values JUTTA as democracy, rule of law, good URPILAINEN governance and human rights

Commissioner for Jobs and Social Rights Submitting a legal instrument to ensure that every worker in EU receives a fair minimum wage and realising a European unemployment reinsurance / Strengthening European social protection systems NICOLAS / Developing European Action Plan SCHMIT for social economy

Commissioner for Crisis Management Strengthening the Emergency Response Coordination Centre as the EU’s single operational crises response hub/Coordinating prevention and preparedness for emergencies/Supporting JANEZ Member States to develop disaster LENARČIČ risk strategies

Commissioner for Transport Developing a strategy for sustainable and smart mobility/Making the transport sector fit for a clean digital economy/ Promoting sustainable and alternative fuel transports / Reviewing ADINA-IOANA the Energy Taxation Directive, VĂLEAN ending fossil-fuel subsidies

Commissioner for Cohesion and Reforms Finding with co-legislators a timely agreement on the Reform Support Programme and the Budgetary Instrument for Convergence and Competitiveness/ Ensuring with the Member States ELISA full and effective use of funds and FERREIRA appropriate control on expenditure

graphic: Beate Dach, Spree Service GmbH, berlin; source: European Commission

and /Creating otection of ed with orld.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

“Suddenly we could face darkness”

Power play in the Middle East Interview with Helmut Sorge, Columnist for Geopolitics and International Relations, Policy Center for the New South, Rabat

he European: Mr Sorge, the Middle East is in turmoil, possibly threatened by another war with whatever configuration of parties. Should we assume the worst? Helmut Sorge: Since the establishment of Israel in 1948, which was preceded by violence, it has been involved in eight wars. Suez, Gaza, Lebanon, the Six-Day War in 1967, which led to the occupation of the West Bank and the Golan Heights and provoked the Palestinian Infadas, the uprising of the people. Since then, we have observed more destabilisation in the region, for example through the American invasion of Iraq in 2003, which led to the horror of the “Islamic State” (ISIS), the attempt to create a Caliphate. The worst is not coming, it has already happened – a permanent disaster for the people of the Middle East, forced to escape, millions to Jordan, more to Turkey, and, yes, to Europe... The European: … and suddenly Europe was forced to recognise that these conflicts, which seemed so far away, were threatening its own stability. Refugees from the Middle East arriving in hundreds of thousands were welcomed by some and rejected by a growing number of European nations.

Helmut Sorge: The unorganised arrival of so many refugees clearly shifted political sentiments to the right, even into the shadow of fascism, reviving the spirits of Hitler or Mussolini. But besides these ideological upheavals, Europe is facing another menace, a war between the US and Iran. Just one Iranian missile hitting an American warship in the Strait of Hormuz, the only sealed passage from the Persian Gulf to the open ocean, killing dozens of US soldiers or sinking the ship, would mean retaliation, an escalation of unforeseeable dimensions. Tehran could, with a few missiles, destroy the oilfields of Saudi Arabia and disrupt the oil deliveries to large regions of the planet, including Europe. Suddenly we could face darkness. The European: There is also the ongoing crisis in Libya, that Europe has to deal with, and which has led to the aggravation of the situation in arrivals, mainly in Italy. How critical is the situation in Libya and who are the powers who intervene from outside? Helmut Sorge: Firstly, it is a real shame how Europeans are abandoning Rome and Athens in their plight to deal with refugees, tolerating miserable and inhumane refugee camps.

of Donald Trump’s reelection should turn into fact, the Middle “IfEastthewillnightmare remain destabilised.”

MAIN TOPIC: EU27 in a multipolar world

Helmut Sorge was born in 1942 in Hamburg. For over 40 years he worked as a jour-

As regards the civil war in Libya, some Special Forces from Washington are active there, supposedly trying to destabilise Islamic State elements, Moscow has activated some private mercenaries, Turkey is taking sides with a few troops, France and Italy are active, both on opposing sides, which demonstrates the lack of any clear European concept or philosophy, except the attempt to stop the flow of migrants from North Africa’s shores to nations like Italy. The Libya conference in Berlin in January this year created a certain hope, but it will need much more time, and without an active Russia – partner in the conference –, there will be no progress. The European: Is there any miracle solution? Helmut Sorge: I do not see any immediate solution. It is a disgrace that members of the European Union are refusing to accept migrants on their territory. For me, European states with “Christian values” like Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Austria are hypocritical. The truth is that despite generosity shown by some, no European state is among the top ten refugee hosting nations of the world. I would like to remind you that when the EU members, late last year, discussed a plan to get migrants off boats in the Mediterranean Sea and distribute them among willing EU Member States, only 7 of 28 states accepted. The European: So, isn’t there any solution to the refugee and migration problem? Helmut Sorge: As long as we are dealing with a war in Syria, supported by Russia, a member of the UN Security Council, willing to veto any realistic peace proposal, as long as the

i The Policy Center for the New South The Policy Center for the New South (PCNS) is a Moroccan think tank which aims to contribute to the improvement of economic and social public policies that challenge Morocco and the rest of Africa as integral parts of the

nalist for the German magazine Der Spiegel, reporting from Vietnam and the Middle East and taking the position of foreign correspondent in Washington, London, Paris and Los Angeles. Mr Sorge is the author of several books and is currently teaching “Communication and Power” at the prestigious University Mohammed VI-Polytechnique, near Marrakech. Since 2018, he is also a columnist on geopolitics and international relations at the influential Moroccan think tank “Policy Centre for the New South” in Rabat.

misery of people in Africa and Asia subsists, famine, civil wars in many regions - Yemen, Nigeria, Afghanistan come to mind – there is no easy solution. If I was starving somewhere in Sub Saharan Africa, I also would strive to reach the supposed world of milk and honey, the dream of an ever-generous Europe. The wanderings will not end tomorrow. Let’s not forget that over the last 40 years nearly 20 African nations faced civil war and destabilisation, enticing millions of people to look for a better future elsewhere. The European: Would a “European Marshall plan” for Africa help? Helmut Sorge: Sure. But it would need decades to be implemented. It would need the consent of the European nations, already struggling with populism, unwilling to transfer billions towards the African continent. The European: At least Washington has been trying to defuse the conflict in the Middle East by offering a peace plan to Israelis and Palestinians, the so-called Kushner plan, proposed by Donald Trump’s son in law, Jared Kushner. The Palestinians immediately rejected it and Mahmoud Abbas, their President, deplored the project as “a gift for Israel”. Would you consider this effort a failure? Helmut Sorge: I have dealt with Palestine for half a century as a journalist for the magazine DER SPIEGEL. In 1968 I met Yassir Arafat, who in 1993 became the first Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority. It was the first time that DER SPIEGEL did an interview in the West Bank, more than half a century ago. Ever since the days after the Six-Day War, a two state solution was debated and finally seemed possible when Arafat, together with Israel’s then President Shimon Perez and the Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin were honoured with the Nobel Peace Prize “for their efforts to create peace in the Middle East.”

global south. The PCNS brings together researchers and publishes their work. It capitalises on a network of renowned partners, representative of different regions of the world. > web: https://www.policycenter.ma/

The European: This opportunity was missed. And Donald Trump is not helping things. Helmut Sorge: Alas! Prior to consulting with the Palestinians, Donald Trump offered Jerusalem to his Jewish allies as an undivided capital, proposed to annex Jewish settlements in the

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

The European: After all, Trump’s loyalty to Saudi Arabia and the belligerent attitude of his most precious Arab ally towards Iran may provoke a conflict? Helmut Sorge: The leaders in Riyadh possibly lost some of their illusions during the last couple of months. When Iranian drones or missiles attacked the Saudi oil fields Abqaiq and Khurais last September, disrupting the national oil company Aramco’s oil exports by 5.7 million barrels a day, cutting Saudi oil production by about half, Washington did not retaliate by firing missiles towards Iranian targets to punish the enemy for their evil deeds.

Helmut Sorge meeting Yassir Arafat for an interview in 1968

picture provided by Helmut Sorge

occupied areas to the Israeli government, and provoked justified Arab anger by handing the Syrian Golan heights to Israel. No question, we are talking about occupied land where more than half a million Jewish settlers moved and built their homes, against all international law and UN solutions. How can such a peace plan be credible? The European: Possibly Trump considered the plan a so-called kick start, trying to get the opponents to at least negotiate again? Helmut Sorge: The European Union foreign policy chief Joseph Borrell rejected part of the proposal, saying that it broke “internationally agreed parameters.” In clear: no annexations, no divided Jerusalem and a two state solution. What did Israel offer? A Palestinian capital in the Jerusalem suburb of Abu Dis and their state, after annexation, looking like a “Swiss cheese”, as the Palestinians complained. Trump tried to entice the Palestinians with promises of billion-dollar investments, just like he tried to convince the North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un: give up your nuclear weapons and your economy will bloom like cherry trees in Japan. The European: So, the two-state solution is dead? Helmut Sorge: Yes, as long as Donald Trump is President of the United States. Will he be reelected – another four years of nightmare? Too early to predict. If that nightmare should turn into fact, the Middle East will remain destabilised, and not only because of Israel’s policies of illegal annexation.

The European: Do you see a parallel when, after the killing of Tehrani revolutionary guard commander, General Qassem Suleimani, by an US drone in Baghdad on 3rd January 2020, Tehran fired several missiles onto an American military base near the Iraqi capital, wounding several dozen GIs, Trump did not retaliate? Helmut Sorge: He didn’t even punish the Shiites trying to storm the US embassy in Baghdad. The US president, facing elections in November, is hesitating before entering another military conflict. He had promised the withdrawal from Arab conflict zones, he is negotiating the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so, why should he risk his reelection by starting a war with Iran for Saudi Arabia? The European: In all this Middle Eastern power play, European observers possibly underestimated the importance of the Arab struggle, related to their religious competition, 14 centuries in the making: the rivalry between Shiites and Sunnis. Helmut Sorge: A very valid point. We are dealing with about 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, of which about 20 percent live in the Middle East. Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt are in majority Sunni, Iran and Iraq Shiite, although minorities exist in Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Syria and Yemen. Often these groups get entangled between religion and politics. The European: Is the invasion of Syria by Turkey’s troops some months ago an indication of power struggles to come, a battle with Syrian troops for example or even a confrontation with Russian forces? Helmut Sorge: Some Turkish soldiers were killed, and we do not know how Moscow will react if Turkish troops accidentally hit Russian soldiers active in Syria. The potential of an escalation is there, just as we have seen when Iranian missiles hit a passenger jet taking off from an Iranian airport. Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoǧan is a politician talented in horse trading and blackmail. His country is a member of NATO, but he does not hesitate to buy anti-missile systems in Russia. He did allow European Islamic State recruits to travel through Turkey to reach their Caliphate in making, and now he sends the ones captured by Turkish soldiers back to their nations, regardless of whether those governments like it or not.

MAIN TOPIC: EU27 in a multipolar world

documentation

The European: Erdoǧan has also often threatened to open borders and allow three million or more refugees to move into Europe… Helmut Sorge: The threat has turned into reality. Erdoǧan in trouble facing Syrian and Russian soldiers during his invasion, asked for NATO support, but he did not get it. He reacted by allowing thousands of migrants and refugees, not only from Syria, but also from Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan to move towards the Greek border. Once again, the Turkish leader blackmailed the European Union, asking for more support

to hold them back on Turkish territory. His calculations were correct! Brussels is paying, just to keep hundreds of thousands from settling in the EU. It is understandable, but it is a sign of weakness, not strength. The European: Thank you Mr Sorge for your openness.

The interview was led by Hartmut Bühl in Marrakech. The opinions expressed are the responsibility and view of the interviewed party alone.

The Berlin Conference on Libya On 19th January, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in agreement with the United Nations Secretary-General, had invited representatives of 12 states to a high-ranking conference on Libya in Berlin, aimed at unifying international support for a political solution for Libya that has been destroyed by civil war. Alongside Germany, the USA, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, the Republic of

Family picture at the Berlin Conference on Libya, 19.01.2020

photo: © European Union

Congo, Italy, Egypt, and Algeria, the Unitnopoly of the State to the legitimate

ed Nations, the European Commission,

current monitoring mechanisms by

the European Council, the African Union,

the UN and competent national and

and the Arab League were represented. In

international authorities, within our

addition, the Libyan Prime Minister Fayez

capabilities, including maritime, aerial

fied Libyan national security, police and

al-Sarraj and his opponent General Khalifa

and terrestrial monitoring, and through

military forces under central, civilian

Haftar accepted the invitation to Berlin.

the provision of additional resources,

authority, building upon the Cairo talks,

They didn’t participate directly in the confer-

in particular satellite imagery.(…)

and the documents produced therein.

use of force. 36. We support the establishment of uni-

ence meeting but had separate side-talks with conference members. Participants

RETURN TO THE POLITICAL PROCESS

ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL REFORM

agreed on a plan for the way forward and

25. We support the Libyan Political Agree-

42. We encourage the establishment

reiterated that there can be no military

ment as a viable framework for the

of a reconstruction mechanism for

solution in Libya. They have undertaken to

political solution in Libya. We also call

Libya supporting development and

comply with the UN arms embargo and to

for the establishment of a functioning

reconstruction in all regions under

stop supplying parties to the conflict with

Presidency Council and the formation

the auspices of a new, representative

combatants or arms.

of a single, unified, inclusive and effec-

and unified government exercising its

tive Libyan government approved by

authority over all Libyan territory, (…)

Conclusions (excerpts): CEASEFIRE

the House of Representatives. 31. We urge all Libyan parties to further

RESPECT FOR INTERNATIONAL HUMANI-

9. We call for the termination of all mili-

engage in and support mediation and

TARIAN LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS

tary movements by, or in direct support

reconciliation efforts between Fezzan

48. We urge all parties to refrain from any

of, the conflict parties, in and over the

local communities so as to reconstruct

advocacy of national, racial or religious

entire territory of Libya, starting from

the social fabric in an area long ne-

hatred that constitutes incitement to

the beginning of the ceasefire process

glected.(…)

discrimination, hostility or violence, including through the use of social media.

(…) ARMS EMBARGO

SECURITY SECTOR REFORM

21. We commit to efforts strengthening

35. We call for the restoration of the mo-

> web https://bit.ly/2xmFrZ8

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Worldwide geopolitical changes and the role of Europe Dr Rachel Suissa is an Assistant Professor at the National Security Program in the

by Dr Rachel Suissa, Professor, Haifa University, Haifa

School of Political Sciences at the University of Haifa, and a research fellow in different academic affili-

Photo: private

eopolitics has been linked to military force and territorial conquest. Therefore, geopolitical thought might pose a challenge for the EU’s strategic culture and its identity as a liberal actor in foreign and security policy. Now that the geopolitical mindset has been converted to geo-economy, geo-energy and other terms suggesting the Union’s geo-liberal nature, there is an argument for the use of this term not in its regional but global framework.

The global impact of globalisation There are two main reasons that explain this development. The first is popular but has cracks in its rationale in contemporary trends. It holds that globalisation has opened borders, that the sovereign state has lost its importance as a major player in

of Geography (U-Haifa), Haifa Center for European and German Studies. Her research interests include security and military studies, intelligence cooperation, strategic alliances, cybersecurity and EU foreign and security policy.

ignoring the tension that leads us to terrorist attacks. Within this setting, the EU with a potential hegemonic role is a matter neither of military force nor of territorial conquest. However, ignoring the tensions that the first cause presents us with is a pre-disposition to misperception, failure and bias. Failures include not only the EU’s distorted self-perception, but also its perception of how other global players and the network of global collaborations perceive it, such as the Iran-China-Russia trio. An in-depth research mind-set is needed to understand them. Most important is the interface between the perception of that trio and that of “natural allies” such as Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States that are living a new spirit of the nation-state, not to mention Eastern European countries seeking to take back responsibility for their society, economy, politics and security. In geopolitical terms, the EU should realise that the structural tensions it has contained, as a liberal regional actor, have served as an umbrella for neorealist Members States facing external neorealist global actors. This is an indicator that it is tailoring its role in worldwide geopolitical changes. It is tapering, no longer counting on the solidarity of democratic regimes

worldwide illegalisation of nuclear weapons.”

professional background: Center for

Public Management and Policy (U-Haifa), the Department

The EU’s uniqueness in the geopolitical “changes is to become the leading voice in the

international relations, whereas globalisation has a global impact. Trends, such as the easy transfer of information, the free movement of people and goods and the flow of capital, coupled with the decline in military strength of many countries, have facilitated or even boosted international terrorism. For European societies, geopolitical thinking is important in the global, not the notorious classic and regional sense, when characterised as critical globalisation rejecting militarism and domination. The second reason is that ignoring global geopolitics will entail

ations due to her multidisciplinary

Photo: © Hanasaki, stock.adobe.com

The Last of the Mohicans

MAIN TOPIC: EU27 in a multipolar world

or “natural allies”, since the neorealist agenda crosses all regimes: democratic as well as authoritarian. Thus, the challenge the European Union faces as a player in the global geopolitical arena is derived from it being the only liberal global player.

The EU – a self-deception actor? However, the characterisation of the European Union as a worldwide geopolitical added value cannot be isolated from its regional geopolitical context. These two levels reflect the tension between, on the one hand, describing the Union as having interests and striving for the status of a superpower player to ensure the promotion of these interests. On the other hand, its conception is rooted in a deep commitment to human rights through development and assistance policies, or in the context of international forum activities, such as the United Nations. The implications of this tension present the EU’s worldwide diplomatic narrative as possibly JUST, but UNWISE. This is why its “natural allies” as well as several of its Member States perceive it as a self-deception actor. This becomes blurred when we turn to another level – that between the EU and the individual in the technological era and in the global ecological system. Though this is a micro-level, it

is the most promising platform on which the EU might establish its reliability. Indeed, none of the world’s global actors have contributed to the values manifested in the General Data Protection Regulation. However, the EU’s uniqueness in the geopolitical changes is to become the leading voice in the worldwide illegalisation of nuclear weapons. This necessitates that it uses its limited success – a failure in the Iranian case – as leverage in the daring and responsible mission of disarming the world from nuclear weapons. In rational terms, this is the only vision that internalises the implications of nuclear armament to all threat clusters. This is a new arena of war for the individual and his rights, an arena that puts the EU in confrontation with other actors and world powers. It’s a vision, and like any vision, it’s a struggle that first starts at home. There is no doubt that the trends of political change in EU Member States will reflect upon all EU institutions. Most right wing Europeans will not prefer to leave the Union, but rather to make another imprint, come to agreements and rethink convections, etc. This might become a success that harmonises national platforms as different entities with a regional supra-national organisation such as the EU.

documentation

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Towards a EU-ASEAN strategic partnership At their last bi-annual EU-ASEAN Ministerial Meeting, on 21st January 2019 in Brussels, the European Union (EU) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) decided to upgrade their relations and to work towards the establishment of a Strategic Partnership. EU and ASEAN Foreign Ministers reaffirmed their commitment “to strengthen EU-ASEAN relations and cooperation across all areas of mutual interest, as outlined in the EU-ASEAN Plan of Action 2018–2022.” They held “wide-ranging discussions on

Family picture, EU-ASEAN Ministerial Meeting, Brussels, 21st January 2019

how to further strengthen EU-ASEAN cooperation, especially on global challenges, such as fair and open trade; the promotion and protection of human rights; cybersecurity; sustainable development; narrowing the development gap; connectivity; maritime security; the circular economy; energy security and clean energy; smart cities; healthy oceans; environmental protection; climate change; biodiversity, and counter-terrorism.“ Ministers also reiterated their “support for ASEAN Centrality in the evolving regional architecture, and for ASEAN’s role as a driving force in promoting dialogue, moderation, cooperation for peace, security, stability, prosperity, and the rule of law in the Asia-Pacific region and beyond.” The two sides agreed to continue efforts towards an ASEAN-EU free trade agreement based on the bilateral deals between the EU and ASEAN member countries.

The EU-ASEAN Plan of Action The relations between EU and ASEAN

The 10 ASEAN member states are Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myan-

date back to 1977 when official “Dia-

mar/Burma, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam.

logue Relations” began. In June 2015,

photo: © Peter Hermes Furian, stock.adobe.com

the EU confirmed the adoption of a new strategy “The EU and ASEAN: a partner-

security cooperation, the combat of

disaster management, the address of

ship with a strategic purpose”. In August

terrorism and transnational crimes, and

regional and global environmental chal-

2017 during the EU-ASEAN Post-Ministerial

the enhancement of maritime security

lenges and the promotion of sustainable

Conference, the second EU-ASEAN Plan of

cooperation;

development; and

Action (2018–2022) was agreed, with the aim of fostering:

• Economic cooperation by expanding

• Connectivity cooperation.

trade, business and investment

• Political and security cooperation, in-

• Socio-cultural cooperation including

cluding the deepening of political and

an enhanced cooperation on crisis and

> web https://bit.ly/33q91Zu

MAIN TOPIC: EU27 in a multipolar world

Japan and the EU have enough reasons to cooperate on maritime security

EU-Japan Maritime Security Cooperation in East Asia by Hideshi Tokuchi, Senior Fellow, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies, Tokyo

U-Japan cooperation is of global importance today. Hideshi Tokuchi The “transatlantic pivot to Asia” is not an American is a senior fellow at the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies rhetorical flourish because the basic principles behind and a visiting fellow of Sophia University’s Institute the rules-based liberal international order are inherent of International Relations. He has served as Japan’s not only in the US but also in Europe and Japan. first Vice-Minister of Defence for International Affairs However, this international order is a reflection of the from July 2014 to October 2015. In the Ministry of American political system, and therefore the role of the Defense Mr Tokuchi also had served as the DirecUS in sustaining the order is special. If the US cannot tor-General of four bureaus such as operations and Photo: private assume the role now, the EU and Japan should work defence policy. together to lead it and to engage the US, and make sure it returns to its leading role in support of the rules-based order. Maritime order is important for Europe and Japan as the sea is one. Even the Arctic Ocean should be put into the scope of EU-Japan maritime security cooperation. Because of global warming, the Arctic region is becoming a focal point. New shipping routes in that region would bring the EU have enough reasons to cooperate on this issue. Europe and Asia much closer. Meanwhile, China declares itself But all gray zone threats are not alike. Russia mainly targets a near Arctic state, and its Belt & Road Initiative (BRI) includes democratic institutions through political subversion, and Chithe Arctic Silk Road. The Arctic is also becoming a place of na’s tactics take on a more materially threatening form. Howevstrategic competition of great powers. er, they have two things in common. One is that quick response to these threats is critical. The other is that both Russia and China seem vulnerable to powerful information campaigns deThe marine environment signed to make them pay a reputational cost for those actions.1 The ocean covers over 70% of the Earth’s surface and is a global ecosystem. Protection of the marine environment is also It is not easy to make them pay this cost, but if we stopped our important in the strategic competition of great powers. For efforts, it would be exactly what they want. example, China’s reclamation activities in the South China Sea have been causing serious damages to the marine ecosystem. Recovery of the regional balance of power The Permanent Court of Arbitration found that China had The history of the South China Sea teaches us an important caused severe harm to the coral reef environment and violated lesson: “Do not create a power vacuum.” China expanded its obligation to preserve fragile ecosystems, but China does its presence there, exploiting the power vacuum created by not admit it. With this in mind, I believe that maritime secuthe withdrawal of France, the US and the former Soviet Union rity cooperation between the EU and Japan should include from Southeast Asia. Any efforts, including joint exercises and environmental protection. So, article 29 (Maine affairs) of the maritime security capacity building assistance, to recover a EU-Japan Strategic Partnership Agreement, which lays down in favorable balance of power in the region will be valuable. Marparagraph (a) the rule of law and in paragraph (b) conservation itime domain awareness is critical for early warning and quick and management of marine ecosystems, should be viewed as response. EU-Japan cooperation for the education and training one package. of regional navies and coast guards will be useful, too. Defence industrial cooperation to help Southeast Asian countries build their capabilities will also be valuable. Gray zone warfare For Japan, it will be an integral part of the implementation of The nature of the maritime gray zone warfare which China has the vision for a Free and Open Indo-Pacific and should be prioribeen engineering in East Asia has a number of commonalities tised in its approach toward the region. with the hybrid warfare which Russia has been engineering in Europe. Both straddle the military and non-military domains 1 Lyle Morris et al., Gaining Competitive Advantage in the Gray Zone: Response and are associated with low-intensity violation of national sovOptions for Coercive Aggression Below the Threshold of Major War, RAND ereignty under the threshold of an armed attack. So, Japan and Corporation, 2019, pp. 89, 133.

Maritime domain awareness is critical for “early warning and quick response”

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Competing strategic visions in the Asia-Pacific Photo: Monica Volpin, pixabay.com

Cultural differences are reinforced by China’s growing economic capabilities

by Barry Desker, Ambassador (ret), Distinguished Fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Singapore*

he American-dominated regional order in east Asia has been facing a growing challenge since the end of the Second World War. East Asian economic growth and the consolidation of post-independence states over the past seventy years occurred under the umbrella offered by the dominance of the US hegemon in the region. Today, the rise of China, the isolationist America First instincts of the Trump administration, and rising domestic criticism of the close affinity between the policies of regional governing elites and American strategic interests has led to a weakening of the ‘hub and spoke’ system which has characterised the American presence. A second important feature has been the emergence of alternative visions of strategic order as American domination in east Asia gives way to a growing willingness from China to challenge the status quo.

There are growing criticisms of the debt burden caused by Chinese loans, as seen in Malaysia, Sri Lanka and Laos. Nevertheless, China has demonstrated a commitment to supporting development projects around the region, even though the contracts may be going to Chinese state-owned enterprises. By contrast, the new American strategic doctrine is not accompanied by a similar willingness to extend support to America’s partners in the region. President Trump has called for a sharp increase in Korean and Japanese contributions to maintain the American military bases in these countries. He indicated a

In the world that is emerging, China will be a “major strategic, political, and economic power.”

Alternative visions of a strategic order Chinese President Xi Jinping promotes China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as “open, green and clean”. The BRI was included in the Charter adopted at the 19th Communist Party of China National Congress in October 2017, ensuring its prominence among long-term Chinese development objectives. Although ASEAN members as well as many other states in Asia and Africa have responded positively to the BRI initiative, there are growing concerns about the dependence on China which would arise from a successful China-centred BRI. By contrast, the United States emphasises its Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP) strategy. The American perspective focuses on its partners in the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Australia, India and Japan) and excludes ASEAN and South Korea.

illingness to reduce the American military presence, despite w the ongoing threat to South Korea and Japan posed by the North Korean nuclear arsenal. This creates the impression that the American military presence is not related to the larger issue of US strategic objectives in the Asia-Pacific

The Indo-Pacific concept Three points regarding the Indo-Pacific concept deserve consideration. First, it looks like an American effort to pitch India as an ally of the United States. President Trump and Prime Minister Modi have promoted the American/Indian partnership. It occurs at a time when India’s relationship with its South Asian neighbours is fraying as a result of the Modi administration’s Hindutva policies emphasising the role of Hindu nationalism in India’s secular state. Secondly, it highlights the importance of the sea lanes of communication (SLOCs), especially unrestricted passage through

MAIN TOPIC: EU27 in a multipolar world

Ambassador Barry Desker the Straits of Malacca and Singapore. This is a critical interest for China, Japan and South Korea, which are dependent on safe passage for their supplies of oil and natural gas from the Middle East. It is also a key objective for major naval powers like the United States, which benefit from freedom of transit through such international straits. Thirdly, Russia and China remain sceptical of references to the Indo-Pacific, as this concept is perceived as providing justification for a continued American presence in the Indian Ocean and east Asian waters. China did not object to references to the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific (AOIP), based on an inclusive approach, at the 35th ASEAN Summit in Bangkok in November 2019. However, China has expressed concern at the Quad’s Indo-Pacific concepts, worries that ASEAN may try to institutionalise the AOIP and is wary that this may provide an opening for India to play a critical role in regional affairs.

Changing relationships in the region This draws attention to the changing relationships in the region. Three ASEAN states bordering China, Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar, have increasingly aligned with China and are perceived as a Chinese lobby within ASEAN. In July 2012, Cambodia established a precedent for the meetings of ASEAN foreign ministers when it blocked a communique outlining an ASEAN consensus on references to Chinese claims in the South China Sea. Although a treaty ally of the United States, under President Duterte, the Philippines has shifted from its earlier firm stance in opposition to Chinese claims in the South China Sea to acquiesce in the Chinese forward movement. Another ostensible American ally, Thailand, has also moved much closer to China. One consequence is the increasing difficulty in developing agreed ASEAN positions on issues in which China has an interest, such as the South China Sea. In the light of these developments, what role there is for EU or European countries in the maintenance of regional security and regional order in east Asia? The EU has played a positive role in encouraging trilateral summits involving the leaders of China, Japan and South Korea. The former President of Finland Marti Ahtisaari played a critical role in facilitating the successful conclusion of the Aceh peace negotiations in 2005, assisted by the EU’s Aceh Monitoring Process. This highlights the EU’s role as a ‘desecuritiser’ in the region, which paves the way for the creation of an environment conducive to negotiated outcomes. By contrast, under the Trump administration, the United States has ‘securitised’ issues such as 5G networks, trade deficits, intellectual property, technology transfer and the presence of Chinese students in American universities. The Trump administration has labelled China a ‘revisionist power’. It has increasingly stressed China’s role as an emerging

is the Distinguished Fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, and a Member of the Board of Directors of the Lee Kuan Yew Photo: private

Exchange Fellowship. He is also a Member of Singapore’s Presidential Council for Minority Rights.

Ambassador Desker was Singapore’s Ambassador to Indonesia from 1986 to 1993 and CEO of the Singapore Trade Development Board from 1994 to 2000. From 2000 to 2014, he was Director of the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies. In 2018 he was the Chair of the ASEAN Inter-Governmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR).

adversary that poses an existential threat to American global and regional interests. American policies designed to delay China’s rise could spark fears of a catastrophic conflict. This is not inevitable. The EU, ASEAN and states like Japan and India can play a critical role as bridges aiming to reduce the potential for conflict and increasing the space for cooperation.

The growing influence of China Over the next decade, as China becomes more influential globally, Europe and the EU will need to recognise that China will expect to shape the global outlook even on issues such as the rule of law, human rights, climate change and approaches to international economic policy that are dearly held by the west. On these issues, China has a more collectivist perspective. China’s focus is on the interests of the community, not the rights of the individual. This creates a fundamental clash of political cultures. These cultural differences are reinforced by China’s growing economic capabilities that has revived western fears. It has resulted in a western shift away from open borders, the dismantling of trade barriers and the decline of open markets, best exemplified by American policies under the Trump administration. While the Soviet Union posed a strategic and political challenge during the Cold War, it was an economic pygmy. By contrast, in the world that is emerging, China will be a major strategic, political, and economic power. Global governance would require that Chinese perspectives, as well as the perspectives of Japan, India and southeast Asian societies, will play a more significant role in shaping global decision-making in the future. Like the United States, Europe will need to adjust to this reality.

This article is based on Ambassador Desker’s keynote address at the Conference co-organised by the IFRI Centre for Asian Studies and the Research Institute for Peace and Security, Japan, in Paris on 12th February 2020.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

The India-China nuclear equation

The nuclear threshold between India and China remains high

by Debalina Ghoshal, Asia Pacific fellow, East-West Institute, Brussels/Kashmir

uclear weapons have served as weapons for deterrence and a currency of power, status and prestige. Different states have different reasons to develop nuclear weapons. Both China and India have – China following the Korean War that left China susceptible to nuclear blackmail from the United States, while India’s road to nuclear weapons was to enhance its international stature and make nuclear weapons as a status of power and prestige. However, strengthening deterrence remained the central focus for both states.

Two conditional “no-first use” strategies For China, going nuclear in the 1960s, the main focus was to strengthen its nuclear deterrence vis-à-vis the United States and the former Soviet Union (now Russia). Nuclear weapons have enabled China to display its assertiveness in the South China Sea as well as in the East China Sea where it is entangled into a myriad of territorial disputes with several countries, including the Philippines, Vietnam and Japan. Peking has adopted a ‘no-first use’ doctrine, however, this is not relevant for the territories that China considers its own.

that both countries “Considering have adopted a ‘conditional nofirst use’ doctrine, both rely on the survivability of their nuclear forces.”

For India, on the other hand, China’s nuclear weapons are a direct threat to its security considering that they are both entangled in border disputes in Arunachal Pradesh – an Indian state that China claims. India also faces the threat from Pakistan, therefore, its nuclear deterrence is vis-à-vis both China and Pakistan. It has also adopted a ‘no-first use’ doctrine, with the exception that it does not apply to states that use chemical and biological warheads against it. However, while China is a Nuclear Weapons State (NWS), India continues to remain a nuclear power (NWP). China adopted a ‘limited nuclear deterrence’ posture in the recent past – a shift from its ‘minimum deterrent’ posture. India continues to maintain its ‘credible minimum deterrence’ posture, even in the present circumstances. China already possesses an intercontinental ballistic missile capability (ICBM) in its nuclear arsenal while India is yet to develop the same. Though the Agni-V intermediate range ballistic missile (IRBM) has a range of 5000 km, many, especially the Chinese, are worried that the missile can reach an intercontinental range.

Divergences and convergences However, amid the divergences, there are also some convergences. Considering that both the countries have adopted a ‘conditional no-first use’ doctrine, both rely on the survivability of their nuclear forces. For this, both countries have worked to strengthen this survivability. China’s arsenal For instance, Peking has constructed deep and strong tunnels where it stores its missile facilities to avoid enemy detection and make it difficult for adversaries to completely destroy their nuclear forces. It has developed dummy silos for its silo-based missiles and has replaced its liquid fuelled ballistic missiles with its solid propelled DF-21s. Liquid propelled missiles re-

MAIN TOPIC: EU27 in a multipolar world

quire greater launch preparation time. Hence, subjected to adversary attack, solid propellants provide greater stability with increased mobility and greater launch time preparation, thereby reducing the scope of ‘use them or lose them.’ China has also worked on ‘seabased nuclear deterrence’ for strengthened counter- and second-strike capabilities. China also keeps its missiles de-mated from its warheads at a de-alerted state. Not only this, China has worked on the post-launch survivability of its nuclear forces by developing counter-measures on its land- sea-, and aerialbased nuclear forces against enemy air and missile defence systems. Missiles that travel lofted and depressed trajectories can evade enemy missile defence. China has developed Multiple Independently Targetable Vehicles (MIRVs) after years of struggling with nuclear warhead miniaturisation process. It has also made efforts in the field of Manoeuvrable Re-entry Vehicles (MaRV), another counter-measure to evade enemy missile defence systems, and is working on Hypersonic Glide Vehicles (HGVs) that could be mounted atop ballistic missiles and evade missile defence systems. India’s nuclear potential India has also worked on the survivability of its nuclear forces and its nuclear deterrence relies on this. Solid propelled ballistic missiles, mobile ballistic missiles, keeping nuclear warheads de-mated from their delivery systems, and canister-launched missiles are all ways to enhance the survivability of its nuclear forces. Just like China, India too has relied on a counter-strike capability. Not only this, New Delhi is also working on post launch survivability methods like the introduction of MIRVs and other counter measures.

Debalina Ghoshal is a Non Resident Fellow with the Council on International Policy, Canada and Asia Pacific fellow with the East West Institute, Brussels. She specialises in regional stability with issues pertaining to nuclear, missile, and missile defence and space issues. She Photo: private

is the author of the monograph ‘Missile Development in the Middle East’ with the Middle East Institute.

Strategic stability in the region Both India and China, are striving for the protection of their nuclear capabilities. Therefore, both are developing a missile defence capability to strengthen their no-first use doctrine. On both sides, sophisticated air and missile defence systems should prevent adversaries from launching nuclear strikes against China or India (or both could be deterred from launching nuclear strikes against each other), thereby reducing the scope of ‘use them or lose them’ for weapons, and convincing the state to retain its ‘no-first use doctrine’. Both India and China, at least at the moment, do not believe in developing tactical nuclear weapons or battlefield nuclear weapons, despite the capability to do so. Both claim that they do not believe in any kind of arms race. It is probably this ‘no-first use’ doctrine adopted by the two countries, coupled with their strengthened nuclear force survivability, which has led to the nuclear threshold remaining high between India and China. This has resulted in strategic stability in the region. NWS (Nuclear Weapon State): Permanent nuclear weapon countries (China, France, Great Britain, Russia, United States of America). 2 NWP (Nuclear Weapon Power): Countries that have developed nuclear weapons and delivery systems, but are not (yet) members of the 5 Nuclear Weapon States (e.g. India, Israel, Pakistan) 1

+++ NEWS +++

A nuclear Force can’t be shared (ed/hb, Paris) On 7th February 2020, the

has always refused that nuclear weapons

territory, and he suggested that they develop

French President Emmanuel Macron de-

be considered as battlefield weapons”. He

together a coherent strategy to reduce nu-

livered a speech on defence strategy and

reaffirmed that France will never engage in

clear weapons.

nuclear dissuasion at the Ecole Militaire

a nuclear battle or any forms of graduated

But the French President evidently didn’t

in Paris, the same place where President

response.

have in mind to open the discussion to the

Charles de Gaulle had developed the “force

The French President pleaded for a strong

sharing of France’s nuclear power. The credo

de frappe” and the French strategy of nuclear

and autonomous European defence, where

of Charles de Gaulle, that a nation can only

deterrence.

France - as the only nuclear power in Europe

employ nuclear weapons for the protection

In his speech, Macron made it clear that the

after Brexit - will fulfil its responsibilities. He

of its own country, respecting retaliation,

country’s nuclear forces “are not directed to-

offered European partners a strategic dia-

is still valid.

wards any specific country” and that “France

logue on the nuclear protection of European

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

READY FOR TODAY. RIGHT FOR TOMORROW.

PATRIOT® The combat proven Patriot system is designed to meet today’s and tomorrow’s threats. 16 partner nations rely on the world’s most advanced air defense system. Raytheon’s new GaN-based AESA radar has proven its 360-degree capability, setting new standards in air defense.

Security and Defence Although the call for European strategic autonomy is more and more frequent, the path to a European defence remains difficult. However, the EU is engaged in successful global security projects that go hand in hand with development policy, such as the EU CBRN Risk Mitigation Centres of Excellence Initiative. In 2020, this successful initiative is celebrating its ten-year anniversary, with 61 nations showing a spirit of cooperation together and with the European Commission.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

The African CBRNe Masters – a high level training course

photo: © ESDU

Taking account of the specificities of each region to anticipate CBRNe risks

Interview with Mohamed Salami, Head of the Regional Secretariat for the African Atlantic Façade (AAF) region, EU CBRN Centres of Excellence Initiative, Rabat

he European: Monsieur Salami, you are the Head of the Regional Secretariat for the African Atlantic Façade (AAF), one of the eight regions in the CBRN Centres of Excellence initiative (EU CBRN CoE, see insert) set up by the European Union in 2010. Today, this initiative encompasses 61 Partner Countries and fosters national, regional and interregional cooperation throughout the world to better anticipate chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear incidents or disasters. What is the role of the Director of a Regional Secretariat? Mohamed Salami: The role of the Director of a Regional Secretariat is enshrined in the charter of Regional Secretariats of the EU CBRN CoE. The Director liaises with member countries, particularly on political and legal issues. He forges consensus among member countries of the Centres of Excellence in his region and liaises with them and the relevant stakeholders, including EU delegations and international and regional organisations, EU Member States and donors present in the region. Finally, the Director contributes to the drafting of project proposals on the basis of regional needs. The European: If I understand you correctly then, the charter is identical for all regions. But given the big differences between the regions, how are the specific needs of each region taken into account?

Mohamed Salami: Yes, you are right, the charter is indeed the same for all regions, but each region has its own specificities. That is why the person who is appointed Head of the Regional Secretariat may take initiatives of his own, as long as they are consistent with the general philosophy and the principles underlying the initiative. This means that the Head of the Regional Secretariat has to be able to devise responses to the various challenges facing his region, beyond those advocated by the charter. The European: Are we talking here mainly of national projects or are there joint projects coordinated with other partners in the region? And what is the role of the European Commission, or more particularly DG DEVCO, in the projects initiated in the eight regions? Mohamed Salami: The projects and their goals are usually the result of needs expressed by the regions themselves. Each region has its own methodology, established jointly by the Regional Secretariat and the various National Focal Points – NFPs – that have been designated in each country of a Region under the EU CBRN CoE initiative. Each project produces its own terms of reference. These are initially drafted by the Regional Secretariat, then discussed and endorsed by the NFPs, before being submitted to the EU for ap-

Security and Defence

Mohamed Salami proval. This is where DEVCO comes in. It considers each project on its merits, ensures its consistency with the objectives of the initiative as well as its legal and financial feasibility. After this detailed consideration, DEVCO decides whether it is prepared to fund the project or not. Naturally, in the course of this process, UNICRI (United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute) and the JCR (Joint Research Centre), who are essential partners of the initiative, contribute their expertise and their support.

are projects addressing the improvement of preparedness and intervention in the tariat of the European initiative for the CBRNe area, the management of danmitigation of CBRN risks, for the African- gerous chemical and biological waste, Atlantic facade. Born in 1960 in Morocco, risk management in high risk chemical he is also the Director of logistics and facilities, strengthening the regional administrative affairs at the Moroccan management of epidemics, boosting Directorate-General of civil protection. border checks on CBRNe substances, the Additionally, he is the CBRN focal point transport of hazardous substances by in Morocco. road and rail, etc… The vast majority of projects selected concern training courses and field exercises. Since 2013, there have been hundreds and even thousands of people who have participated in these courses The European: We can conclude therefore that projects have a and exercises. regional vocation and are proposed jointly by the countries of The European: There is no doubt then that the EU CBRN CoE the region in response to a common need. You referred to the initiative has created real momentum in all the countries of the funding, could you expand a little on that issue? region. Mohamed Salami: Generally speaking, the projects are funded Mohamed Salami: …yes indeed, the results are palpable at naby the EU under the Stability instrument and within the budget tional level, particularly in terms of working effectively together granted to the initiative by the European Commission. This to analyse the risks, identify threats and sensitive areas, reflect being said, in the AAF region the Regional Secretariat has on preventive and mitigating actions and of course on possible started to seek funding from other donors and there has been corrective action. This also true at the level of the AAF region, a promising start to the initiation and implementation of other where we have definitely made great progress. The milestones projects, in particular with the USA. for cooperation between the partner countries have been laid down, with the ultimate goal of unifying working methodoloThe European: Turning particularly to your region, can you say gies, standardising procedures and ultimately, drafting agreemore about the projects that have been initiated, your objecments for bilateral and multilateral cooperation. tives and your success stories? Mohamed Salami: So far, the AAF region has benefitted from The European: And internationally? several projects covering various areas, responding to different Mohamed Salami: On the international level, the work with problems in respect of CBRNe risks. By way of example, there the EU and UNICRI, as well as with other Regional Secretariats, has started to produce tangible benefits in terms of exchanges on best practices, and above all, in increasing awareness of the importance of sharing the same values and approaches to common security, The EU CBRN Centres of Excellence Initiative and of course, in developing a culture of The European Union’s Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Risk Mitigation risk prevention and mitigation. Centres of Excellence (EU CBRN CoE) Initiative was created in 2010 with the aim of fosis the Director of the regional secre-

tering national, regional and interregional cooperation around the world to better prevent chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear incidents or disasters. The Initiative is the largest European civilian external security programme, with a budget of  155 million for 2014–2020. It is funded through the Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace (IcSP). EU support is provided to implement a wide range of CBRN Risk Mitigation activities including needs and risk assessments, national and regional action plans, trainings, Train the Trainer modules, table top and real time (including cross-border) field exercises. A National Focal Point (NFP) is appointed by each of the 61 Partner Countries and a CBRN National Team is tasked with the implementation of the initiative at the country level. NFPs report to and rely on a Regional Secretariat hosted and led by one of the Partner Countries in the region and supported by a UN Regional Coordinator.

The European: In 2019, you launched a university project which is unique in its approach and could be used as an example on CBRNe for other regions: you have established at the International University of Rabat, with the support of the Moroccan government and the National Focal Points of the AAF region partner countries, an African Masters programme, taught in French, on the reduction of CBRNe risks. What is the thinking behind

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

this new programme and what are the subjects taught? Mohamed Salami: Yes, indeed, the basic idea for this project goes back to 2017. It was the result of an insight but also the logical follow-up to all the training courses that have been organised in the region. As we reviewed the situation of different African countries on the Atlantic Facade, and considering their feedback, we realised that there is a lack of highly trained experts in the general area of CBRNe risks and a definite need for highly qualified resource persons in each country. The European: For whom is this new programme intended and what are the subjects taught? Mohamed Salami: The specialised CBRNe African Masters programme is aimed initially at French speaking countries in the region, to be extended later to English speaking countries. The curriculum will cover a wide range of issues concerning CBRNe risks and threats. These will include terrorism related threats (a “dirty” bomb, diversion of chemicals for terrorist purposes, their use …) the management of industrial risks and accidents as well as the management of epidemics.

of ownership of their course. The eventual aim of course is to reduce the number of European teachers and have a majority of African teachers. The European: Will the diploma be recognised internationally? Mohamed Salami: The CBRNe Masters has been taught in France for many years and the diploma is recognised by the “conférence des grandes écoles”. This being the case, there is no reason in principle why the same course taught in Africa should not be recognised as well. The European: What is the overall length of the course? And has the teaching already begun? Mohamed Salami: The project is almost ready to launch and teaching should start this year. The course will comprise five periods of 15 consecutive days, within a maximum of 12 months. Four of the 15-day sessions will be taught in Morocco and one will take place in France, where the students will be able to train on a technical platform simulating real world conditions. The European: What are the selection criteria for candidates applying to the programme? Mohamed Salami: 25 candidates will be selected in a two-stage process. The National Focal Points will make an initial selection to ensure a balanced representation of the relevant departments and ministries. The NFPs will then propose to the AAF Regional Secretariat a list of candidates who have completed five years of higher education or equivalent, whom they have selected on the basis of their student records. In the second stage, the Regional Secretariat will select candidates on the basis of their career history forwarded by the NFPs. The candidates proposed by the NFPs must hold an executive function and most of them must come from a government department. Exceptionally, some candidates may come from a private company or a Non-Governmental Organisation.

specialised university course will help countries “This to have high level experts and strengthen capacity in these areas in every country.”

The European: Will your CBRN Masters also propose more specialised subjects? Mohamed Salami: Yes of course, we shall propose specialised courses, like for instance, “the biological versus the physiological impacts of biological agents”, “the sociology of crowds in degraded conditions” or “the toxicology of malicious acts”. The European: Will the course also include practical exercises? Mohamed Salami: Yes, the Masters programme will give students the opportunity to do table top exercises, like the CBRNe preparation for a summit of heads of state, as well as field exercises like decontamination in a radiologically contaminated environment. The European: Will you be cooperating with other universities on this programme? Mohamed Salami: The specialised CBRNe African Masters programme will be organised in collaboration with a French university (l’Université de Haute Alsace) which has been running this course in France for many years. The International University of Rabat (see insert p.53) will participate in the project as part of an international partnership that will enable it to take root on African soil. This is in line with a fundamental principle of the project which is to give the African partners a feeling

The European: Will the Masters also be open to students from outside the AAF Region? Mohamed Salami: Yes, in principle, the CBRNe Masters could be opened up to other regions and there is no reason why candidates from countries that don’t have an Atlantic facade should not be able to benefit from it, as long as they comply with the selection criteria of course. That being said, I think ideally that we should conduct this first experimental session solely for the benefit of the countries of the African Atlantic Facade before opening it up to other countries. The European: This specialised Masters programme is therefore the first university course in Africa that will train highly

photo: © ESDU

Security and Defence

i International University of Rabat The International University of Rabat (UIR) was created as part of a partnership with the Moroccan government in the field of higher education. UIR’s multidisciplinary educational offering ranges from engineering, architecture, law and political science to business administration, management, actuarial studies and logistics, as well as dentistry. Since its creation in 2010,

qualified professionals in the reduction of CBRNe risks. What role will the experts who have completed this training be able to play in their respective countries to advance the cause of reducing CBRNe risks? Mohamed Salami: This specialised university course will help countries to have high level experts and strengthen capacity in these areas in every country. These experts will be able to help governments to develop their national policies and strategies to reduce CBRNe risks and become a stimulus and a guiding light for their national authorities. As the first course of this kind in Africa, the CBRNe Masters is a pro-active way of anticipating developments on the African continent. The training of executives in these areas will also enable national governments to call on local expertise in devising their policies. The European: What benefits are you expecting in terms of regional cooperation from this high-level training course and how will the specialised African Masters support the work of the National Focal Points and the projects of the EU CBRN CoE initiative? Mohamed Salami: Our project on the African Atlantic Facade aims to give ministerial advisers the keys to a better understanding of the issues on which they are called on to advise political decision makers. Giving these advisers the necessary knowledge in the area of CBRNe is a first step. A further objective is to encourage them to think about the necessary links between ministries on all CBRNe subjects and to put an end to the silo mentality. Indeed, CBRNe issues, whether we are talking about prevention, preparation, responses or rehabilitation, always require concerted action by a whole host of experts, administrations and other bodies. The European: Yes, it is certainly true that CBRNe in general is the area that requires the most pluridisciplinarity….

UIR has developed many partnerships with international universities outside Morocco. > web: https://www.uir.ac.ma/

Mohamed Salami: …yes, indeed, by training executive staff from different administrations (police, fire service, health service, defence….) and from different countries and cultures, the pluridisciplinary approach will not only be taught but will also become a reality among the trainees. This will be a source of enrichment for participants who will be able, during numerous discussions among themselves or with their teachers, to exchange views, technical knowledge and compare their respective approaches (cultural, social, professional…). The European: This means that the graduates will not only be useful to their countries but will also promote regional cooperation. Mohamed Salami: Yes of course, because it is far easier to bring about regional cooperation, when executives have been through the same training course, can speak the same language and form convergent views on matters of common interest. Finally, we should not forget the role that this type of training can play in the medium and long-term consolidation of the principles behind the initiative and its considerable influence on the development of a culture of collective security that we are all striving for. The European: Monsieur Salami, many thanks for this interview; we wish you every success in your future endeavours. The Interview was led by Nannette Cazaubon in Rabat.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

We need to strive for practical international cooperation between armed forces

On the way to a Europe of Defence

by Dr Hans-Peter Bartels, Parliamentary Commissioner for the Armed Forces, Berlin

rganising armed forces in line with how they are to be deployed, preferably from the very outset, makes perfect sense. Out-ofarea crisis resolution? Always multinationally! National and collective defence? Always multinationally! Only basic operations, training and daily military routine should still be organised on a strictly national basis – as if this constituted the very core of national sovereignty. So has the time now come to merge the many individual military parts in Europe into one complete set in the form of a European military? I do not think so.

Timing is important Timing is important. And currently, European negotiations as to creating a European military are likely to trigger adverse reaction, disharmony and they are likely to reinforce the battle lines. The UK has already made clear that it will not participate in this process, the East could block it, France itself, despite all the rhetoric, is not yet ready for it, and a European military built around Germany alone would not be sufficient. It is not that such an agreement is generally impossible. Indeed, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg had already negotiated a treaty concerning the European Defence Community (EDC) in 1952 that provided for establishing the ”European Defence Forces” that were to report directly to the NATO Commander-in-Chief. Bundestag and Bundesrat had already ratified the EDC Treaty in order to supply the Western Alliance with German soldiers without having to establish a German military again. But the French National Assembly,

Photo: Thomas Trutschel/ photothek.net/Deutscher Bundestag

Purely national capabilities must gradually become “multinational islands of cooperation.”

Dr Hans-Peter Bartels

Practical cooperation has to prevail

is the Parliamentary Commissioner for the German Armed

The way to a Europe of Defence is by no means lacking a founding treaty, but actual practice. I think a good formula that may be applied to such a practice would be ”islands of cooperation”. Purely national capabilities must gradually become multinational islands of cooperation. Not everyone has to work with everyone else, not everything needs to be connected to everything else in a planned way already. What matters is that it does work – better in a modest and efficient way rather than on a large scale but dysfunctionally. After all, the main task of the military is still to carry out real missions.

Forces since 2015. Born in 1961, he studied political science at the University of Kiel, where he earned his MA and received his PhD in 1988. He was an editor at the newspaper Kieler Rundschau and a civil servant in the office of the Prime Minister of Schleswig Holstein. Dr Bartels has been a member (SPD) of the German Bundestag since the 1998 federal elections, serving essentially at the Committee of Defence. Elected Military Commissioner in 2015, he gave up his mandate as a MP.

having meanwhile faced a change of majorities, objected to these plans in 1954. Therefore, in 1955, the Bundeswehr was established. Europe is able to achieve a consensus and to pool previously national sovereign rights at a higher level. The introduction of the euro is one example. And so is the Schengen area without passport controls at internal borders. But like the euro project which was initiated in the 1970s and only became real money in 2002, developing towards a common European military is likely to be a project that will take generations. It started quite unimposingly sometime during the second decade of the 21st century. It has scarcely been noticed.

Security and Defence

If things go well, then such islands of cooperation will become larger, more of them will appear, some will even grow together. And gradually they may form mainland. This metaphor could stand for what is actually happening in Europe at the moment. We have been experiencing, as it were, the normative power of actual practice. A Europe of Defence is currently progressing on three axes of Europeanisation.

The way is paved for European Armed Forces

documentation

The three axes are, first, the Framework Nation Concept (FNC), which aims at a better cooperation between NATO and Europe, second, the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), where it is the EU and Europe cooperating, and third – without a specific name – individual nations that are cooperating bilaterally and multilaterally, e.g. Dutch combat brigades being in-

tegrated into German Army divisions or a new German-French air transport squadron being set up – and the trend is a rapid upward one. If more and more mainland will be formed through these axes in the future, at some point the time will come to administer it more effectively on the basis of a European set of rules rather than on the island rationale. Then, a European military could be established officially with 20 or 30 national armed forces being dissolved and integrated into each other at the same time. Incidentally, ”integration” is a term from the 1952 EDC Treaty. Perhaps we shall achieve this integration project prior to China overtaking the Americans in militarily terms. Then, eventually, the US would be happy to have an ally that does make a substantial contribution to the West’s ability to assert itself.

The stony path to European sovereignty The new European Commission is clearly

ise European defence. The reflections on

Berlin Plus option, falling back on NATO

requesting greater responsibility of the

possible concepts coming from outside

command for higher intensity military oper-

European Union for European security and

are mostly not yet coherent, but there is

ations. Until now, the trademark of CSDP

strategic autonomy. One reason for this

evidently a tendency of European adminis-

was civil-military cooperation.

is certainly the new attitude of the United

trations to assume their common defence

States on European security.

as a pillar of the collective defence in NATO.

The discussion regarding a European army

This co-existence with NATO corresponds to

An interesting contribution to this discus-

has broadly started inside the administra-

TEU 42(2). Common Security and Defence

sion is a 12-point paper by the French

tion and outside by specialists. The dream

Policy (CSDP) has clearly been built on

Senate under the title “European Defence:

of European soldiers in the same uniform

the principles of no separation from the

The Challenge of Strategic Autonomy”,

and a unique command is going to be

North Atlantic Treaty and no unnecessary

published in July 2019:

replaced with discussions on how to real-

duplications or taking advantage of the

> web https://bit.ly/2PNQQra

The 12 proposals in this paper are as follows: 1. Reinforce the commitments of each country and a collective drafting of a White book on European Defence; 2. Raise the profile of defence issues within EU institutions; 3. Create facilities such as a European defence summer school as a forum for reflection; 4. Create a Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe at NATO; 5. Render the European capacity planning process cyclical and consistent with the established process in NATO; 6. Relaunch the CSDP by concentrating on the EU’s global

must be favourable to the development of the European Defence Technological Industry Base (EDTIB); 9. Clarify the functioning of TEU 2(7) by assigning an informational and coordinating role to a specific EU body, e.g. the High Representative (HR/VP); 10. Propose as a top priority the establishment of a Defence & Security Treaty with the United Kingdom (UK); 11. Make the major Franco-German industrial projects key elements as a starting point to allow other European partners to join;

approach, combining a military component with diplomatic

12. Prefer and encourage flexible mechanisms, both inside

economic and development assistance components and

and outside the EU, such as spontaneous cooperation or

extending the resources for the Military Planning and Conduct

pooling, similar to those established with regard to Military

capabilities (MPCC);

Air Transport (EAT).

7. Use the European Defence Fund (EDF) for projects of excellence contributing to European strategic autonomy;

This paper has been broadly discussed in Member States (including

8. Reaffirm the binding nature of the Permanent Structured

the UK) and EU institutions as well as at NATO Headquarters as a

Cooperation (PESCO) and the commitment of nations, which

valuable contribution to the discussion on a Europe of Defence.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Photo: Guilhem Vellut CC BY 2.0, flickr.com

Europe’s strategic autonomy A pillar of a renewed NATO and a precondition for European security

by Christian Cambon, Member of the French Senate and Chair of the Senate’s Committee on Foreign Affairs, Paris

ith the issue of the European Defence Fund (EDF) budget, discussions on the European Union’s multiannual financial perspectives have highlighted the question of Europe’s strategic autonomy. On this subject, it should first of all be borne in mind that strategic autonomy is based not only on defence and the existence of a European defence technological and industrial base (DTIB); it also involves a broad range of sectors of the civilian economy.

Defence issues have changed in our history Defence issues, however, cast a particularly clear light on the challenges and choices Europeans are facing. Today, we might say that the 20th century has, in a way, brought Europe back to its position before the modern era. Until the end of the Middle Ages, Europe was just a reasonably well-populated and developed region, with an influence that did not extend greatly beyond its geographical area. The considerable technological and economic advance that Europe gained over the rest of the world from the 16th century onwards has been levelled out in the last century by two world wars, economic crises, and the partition of the continent in the context of the Cold War. However, there are three important differences between the situation in which Europeans find themselves today and the one that prevailed at the end of the Middle Ages: Firstly, conflicts between European nations are now at a historical low, and this situation seems likely to last. This exceptional

outcome is mainly due to the process of European integration, though the people in Europe tend not to give much credit for this to the European Union. Rather, they blame it for failing to solve their everyday difficulties, even though that was not what EU was originally designed for. Secondly, and this is partly related to the previous point, Europeans have largely given up on providing for their own security, a situation not seen since the fall of the Roman empire. The primary cause of this historically extraordinary situation was the rivalry between the United States and Russia during the Cold War. It led the United States to assume most of the continent’s defence up to now. But as the current US President and his Democratic predecessor have made clear, the United States now considers its main rival to be China, which has led it to divert part of its efforts from Europe and the Middle East to the Pacific region. From this perspective, the American president’s statements questioning the security guarantee promised by

initiatives show that European defence is in “Recent fact already a reality.”

Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty tend to suggest that the United States considers the original grounds for the creation of NATO, i.e. the threat from Russia, to no longer be so relevant. Thirdly, today Europe is fully integrated into a global economic, social and political context from which it cannot extricate itself and which is developing in a way that Europe influences less and less. Migration flows, about which Europeans have struggled to agree upon a common management, are generated by crises on other continents, whether in the Middle East or in Africa. Likewise, terrorist networks are now globalised, and attacks

Security and Defence

Christian Cambon is the Chairman of the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Armed Forces of the French Senate. Born in 1948, he earned a Master’s degree in Public Law from the University II in Paris and he graduated from the Paris Institute of Political Studies. Mr Cambon has been a member of the French Senate since 2004, representing the constituency of Val de Marne. He is, among Photo: private

others, Head of the French delegation at the Parliamentary Assembly of NATO and Chairman of the parliamentary delegation to intelligence.

in Europe have often been encouraged, planned and funded from outside of Europe. The issue is therefore to know whether Europeans wish to choose their own destiny, or instead rely on other powers to ensure their security, monitor their alliances and decide their expenditures. This is not at all a matter of being in favour of, or against, the transatlantic link. First of all, Europe is currently still unable to provide for the defence of the continent on its own. Secondly, the United States is our ally for reasons that are mainly political. We share common values that underpin our alliance in NATO: the primacy of the rule of law over the use of force, the defence of the freedom of individuals and peoples, and respect for the human person – these are the foundations of the total solidarity upon which we must act as allies if any one of us is attacked. This is a political reality that is unlikely to change in the future, even if the United States chooses to redirect its focus towards the Pacific. Lastly, it’s worth remembering that it is the Americans who are calling for “better burden sharing” in the defence of our continent. All these reasons show that European strategic autonomy should not cause tension between Europe and the United States; it is, on the contrary, a condition for the achievement of the respective goals of both Americans and Europeans. By strengthening its autonomy, Europe can become a key ally for the United States on the global stage.

France wants a more efficient NATO The French request to redefine NATO’s objectives and re-evaluate the threat analysis made by the allies must be seen from this perspective. It will be difficult to maintain a military alliance if the allies cannot agree on what the threats are. For example, it is clear – as we have seen recently – that we do not define terrorist threats the same way Turkey does. It is clear that we do not share the same understanding of what it means to be in a military alliance when Turkey purchases S400 air defence systems from Russia. It is also clear that we do not share the same concept of what it means to have an alliance when Turkey seems to challenge the sovereignty of other NATO members or EU members. At France’s request, work is in progress to redefine the NATO framework: this will be good for

our common security. To be effective and credible, the Atlantic Alliance must have its feet firmly planted on both sides of the Ocean, relying on the formidable military power of the United States, of course, but also on the specific capabilities of European countries. Of course, for many of our European partners, this represents a major shift. It is important that we acknowledge this and allow time for this new posture to mature. It is also important that we recognise the realities at hand, namely that today Europe largely depends on the United States for its security – a fact that no one can seriously dispute. But at the same time, it’s also true that the development of terrorist networks in the Middle East or in the Sahel region does not present the same risk for the United States and European countries. We Europeans are, so to say, on the front line, and are finding ourselves more and more often in a situation where we have to convince our American ally to join our efforts to combat these networks.

A strategic awakening in Europe For all these reasons, we are witnessing a European strategic awakening. The work of our Standing Committee in the French Senate, and especially our report on European defence1 released last summer, has shown that analysts too often insist on seeing the glass as half-empty, disregarding the glass that is half-full with all the various elements of European defence that are gradually coming together. To mention only a few recent ones: the creation of the EDF, of course, which will make it possible to consolidate the DTIB; the bolstering of dialogue between the EU and NATO; the creation of a joint Franco-German tactical air transport unit to be based in Evreux, France; the unprecedented partnership between the French and Belgian armies, within the framework of the “CaMo” armoured vehicles programme; the creation of the “Takuba” task force allowing the participation of special forces from several European countries in the Sahel, etc. These recent initiatives show that European defence is in fact already a reality. Its further development is still necessary to ensure that it can meet the challenges of a more violent, more unstable world, and allow Europe to guarantee the security of all Europeans, and to serve the cause of peace. 1 http://www.senat.fr/rap/r18-626-2/r18-626-2.html

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

JEYRAN 2019 – a successful CBRN counter-terrorism exercise

A field report from Uzbekistan by Nannette Cazaubon

n November 2019, together with Editor-in-Chief Hartmut Bühl, I took a flight to the capital of Uzbekistan in Central Asia. We were invited to participate as observers – me as a journalist, Hartmut as an expert – in the CBRN counter-terrorism field exercise “Jeyran”. Curious to learn how such a large international exercise with 200 participants from Uzbekistan and partner countries, as well as international observers, would be organised and what its outcome would be, we accepted the invitation. The three-day exercise was mounted within the framework of the dynamic European CBRN Risk Mitigation Centres of Excellence Initiative (EU CBRN CoE), established ten years ago with the aim of fostering national, regional and interregional cooperation worldwide to better prevent CBRN incidents or disasters.

(Tashkent, November 2019) During the flight to Tashkent we have time to study the programme in more detail. It sounds promising: the participants will play a variety of roles – active players, observers and evaluators – in four realistic scenarios simulating the release of biological and chemical agents by terrorists. We learn that almost a year of preparation has gone into combining the different scenarios of the “Jeyran” exercise organised by the European Commission’s DG DEVCO and the Government of Uzbekistan. There is no doubt that terrorists today have the knowledge and willingness to use chemical and

During the opening session

biological agents. A large joint field exercise such as “Jeyran”, with international participants and observers, is timely!

First Day Opening session On the morning of the exercise’s first day, we are taken by bus, together with the other international participants and observers, from the city of Tashkent to the premises of the Institute of Civil Protection of the Ministry of Emergency Situations of Uzbekistan, near the capital. We are warmly welcomed by Bakhtiyor Gulyamov, acting Chairman of the State Committee of Industrial Safety of the Republic of Uzbekistan and Head of the Regional Secretariat for Central Asia of the EU CBRN CoE Initiative. Mr Gulyamov, who has coordinated the preparation and implementation of the field exercise, states that terrorism has become a global issue and that the organisation of joint exercises “effectively promotes discipline, efficient time management and development of the necessary professional skills that will later help to correctly and efficiently respond to various CBRN threats”. The overall goal of planning for emergency preparedness and response is to ensure that adequate capabilities are in place and emergency response teams are sufficiently equipped and trained. This is highlighted by Shavkat Samatov, representative of the Cabinet of Ministers, who welcomes us in the name of

Security and Defence

the Government of the Republic of Uzbekistan. The Chargé d’Affaires of the EU Delegation to Uzbekistan, Jussi Narvi, says that “holding the Jeyran field exercise in Uzbekistan is very timely and relevant”, while the United Nations Resident Coordinator Helena Fraser, in her speech, underlines the importance of working together at a national, regional and international level to prevent CBRN incidents or attacks. She expresses her conviction that Jeyran “will point us in the direction where we should further streamline our efforts.”

i JEYRAN 2019 The chemical-biological counter-terrorism field exercise Jeyran took place from 13th to 15th November 2019. It was organised in the framework of the European Union CBRN Risk Mitigation Centres of Excellence Initiative (EU CBRN CoE) that is funded by the European Union and is jointly implemented by the United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute (UNICRI) and the European Commission Joint Research Centre (JCR). The European External Action Service (EEAS) is

SCENARIO 1 – detection of CBRN material The Commander of the exercise – Colonel H. Botyrov, Deputy Commander of the National Guard – introduces us to the operational aspects of the exercise and the different scenarios. The first scenario is presented right away, by a video that is commented live: The Uzbek authorities have received intelligence that a terror group is trying to bring chemical and biological substances into Uzbekistan; dangerous goods have been discovered at the airport. State Customs Committee units have followed a suspicious truck, which eventually leads them to a clandestine biological-chemical laboratory operated by terrorists. In the meantime, an operational headquarters has been set up, involving all relevant agencies and a joint task force is preparing to intervene. Just as I am wondering what such a joint headquarters might look like, we are invited to visit it next door, in the Institute of Civil Protection! The headquarters is equipped with computers, screens, phone lines and maps. This is where all the information on the terrorists is collected and where the decisions are taken. Demonstration of equipment In the afternoon, we witness an impressive open-air demonstration of the resources and equipment used during the exercise: weapons, special equipment, protective suits, medical care equipment, robots, specially trained dogs to detect the explosives, etc. are shown. Everything is explained in Russian and English, and Hartmut and I can ask a lot of questions. We appreciate the lively mixture of presentations, videos, and visits. I am amazed to hear that after we have seen all the material, we will even be able to attend the simulation of an earthquake with a magnitude of nearly 7! Earthquake simulation The simulation takes place in the Institute of Civil Protection’s earthquake simulation centre, which is the first of its kind in Central Asia. The state-of-the-art equipment, financed with the support of the European Commission, is available otherwise only in Japan. It serves as a platform to build public awareness of Uzbekistan’s vulnerability to seismic events and educate the public in the best ways of preparing for and behaving during an earthquake. Now the simulation starts! We are shown into a space with a living room-like scene installed on a mobile platform. They ask

also supporting the initiative that involves 61 countries in 8 regions of the world. Uzbekistan is part of the Central Asia region together with Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Pakistan, and Tajikistan. Jeyran was approved by the authorities of the Republic of Uzbekistan and implemented by the relevant national ministries and agencies: the National Guard; the Ministry of Emergency Situations; the Ministry of Interior; the Ministry of Health; the State Customs Committee; the Ministry of Defence; and the State Security Service. Participants and observers of the exercise included the Heads of the Regional Secretariats of the EU CBRN CoE Initiative, the National Focal Points of the partner countries of Central Asia, as well as representatives of international organisations, diplomatic missions and independent experts.

for volunteers to sit down in the living room. Hartmut cannot resist the temptation to do so, while I prefer to observe the scene. Good decision, the demonstration is impressive! Books fall off the shelves and the furniture trembles violently. Luckily, the volunteers have been told how to react by hiding under the table or squatting in a corner and protecting their heads with a pillow. Nobody is injured! At the end of this intense first day, we enjoy the generous Uzbek hospitality during dinner with the other participants.

Second day SCENARIO 2 – seizure of a clandestine laboratory Scenario 2 takes place on the second day at the same location. It’s cold this morning, and we are wearing our warm coats and scarves as we arrive at an extensive outdoor area, in front of a scruffy building – the terrorists’ “clandestine laboratory”, according to the scenario. We take our seats opposite the building. I am observing some snipers on the roof while the Commander is explaining the situation to us: he reminds us that the day before (Scenario 1) the location of the terrorists’ clandestine laboratory has been identified. He tells us that we will now be able to observe how the different specialised teams will proceed to neutralise and capture the terrorists. Neutralisation of the terrorists As a first step, the area is cordoned off to prevent the terrorists escaping. A medical team is on stand-by in case people get injured. A CBRN decontamination team is on-hold nearby.

Then it starts! Suddenly, several people with rock-climbing equipment go abseiling from the roof with amazing speed. They remain stuck in the middle of the wall, motionless and head down. At that moment, the intervention team arrives from the right along the wall. They duck under the windows of the building, and I wonder what the parcel is they have with them. I understand it right away, when the parcel is thrown against one of the windows: a loud bang fills the air, together with the sound of gunfire – the parcel was obviously a bomb allowing the special team to enter the building. Like me, the other observers are impressed, but some are a little critical. The specialists from Afghanistan next to me are discussing among themselves and I ask them for their impressions. They say that there may be alternative and less risky methods than explosives to enter a building where terrorists are hiding with chemical agents and explosives. A point that I find interesting, and that will be discussed later during the debriefing. This brings home to me that the open exchange of experience is key in this exercise. The action moves on: the intervention team enters the building together with a negotiator who will try to convince the terrorists to give themselves up. Lieutenant-Colonel R. Yunuskhodjayev is updating us on the situation: three terrorists have been killed and four captured. With a black hood over their heads, they are taken outside the building. The operation of the special teams Now it’s the turn of the heavily equipped anti-explosive team to enter the building. The way the scenario plays out is really gripping, and I appreciate being able to follow, via two big screens, how the team is proceeding inside the building. Once the area has been declared free of explosives, the CBRN team starts its work inside the “laboratory” to collect samples. I leave my seat and join Tristan Simonart, DG DEVCO’s dynamic coordinator for the CBRN CoE Initiative, who invested considerable time and effort in preparing the exercise together with the Uzbek authorities. He tells me that participants from other countries of the Central Asia region, from Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, and Afghanistan, are part of the specialised CBRN team. The members of all the different teams leaving the building

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

must go through the decontamination station that has been set up outside. Finally, the investigation team arrives. Their work will last several hours, sometimes days, to collect further information on the terrorist group. After three hours of observation outdoors, we are happy to go back inside for a cup of coffee and to discuss the morning’s events with the other participants. SCENARIO 3 – tracking terrorists to prevent an attack The afternoon is no less gripping. Scenario 3 is presented to us: Thanks to the information obtained from the captured terrorists and a map found, the authorities become aware that accomplices of the terrorists are planning an attack in Tashkent and its region. The terrorists’ car is detected and tracked by the deployed special groups. In order to protect the population, artificial traffic jams are created, and the terrorists are guided to an empty road outside Tashkent. When the car is blocked from both sides of the road, the terrorists start shooting and snipers from the special groups respond. A box with a clock mechanism is found in the car, possibly a bomb which is destroyed by bomb disposal experts. SCENARIO 4 – neutralisation of a bomb in a cinema A bomb will also be involved in the last scenario of the exercise, and the same goes for the observers! We are told that we are supposed to be moviegoers in a cinema located in a shopping mall in Tashkent. According to the scenario, in five hours, the concert of a famous singer will take place in a concert hall of the big mall with 1000 spectators expected. The authorities receive the information that a bomb is hidden somewhere in the mall, and they decide to evacuate everybody inside, including us. We leave the “cinema” quietly and the way we are told. Then we can observe how the special task force proceeds in the search for the bomb. They arrive in impressive protective suits with their special equipment and trained dogs. A suspicious parcel found under a seat is checked with an X-Ray scanner. We are told that the parcel contains a clock mechanism, a detonator and an energy source – so it’s a “dirty bomb” made by the terrorist group. The commander of the operation decides to destroy the bomb outside. This is where a tracked robot comes

Security and Defence

in. I remember that I saw it at the demonstration of material on the first day, and it’s interesting to see how it now works! The bomb is cordoned off with a protection ring, and the small, remote-controlled robot clanks over to it. A few seconds later the parcel explodes with a loud bang! Observers’ opinions During the debriefing, Tristan Simonart takes the floor to congratulate the Uzbek organisers and all the players “for this extremely well-performed exercise”. He highlights the good coordination between the different agencies and teams and says that in the future it would be interesting to organise a regional cross-border exercise, involving neighbouring countries. “We from the European Union will certainly be interested to participate within the frame of the EU CBRN CoE programme”, he concludes. As we wait for the bus to take us back to Tashkent city, Hartmut and I ask a few of the participants about their impressions. The experienced observers from Afghanistan have appreciated the well performed exercise, focused on the prevention of a terrorist attack. A follow-up exercise, they say, might cover the response in case an attack with biological-chemical agents actually occurs. They underline that the Uzbek organisers have shown with this exercise that terrorism should be managed like a natural disaster, demanding a multisectoral response with well-defined roles responsibilities of the different actors. We also ask Emmanuel Gravier, who is the counter-terrorism and security advisor to the European Delegation to Kyrgyzstan in Bishkek, for his view. He makes an interesting point regarding the support of the EU for counter-terrorism exercises like Jeyran: “the purpose of incorporating security issues into the European Union’s new strategy for Central Asia is ultimately to prevent terrorist attacks on the territory of the Member States of the European Union. As the threat is global, the response has to be global too”.

observers is very positive. They are impressed by the perfect organisation of the Jeyran exercise. Indeed, a lot of effort has been deployed to make the scenarios easily comprehensible for the observers. It was highlighted that the strong point of the exercise was the professionalism and the cooperation of the different agencies. Jeyran raised awareness among observers and strengthened interregional networking, which is an objective of the EU CBRN CoE Initiative. Several observers suggest that in the future, an interregional exercise involving several countries would be a good idea, even if everybody is aware that the preparation of such an exercise involving several countries is complex and would need time. Dr Faheem Tahir, Chief of the Public Health Laboratories Division at the National Institute of Health in Pakistan and the National Focal Point for the EU CBRN CoE Initiative, hits the nail on the head: “the name of the exercise – Jeyran – was well chosen”, he says, “because a Jeyran is a well-known animal in Pakistan and also in Afghanistan, that eats snakes. And terrorists are the snakes.” Hartmut and I had a really interesting time in Uzbekistan, learning a lot about international and regional cooperation in CBRN risk and threat mitigation. We also learned a lot about the way the European Union, and in particular DG DEVCO, is supporting CBRN cooperation and risk prevention around the world. Both of us were deeply impressed by the spirit of cooperation among the participating countries and the openness of their discussions. And we felt that the EU CBRN CoE Initiative is really on the right track!

Third day

Nannette Cazaubon is Deputy-Editor-in-

Evaluation of the exercise The morning of the third day is dedicated to the debriefing and evaluation of the exercise. The overall feedback from the

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Our Authors in 2019 Author/ Title Atzpodien, Hans-Christoph; Bellouard, Patrick; Taylor, Trevor Interview: Germany – a touchstone for the arms export policy of the European Union Barrons, Lawson Richard Interview: What does Brexit mean for the British Armed Forces? Beer, Nicola New liberal dynamics in a reformed EU Berger, Laurent How to build a European industrial policy that respects social demands Bujan, Carlos Bandin We need more efficient cybersecurity building worldwide

Page

Author/ Title

Bühl, Hartmut Climate- will our youth be able to change the world? Security must be palpable Life Support Solutions – Field Camp Services

32 33 33

14 13 56

Bütikofer, Reinhard Security Union: Getting the defence industrial pillar right

Cazaubon, Nannette The EU CBRN Centres of Excellence Initiative

Ciamba, George The Romanian Presidency objectives in 2019

Eggers, Bruse R. Eggers The Future of European Integrated Air and Missile Defence

Fabbrini, Federico Ad Kalendas Graecas?

Favin-Lévêque, Jacques European Army or Permanent Structured Coalition?

Gahler, Michael Transatlantic relations: shared history and common values

Dognin, Léo Isaac Democracies must learn to withstand, in peacetime, a permanent war in cyberspace

Geiger, Henriette Effective development aid through coherent and concrete projects Giuliani, Jean-Dominique European evidences Our freedom starts with Hong Kong

ESDU N°

Page

Kivinen, Timo Finland promotes an EU defence cooperation

Martini, Peter The crucial role of cybersecurity for a resilient energy supply

Mauro, Frédéric A European army: a vital debate

Merz, Céline Walls are not Eternal

Meyer-Plath, Sebastian Interview: Networking on CBRNe detectors

Niebler, Angelika How MEP’s work to boost Europe’s cybersecurity

Pariat, Monique Managing disasters: the role of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism

Pascu, Ioan Mircea The time is ripe for a Commissioner for Security and Defence

Picula, Tonino Consolidation of the Western Balkans is crucial for European security

Röhrig, Wolfgang Cyber defence in the European Union is part of its defence capabilities

Schönbohm, Arne Interview: Europe needs coherent national stategies and EU operational concepts

Viola, Roberto Taking a cyber leap forward

Von Blücher, Hasso Interview: 50 years of CBRN protection

McGrath, Beth The new role of Defence Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)

Popp, Thomas Decontamination solutions for all kind of scenarios

Singh, Michael The world needs the EU as a global player Tajani, Antonio Interview: The next European elections will be of utmost important for the EU

32 33

23 12

Haavisto, Pekka The EU’s security and prosperity in the digital age

Weber, Manfred Europe needs to face the threats of the 21st century

Hernandez, Raymond No more dead through contaminated water!

Zikora, Dirk The importance of a European Air Power solution

Hoyer, Werner The new European Union

Jehin, Olivier A European army: a vital debate

Gergorin, Jean-Louis Democracies must learn to withstand, in peacetime, a permanent war in cyberspace

ESDU N°

Wainwright, Rob The new role of Defence Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)

Editorial Staff Publisher and Editor-in-Chief: Hartmut Bühl, Brussels

Hartmut Bühl was born in 1940 in Karlsruhe. He has been Publisher and Editor-in-Chief of the magazine since 2008. He is a German General Staff Officer who served in staff and command positions, among others as a Defence and Security Policy Advisor to two German Chancellors (1982–1986), as Military Attaché in Paris from 1986–1990 and Brigade Commander in Trier (1991). Hartmut was German Head of the Mounting HQ of Eurocorps and Deputy Chief of Staff Operations (DCOS) in Strasbourg (1992–1996). He retired in 1998 from the Bundeswehr as a Commander of the Military Division in Darmstadt before joining Aerospatial/DASA (future EADS) in Paris. He retired in 2005 from EADS as an Executive Vice-President and was engaged by the Alliance Ground Surveillance (AGS) Consortium in Brussels as Team Leader Communications until 2007. Hartmut was decorated with the German Bundesverdienstkreuz am Bande (1994) and the United States Meritorious Service Medal (1998). France made him Chevalier de la Légion d’honneur (2004). E-Mail: Hartmut.buehl@orange.fr • Phone: +49 172 32 82 319

Deputy Editor in Chief - Nannette Cazaubon, Paris

Nannette Cazaubon was born in 1968 and grew up in Germany and France. An independent journalist specialised in the field of European security and defence, she has been Deputy Editor-in-Chief of “The European – Security and Defence Union” since 2010. Nannette studied literature at the University of Bonn, then Political Science at the Institut d’Etudes Politiques (IEP) in Paris. She worked as an independent lecturer for various German political foundations and for the Bundestag. She has been living in Paris since 1998, where she started out as an editorial assistant for the German magazine “Der Spiegel”. From 2003–2013 Nannette was the special correspondent for France of the German publishing group Mönch. From 2008– 2014 she worked as Senior Editor for SecurityCommunity.eu, an independent information service for CSDP activities. E-Mail: nannette.cazaubon@magazine-the-european.comt • Phone: +33.6.78832116

Editorial Assistant – Céline Merz, Aachen

Céline Merz was born 1994 in Bonn. After graduating from high school in Bonn, she decided to study business at the International University of Bad Honnef. Since 2017, Céline has been working as an editorial assistant for “The European – Security and Defence Union” magazine, where she is responsible for documentation and picture research and social media. E-Mail: editorial.assistant.esdu@gmail.com

Translator – Miriam Newman-Tancredi, London

Miriam Newman-Tancredi was born in 1993. She is French and British and joined the ESDU editorial team in 2018 as a freelance bilingual translator. She has been a communications consultant in the defence sector since 2016, working for Eurocorps HQ and CiDAN, among others. After obtaining an LLB in Law and an LLM in International Human Rights Law, Miriam did a Masters in European politics in 2015, specialised in defence and security, at Sciences Po, Strasbourg. She is also a business adviser for Enterprise Europe Network, a European project helping small and medium sized enterprises to innovate. E-Mail: miriam.newmantancredi@gmail.com

Layouter – Beate Dach, Berlin

Beate Dach was born in 1972. She has worked for the magazine since 2009. She holds an engineering degree in landscape management and nature conservation. She completed further training as an advertising designer in 2001. Since then, she has worked in agencies and publishing houses, and has been the Layouter at Spree Service GmbH since 2004. E-Mail: beate.dach@spree-service-beratung.de

The magazine holds the CiDAN â&#x20AC;&#x153;European Award 2011 for Citizenship, Security and Defenceâ&#x20AC;? and was awarded the Special Jury Prize in 2019 by the same association for excellent journalism promoting Europe.

The European Security and Defence Union Issue 34

Articles inside

“A strong Europe in a world of challenges” Croatia’s EU chairmanship – a historic moment for the country

Nannette Cazaubon, Paris JEYRAN 2019 – a successful CBRN counter-terrorism excercise A field report from Uzbekistan

Christian Cambon, Paris Europe’s strategic autonomy A precondition for European security

Barry Desker, Singapore Competing strategic visions in the Asia-Pacific Changing relationships in the region

Dr Hans-Peter Bartels, Berlin On the way to a Europe of Defence Striving for practical international cooperation

Debalina Ghoshal, Brussels/Kashmir The India-China nuclear equation The nuclear threshold remains high

Interview with Mohamed Salami, Rabat The African CBRNe Masters – a high level training course Taking account of regional specificities

Interview with Helmut Sorge, Rabat/Marrakech Power play in the Middle East Europe’s missing influence

Jean Dominique Giuliani, Paris Learning the language of power Change of dimension

Editorial, Hartmut Bühl

Dr Gordan Grlić Radman, Zagreb Croatia’s EU chairmanship - a historic moment for the country Overcoming challenges through unity and strength

Hideshi Tokuchi, Tokyo EU-Japan Maritime Security Cooperation in East Asia Recovery of the regional balance of power

The Berlin Conference on Libya Documentation

Hartmut Bühl, Brussels/Paris Auld Lang Syne Will the UK accept EU standards?

Sir Graham Watson, London The United Kingdom after Brexit Damage to the integrity of the UK