The European Security and Defence Union Issue 8 by The European-Security and Defence Union

ISBN 978-3-934401-20-4

Independent Review on European Security & Defence

Volume No 4/2010

Main Topics Energy Supply Secu rity Air Power in Crisis Management

No 4/2010

How to strengthen Europe’s freedom of political action and efficiency in crises

The European Union has to guarantee its Member States an equitable energy supply – but Member States have to make greatest efforts

Securing Europe’s energy supply – the priorities for European energy policy in the coming years

Interview with Michel Barnier,

Krzysztof Lisek MEP, Vice-Chairman of the

Günther H. Oettinger,

Member of the European Commission for

Subcommittee on Security and Defence of

Member of the European Commission for

Internal Market and Services, Brussels

the European Parliament, Brussels

Energy, Brussels

gdels.com

NEW EAGLE

EDITORIAL

Editorial

NATO wishes to prove its relevance In a few weeks’ time, on 19 and 20 November 2010, at the Lisbon summit, the 28 NATO heads of state and government will decide on Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s proposal for the first revision of the Strategic Concept since 1999 and determine how they see NATO’s future responsibilities. The new Strategic Concept is intended to bring NATO into step with the changes in the world, prove NATO’s relevance for the security of its members and set a new direction for it. After one year of rethinking NATO, a group of senior policy-makers under former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright’s guidance have identified the elements to be taken on board by the new Strategic Concept. They noted that we are living in a more insecure world where western values are no longer assured, in which it is no longer the previous longstanding threats to NATO’s territory that prevail, but rather new, asymmetric threats such as that of cyber attacks or of weapons of mass destruction falling into the hands of non-reliable states or worse, terrorists. They point to the dangers of piracy for world trade, to the unsatisfactory relations with Russia and to the crucial threat that radical Islam poses to our way of life. The new consensus on a missile defence shield is a good thing and if Russia were really to become involved it would be a breakthrough for security in Europe. But can there be a common transatlantic strategic view on nuclear weapons as long as some nations refuse to acknowledge the interdependent nature of nuclear arms control and missile defence. Then the agreement on NATO missile defence is no more than a shabby compromise. Moreover, is all this sufficient for it to be considered a new Strategic Concept? A change in the Strategic Concept requires the member states to agree on the need to respond to new challenges and on how to do so. It is also about the impact on NATO’s role and influence in a decade or so of the rise of new powers such as China, India and Brazil. Member states also

Impressum The European − Security and Defence Union ProPress Publishing Group Brussels/Berlin Headquarters Berlin: Kaskelstr. 41, D-10317 Berlin Phone: +49/30/557 412-0, Fax: +49/30/557 412-33 Brussels Office: Hartmut Bühl Avenue des Celtes, 30, B-1040 Brussels Phone/Fax: +32/2732 3135, GMS: 0049-1723 282 319 E-Mail: hartmut.buehl@orange.fr Bonn Office: Am Buschhof 8, D-53227 Bonn Phone: +49/228/970 97-0, Fax: +49/228/970 97-75 Advertisement Office Bonn: Karin Dornbusch Phone: +49/228/970 97-40 E-Mail: karin.dornbusch@behoerdenspiegel.de

need to reach a real consensus on redefining relations with Russia: something more than the predictable well-written but empty formula to smooth over hard-toreconcile differences of perception and allay the ongoing suspicions in some quarters with regard to Russia’s reliability. Hartmut Bühl The transatlantic cacophony surrounding President Medvedev’s proposal for a new Euro-Atlantic security and defence architecture shows how far we still are from a common strategic vision. Then the real conflicts: The development of the Afghan army raises hopes for the successful transfer of responsibility for the country’s security to the Afghans themselves. This should allow NATO to pull out before the member states’ lack of cohesion on the strategy for Afghanistan turns into embarrassing individual withdrawals. Have we given sufficient thought to NATO’s potential role in the Middle East and with respect to Iran? How will its relationship with the European Union develop and how is it possible that after years of discussions NATO still has in its midst states unable to resolve their political differences in the Mediterranean? The most dangerous threats to NATO’s credibility come from within: the financial crisis and resulting cutbacks of defence budgets will make it difficult to procure the necessary capabilities, which in turn will hamper NATO’s political and strategic flexibility. It will not be easy for the Secretary General to draw all these threads together. In my view, the strategic discussion has not been deep enough, and while the NATO summit will end with an impressive strategic document, this will not stop the debate about the next Strategic Concept from resuming the day after.

Publisher and Editor-in-Chief: Hartmut Bühl, Brussels Editorial Deputy: Nannette Bühl-Cazaubon, Paris Publishing House: ProPress Verlagsgesellschaft mbH President ProPress Publishing Group: R. Uwe Proll E-Mail: magazine@euro-defence.eu Layout: SpreeService- und Beratungsgesellschaft mbH Print: Heider Druck GmbH, Bergisch Gladbach The European − Security and Defence Union Magazine is published by the ProPress Publishing Group. The ProPress Publishing Group is the organizer of the congress on European Security and Defence (Berliner Sicherheitskonferenz), the European Police Congress and the European Congress on Disaster Management. For further information about the magazine and the congresses please visit www.euro-defence.eu Suscription: This magazine is published quarterly in Brussels and Berlin. The copy price is 16 Euro: 4 copies for one year: 56 Euro (Euro EU Subscription). 4 copies for one year: 88 Euro (International subscription) Quarterly, including postage and dispatch (4 issues) © 2009 by ProPress Publishing Group Bonn/Berlin

THE EUROPEAN − SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Kosovo and Serbia – a common European Future by John Greenway MP, London

An energy strategy for Europe – building brigdes and walls by Dr.-Ing. Jürgen Großmann, CEO, RWE AG, Essen

POLICY and POLITICS Editorial

Strategies Europe and NATO How to strengthen Europe’s freedom of political action and efficiency in crises Interview with Michel Barnier, Member of the European Commission for Internal Market and Services, Brussels 7 20 years of German unity – a success story A commentary by Jean-Dominique Giuliani, Chairman of the Board, Robert Schuman Foundation, Paris-Brussels 11 Kosovo and Serbia – a common European Future by John Greenway MP, London

Maritime Terrorism a threat to world trade by Dr. Peter Roell, President, ISPSW, Berlin

NATO’s new strategy concept A commentary by Dr. Klaus Wittmann, Brigadier General (ret), Berlin

Securing energy supply for the European Union through an appropriate energy diversity by Herbert Reul MEP, Chairman of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, European Parliament, Brussels/Strasbourg 28 The environment and the energy supply in Europe by Jo Leinen MEP, Chairman of the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, European Parliament, Brussels/Strasbourg 31

Energy Supply Security Securing Europe’s energy supply – the priorities for European energy policy in the coming years by Günther H. Oettinger, Member of the European Commission for Energy, Brussels 19 The European Union has to guarantee its Member States an equitable energy supply – but Member States have to make greatest efforts by Krzysztof Lisek MEP, Vice-Chairman of the Subcommittee on Security and Defence of the European Parliament, Strasbourg/Brussels 22 An energy strategy for Europe – building brigdes, not walls by Dr.-Ing. Jürgen Großmann, CEO, RWE AG, Essen 25

Nabucco – a historical undertaking by Stefan Judisch, CEO, RWE Supply & Trading, Essen

The revolution in the energy supply chain and its implication for energy supply security by Michael Langer, Vice President EU and NATO Political Affairs; Head, Diehl Representation, Brussels 34 Meeting the challenge – a roadmap for renewable energy toward a sustainable future by Matthias W. Send, General Manager, Head of Division Economy and Public Affairs, HSE AG, Darmstadt 35

CONTENT

20 years of German unity – a success story A commentary by Jean-Dominique Giuliani, Chairman of the Board, Robert Schuman Foundation, Paris-Brussels

NATO and the European Union need urgently their military transport aircraft, the Airbus A 400 M, by Domingo Ureña-Raso, Managing Director Airbus Military and CEO EADS/Casa, Madrid

SECURITY and SECURITY SOLUTIONS Air Power in Crisis Management Air Transport in Crisis Management No civil or military crisis management without transport aircraft by Laurent Donnet, Assistant Capability Manager Manœuvre, European Defence Agency, Brussels 38 Is it possible to conduct a civil or military crisis management operation without tactical air transport? by Andrew Gray, Helicopter Project Officer, European Defence Agency, Brussels 41

Protection of the Soldier Defending world security – an industry view by Bernd Wenzler, CEO, Cassidian Electronics, Ulm

Civilian armoured vehicles - a solution to better protect civil and military crisis management forces by Nannette Bühl-Cazaubon, Journalist, Paris 53

VTUAV and Safeguarding Military and Civilian Interests by Michael Isherwood, Senior Analyst, Northrop Grumman, Wasington 43

Why does the soldier's health always come last – an appeal for higher medical budgets for crisis management forces by Alexander Lutz, Zeppelin Mobile Systems, International Head of Marketing and Sales, Meckenbeuren 56

NATO and the European Union need urgently their military transport aircraft, the Airbus A400M, by Domingo Ureña-Raso, Managing Director Airbus Military and CEO EADS/Casa, Madrid 45

Epidemiology in the field – how mathematical modelling can save lives by Markus Schwehm, CEO, ExploSYS GmbH, Leinfelden-Echterdingen

European Air Transport Command (EATC) – a blue print for integration of European military capabilities by Major General (GE) Jochen Both, Commander EATC, Eindhoven 47

SECURITY and DEFENCE NEWS

Cuts to defence programmes means Cutting deterrence, technology and jobs – the Eurofighter programme as an example by Marcus Messalla, Defence Analyst, Munich 49

POLICY and POLITICS

How to strengthen Europe’s freedom of political action and efficiency in crises Interview with Michel Barnier, Member of the European Commission for Internal Market and Services, Brussels The European: As a member of the European Commission, are you satisfied with the way the EU acts in response to the catastrophes around the world and most recently to the earthquake in Haïti and the flash floods in Pakistan? Michel Barnier: We do our best at the EU level and our efforts are complemented by numerous national public and private sector efforts, which all add up to the actions which are being undertaken at the EU level. But when you faces catastrophes like the tsunami, which I remember very well as I was part of the crisis management as former French Minister of Foreign Affairs, or when one sees disasters such as the flash floods in Cashmere or Haiti, you know there is still room for improvement. The European: And, what would you like to improve? Michel Barnier: One way of doing this is rather than spending more money, to pool our efforts and act together more efficiently. The European: Concretely, what does pooling our efforts and acting together really mean? Is it about training the EU and EM capacities so that they can effectively act together in times of crisis? Is it advance planning, co-ordination of information? Michel Barnier: I have been looking at the question of crisis prevention and management and the concept of “prévoyance“ for a long time now. And, I am convinced that it is the best management tool for ecological, humanitarian or financial crisis is prevention. The point is that forward planning and anticipating are far cheaper than footing the bill. The European: Anticipating, ok, but how? Michel Barnier: For natural disasters, we need to improve the readiness of our responses. Crises anticipation is crucial. Planning in advance is necessary. That is the credible way to build our response to crisis. The European: Can you take this further? Michel Barnier: Yes, more concretely, in my 2006 report for which I was mandated by José-Manuel Barroso, I identified seven categories of disasters for which we need preparation with different levels of intensity: we first have serious earthquakes and tsunamis. Looking back through European history, you notice that, we, Europeans, are not ‘protected’ from mega disasters: in 1908, the Sicilian city of Messina was destroyed

Michel Barnier Michel Barnier is Commissioner for Internal Market and Services since February 2010. He was born in Grenoble in 1951. After earning his diploma at the Paris College of Business, he started his political career in the region Savoie in 1973, where he was in 1982–1999 President of the Regional Council. In 1993 he becoming France’s Minister for the Environment before coming Minister of Foreign Affairs (1995–1997). In 1999-2004 Mr Barnier was European Commissioner in charge of Regional Policy and the Reform of European Institutions, and in 2006 he became Special Adviser to the President of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso. In 2007–2009 he was Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries before becoming a Member of the European Parliament in June 2009.

by a tidal wave and 100.000 people were killed. In the past ten years, disasters of a less important but more recurrent have happened throughout Europe. Greece was hit by a dramatic earthquake in 1999. Then come the floods and landslides. Several Member States have been seriously hit by floods over the last decade. This was the case of Germany, Slovakia, Czech Republic and Austria in 2002. Thirdly, we have forest fires and other fires. Greece, Portugal and Spain have all been recently concerned again. This will not get better in the coming years due to the effects of climate change. We need to keep a watchful eye on this. Fourthly, there are disasters at sea. A recent example of this was the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon drilling well in the Gulf of Mexico (which resulted in the most damaging oil spill on record), but in Europe, we faced the Erica and Prestige catastrophes. Fifthly, we have industrial and nuclear accidents such as Chernobyl or the AZF in Toulouse. I also added two supplemental types of disaster: pandemics and a “European 9/11” (terrorist attacks). For all these types of disasters we need to elaborate concrete scenarios and conduct an advance planning exercise to build an efficient EU response. The European: It turns out that we then have 7 categories of disasters which belong to 7 different departments for civil protection. How do you then see the coordination work between Member States? Michel Barnier: We must be able to set up a common framework in Brussels or elsewhere to have these 7 departments

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

headed by seven directors coordinating with experts, NGOs and EU or national civil protection specialists to prepare our responses.

ning undertaken with advanced technology such as CBS (“Computer Based Simulation”) for crisis management training? Michel Barnier: Each unit stays in its own Member State or region. When a crisis hits, they are informed whether they have to take off for the crisis area and by which other unit will accompany them. At a time of crisis, they will already have trained together several times and they will already had the chance to check to what extent they are interoperational.

The European: And, how could we further integrate these capacities and assets? Michel Barnier: Where the preparation work is being carried out, in Brussels or elsewhere, we should ask simple questions to Member States: which means, which units, how much staff/ human resources, Commissionar Michael Barnier during the interview at his Brussels office which transportation Photo: EU-Commission means and which equipment are you ready to pool The European: Besides this, would it be worth having some in each specific department or for a certain crisis. units acting as “standing forces”? The European: You mean some sort of a European civil protecMichel Barnier: This is an open issue. In the first place however, I personally believe that the best approach would be to set tion force? up the operations centre at the EU level so that we can organMichel Barnier: I am not talking about a “federal European ciize the pooling of transportation, trainings, etc, and leave the vil protection force”. What I have in mind is an operations cenunits in their own countries and regions. tre. A light structure, but fully equipped! The European: The operations centre would be equipped with technical means? Michel Barnier: Of course and it will even include satellite connections. The operational staff and units would have to opportunity to prepare together through ad hoc training.

The European: Do you count on Member States‘ good will to move on? Michel Barnier: My 2006 proposal was flexible. If we do not start with the 27 Member States, we can fairly explore the route of a reinforced cooperation.

The European: You mean a cross-border training, including trai-

The European: Reinforced cooperation is a key word under the

Hungary 2010 – Chemical disaster

Gulf of Mexico: one of the most important oil disaster Photo: www.epochtimes.de

Photo: Behörden Spiegel archieve

POLICY and POLITICS

Lisbon Treaty. What are the options offered by this route? Michel Barnier: We can imagine, for instance, that a country participates in one or two departments for civil protection (e.g. fires and floods), but not the others. The European: Can this be done at once? Do you have a timeframe to implement all this? Michel Barnier: It could take several years, step by step. One step at a time. The European: The Commission is going to publish a Communication on the EU response to crises in the coming weeks? Do you think that Member States will follow the Commission in the way you just described? Michel Barnier: The Commission is still working on its proposal (likely due end of October). And, as usual, everything is open to discussion. In this context, I have had several discussions with Kristalina (Georgieva), who leads on this very important work for the Commission. I suggested that we follow a route where we spend the money and allocate EU competences in a better way with a lot of flexibility. The European: The Lisbon Treaty does indeed allow for this... Do you think that the military should take part in, for instance, for transportation means, for surveillance, etc.? Michel Barnier: Kristalina Georgieva is going to present a series of proposals and she must obtain the support of the EU Parliament, which is paying a lot of attention to this question. I am totally confident in Kristalina’s willingness to act and put serious proposals on the table. I will support her. And, as you just said, the Lisbon Treaty offers possibilities. Two be precise, and one of them is the solidarity clause, ruling that any EU Member State hit by a natural or man-made disaster can give an emergency call to the others. The European: The Lisbon Treaty refers specifically to a provision on population protection in case of crisis. Michel Barnier: Yes, the Lisbon Treaty responds partially to this concern with the solidarity clause (article 222 TFUE). Also, by bringing civil protection and humanitarian aid under the same Commissioner, José-Manuel Barroso clearly wanted to achieve more coherence to organize our response to crises. Besides this, the Treaty also gives a strong legal footing to humanitarian aid and civil protection while leaving some room for mechanisms of reinforced co-operations in case some Member States are keen on going further and faster than others. The European: Commissioner Barnier, thank you very much for this interview.*

*The Interview was conducted at the beginning of October prior to the presentation of Commissioner Georgieva’s proposal of 28 octobre 2010.

Documentation Article 196 of the Lisbon Treaty and Article 222 are of high relevance to the area of Civil protection. Through article 196 of the Treaty, Civil Protection is for the first time established as a specific policy area in the EU.

Article 196 ’Civil Protection’ 1. The Union shall encourage cooperation between Member States in order to improve the effectiveness of systems for preventing and protecting against natural or man-made disasters. Union action shall aim to: (a) support and complement Member States’ action at national, regional and local level in risk prevention, in preparing their civil-protection personnel and in responding to natural or man-made disasters within the Union; (b) promote swift, effective operational cooperation within the Union between national civil-protection services; (c) promote consistency in international civil-protection work. 2. The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure shall establish the measures necessary to help achieve the objectives referred to in paragraph 1, excluding any harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States. Article 222 ‘Solidarity Clause’ 1. The Union and its Member States shall act jointly in a spirit of solidarity if a Member State is the object of a terrorist attack or the victim of a natural or man-made disaster. The Union shall mobilise all the instruments at its disposal, including the military resources made available by the Member States, to: (a) - prevent the terrorist threat in the territory of the Member States; - protect democratic institutions and the civilian population from any terrorist attack; - assist a Member State in its territory, at the request of its political authorities, in the event of a terrorist attack; (b) - assist a Member State in its territory, at the request of its political authorities, in the event of a natural or man-made disaster. 2. Should a Member State be the object of a terrorist attack or the victim of a natural or man-made disaster, the other Member States shall assist it at the request of its political authorities. To that end, the Member States shall coordinate between themselves in the Council. 3. The arrangements for the implementation by the Union of the solidarity clause shall be defined by a decision adopted by the Council acting on a joint proposal by the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. The Council shall act in accordance with Article 31(1) of the Treaty on the European Union where this decision has defence implications. The European Parliament shall be informed.

H H

Migration – Integration – European Security in Transition 15 – 16 February 2011, Berlin Congress Center (bcc)

Visit leading Europe’s con interio ference for r secur ity!

Further Information and Registration at www.european-police.eu

 Preview 14th European Police Congress 2011 The main emphasis of the 14th European Police Congress will be “Migration – Integration – European Security in Transition”. The congress will welcome personalities as Dr. Thomas de Maizière, Federal Minister of the Interior of Germany; Cecilia Malmström, Commissioner for Home Affairs, European Commission; Ilkka Laitinen, Executive Director FRONTEX and Rob Wainwright, Director EUROPOL, just to name a few. A traditional highlight will be the discussion round of several German Ministers of the Interior of different “Länder”. A novelty will be a discussion round of Police Presidents of European metropolises on the invitation of the Police President of Berlin, Dieter Glietsch. For further information please visit the homepage www.european-police.eu or get in touch with Martin Jung of the conference management team by email martin.jung@european-police.eu.

POLICY and POLITICS

Commentary:

20 years of German unity – a success story by Jean-Dominique Giuliani, Chairman of the Board, Robert Schuman Foundation, Paris-Brussels On 3rd October 1990 - 20 years ago - the treaty reuniting the two Germanies entered into force. German unity will go down in history as an extraordinary moment in the human story, which we can appreciate better with hindsight. No one really could have imagined it was to be achieved peacefully. It was undertaken with a great deal of Europe-oriented shrewdness, making it possible to overcome some difficult obstacles. Diplomatically and politically, it was a remarkable success to the credit of those involved at the time and to the European spirit.

An incredible effort demanded However, we do not know as much about the incredible effort demanded of the Germans. More than 1,400 billion Euro, 67% of it in social payments, have been transferred from West Germany towards the Länder in the East since 1991. This represents half of the German annual GDP and nearly 75 billion Euro annually. By means of an extremely costly adjustment between the regions in the West and the new Länder, and an exceptional income and business tax, the rate of which has sometimes risen from 5.5% to 7.5% and which will remain in force until 2019, the German Federal Republic has achieved a real feat of strength.

“Diplomatically and politically, it was a remarkable success to the credit of those involved at the time and to the European spirit.” Of course there remains a great deal to be done. The unemployment rate is double in the East, 11.5% against 6.5% in the West, re-industrialisation is still proving difficult, the regions in the East have lost one million inhabitants, and some psychological “walls” remain as 40 years of dictatorship cannot be swept away in just a few years. But increasing average life expectancy by six years between 1991 and 2009, raising household income in the East from 56% to 75% of that of West, enabling 16 million East Germans to align their consumption with that of their fellow countrymen, providing them with pensions and social benefits that are higher than in the West, seeing Pomerania rise to become Germany’s leading tourist destination, raising the production of wealth in the East to an annual 51 billion Euro, i.e. 3,6 times its level in 1991 ... all of this was unimaginable for those who had the sad privilege of living in East Germany.

The Berlin Wall became redundant on 9 November 1989. Photo: www.nato.int

Germans need still more ten years to catch up It is believed that the six new Länder (including Ost Berlin) will have caught up with the eleven in the West (including West Berlin) by 2019. Thirty years and an enormous amount of work will have been necessary to wipe out totalitarian communism. These figures are a clear answer to any who still cling to an extremely indecent form of “Ostalgia”. They give us an idea of what the imminent collapse of the odious regime in North Korea will cost its 24 million inhabitants. They offer everyone an image of Germany led by courageous leaders who have assumed great risk even when the cost proved to be higher than originally estimated – here is the example of the German people who have stood by one another, complaining at times, but who have not counted the cost of their support. A European Germany – peaceful, powerful, which has re-integrated into the international scene with an extremely positive role. On an historical level, which we often lose sight of, – this is an example and a true success, – which we firstly owe to the Germans, but in which European integration has certainly played its part.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Kosovo and Serbia – a common European future by John Greenway MP, Chairman of the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Population of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, Paris The disintegration of Yugoslavia 20 years ago was accompanied by the horrors of genocide with unspeakable atrocities perpetrated in the name of ethnic cleansing. Thankfully, over the last two decades, peoples of different ethnic and religious backgrounds have learned to live peacefully together. The challenge today is to secure peace and prosperity in the longer term, but we have to bear in mind that there are apparently non negotiable issues.

NATO and the European Union are still assuring security For Kosovo, it is unthinkable that Pristina would accept a return to rule by Belgrade or that Belgrade would recognise Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence on 17 February 2008, which it sees as secession. Since NATO intervened in 1999 in order to put a stop to the disproportionate use of force by Serbia in the region of Kosovo, with its 90% ethnic Albanian population, the international community has constantly sought a permanent solution to allay the serious tensions between the government of Serbia and the Kosovar authorities. Currently the EU is present with EULEX Kosovo and its 2 800 judges, prosecutors and customs officials to assist and support the Kosovo authorities on all rule-of-law matters, particularly in the areas of police, judiciary and customs. NATO still remains in place with KFOR to ensure a safe and secure environment thanks to its 9 900 troops.

The problem of sovereignity A landlocked country of two million people, Kosovo can either be allowed to join organisations that promote security, human rights and growth, or it can be forced into isolation, jeopardising regional prosperity and security. Without broader international recognition, it will be difficult for Kosovo to join regional or international organisations. 70 countries have recognized Kosovo, including the United States, 22 members of the European Union, as well as all of Kosovo’s neighbours except Serbia.1 Last year, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) sought a legal opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ), putting the question of whether to recognise Kosovo on hold in many countries. On 22 July 2010, the ICJ ruled that the “adoption of the declaration of independence did not violate any applicable rule of international law”.

John Greenway John Greenway has been a Member of Parliament for Ryedale (North Yorkshire/United Kingdom) since June 1987. He is currently Rapporteur on behalf of the Committee for Parliamentary and Public Relations of the European Security and Defence Assembly (ESDA). He is the author of numerous reports of the Assembly. In particular, together with Mr Muñoz Alonso (Spain), he recently submitted a report on behalf of the Committee for Parliamentary and Public Relations on “European security and enlargement: shifts in public opinion” (Document 2054), which was adopted during the December 2009 plenary session of the European Security and Defence Assembly. He is also the Chairman of the Committee on Migration, Refugees and Population of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly.

“The EU has a great responsibility in the Balkans today. It must create the right conditions so that countries and peoples that historically have been in conflict with each other may conceive of a future achieved by working not against their neighbours, but with them.”

On 8 September 2010, an agreement was reached between the EU and Serbia to co-sponsor a United Nations General Assembly resolution on the ICJ advisory opinion on Kosovo. After the UNGA vote on 9 September 2010 the important thing will be that the dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina can start. The European Union will facilitate the dialogue between the parties in order to “achieve progress on the path to the European Union”, reflecting in particular “Serbia’s European perspective”.

Progress has been made – bilateral talks will start As recently underlined by Madeleine Albright and James O’Brien, now that both Serbia and Kosovo have agreed to bilateral talks, they should start soon so as not to lose momentum. The agenda will be hard to agree on, though. Serbia will be tempted to insist on addressing territory or status, two subjects that officials in Kosovo would reject. The European

POLICY and POLITICS

Kosovars all over Europe celebrated the declaration of independence on 17th February 2008. Here: the festival in Vienna, assembling thousands of Kosovars in the Austrian capital Photo: www.academic.ru

Union, which will supervise the talks, must create an agenda to include questions such as trade, utilities, law enforcement, and border crossings. These are the practical items that neighbours need to resolve. The agenda should also include more sensitive subjects such as the rights and self-governance of Kosovo’s Serbian population, especially the one-third of that population concentrated in the far north, and the protection of the beautiful and historical Orthodox religious sites located across Kosovo.

The EU should prioritize preparing the region for membership In addition, the EU should redouble its efforts to prepare the region for EU membership. Even before states become formal candidates for membership, this step will require the EU’s current members to overcome their fatigue over the prospect of admitting new members. There is strong reason to focus on the preparations that states must go through in order to join. Simply put, the EU membership process is the best tool available for improving governance and future security in the western Balkans. Hashim Thaci, the Kosovan Prime Minister, has recently offered to make a fresh start in relations with Belgrade. He said it was “inevitable” that Kosovo and Serbia would resolve their deep enmity, bury their differences, and look to a future integrated in the European Union.2 But “Serbia does not and shall not recognise the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo” as often reasserted by President Tadic and other Serbian authorities.

Time is running We cannot turn back the clock; however long it takes, I believe that the process under way in Kosovo will almost certainly lead to the territory’s full independence. It is wise to bear this in mind and make every effort to integrate all the countries of the region fully and harmoniously into the European Union. That would be the best outcome for the region and for the rest of Europe, by helping to ensure that Europe never again sees the ethnic violence of 20 years ago within its historical borders. Recently the European Security and Defence Assembly invited “the EU to define as soon as possible a road map for the integration of the western Balkans into the European structures, setting out the stages of the process, with conditional benchmarks, and a firm and verifiable timetable”.3 The EU has a great responsibility in the Balkans today. It must create the right conditions so that countries and peoples that historically have been in conflict with each other may conceive of a future achieved by working not against their neighbours, but with them.

1 Cyprus, Greece, Romania, Slovakia and Spain do not recognize Kosovo as an independent state. 2 “Europe needs Kosovo”, Wall Street Journal, 27 September 2010. “EU pressures Serbia to accept Kosovo’s offer to end enmity”, Guardian, 3 September 2010. 3 See Assembly document 2066 adopted on 16 June 2010: “The EU and the western Balkans” submitted on behalf of the Political Committee by Mr Fassino, Rapporteur (http://www.assembly-weu.eu).

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Maritime Terrorism – A threat to world trade? by Dr. Peter Roell, President, ISPSW*, Berlin

It is difficult to define maritime terrorism, particularly because the United Nations have so far not been able to find a binding definition for terrorism. The U.S. Department of Defence defines terrorism as “unlawful use or threatened use of force of violence against people or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious or ideological objectives”. I think that this definition can be useful to describe maritime terrorism as well. I would like to present here three observations. 1. Maritime terrorism is not a fiction but a reality 2. Terrorists focus on “choke points” and mega harbours 3. To fight maritime terrorism and piracy, cooperation between governments and the private sector is crucial It is obvious – if we look at the attacks by pirates at the Horn of Africa and in the Indian Ocean – that monetary reasons prevail. Acts of hijacking and blackmail cannot be defined as maritime terrorism but as organised crime.

Maritime terrorism is not a fiction but a reality To analyse maritime terrorist threats, it is not enough to examine the capabilities and motives of terrorist groups. We must also examine the maritime industry, shipping practices,

Dr. Peter Roell Dr. Peter Roell is President of the Institute for Strategic, Political, Security and Economic Consultancy (ISPSW) in Berlin since January 2006. Previously, he served as Senior Advisor for foreign and security policy at the Permanent Representation of the Federal Republic of Germany to the EU in Brussels. In Germany, Dr. Roell served as head of the Asia-Pacific, Latin America and Africa (Sub-Sahara) branch and served at German embassies in the Near and Middle East and in Asia. He is an alumnus of the NATO Defence College in Rome and the Federal College for Security Policy Studies (BAKS) in Berlin.

the vulnerability of trade shipping, as well as countermeasures by the authorities and other institutions which are entrusted with the security of the shipping routes. Let me give some examples of planned or executed maritime terrorist attacks. According to Western intelligence services, some Islamist terrorist groups have declared that it is their aim to interrupt Western supply lines. The no. 2 man of Al-Qaida, Aiman AlSawahri, said: “we must stop the West from plundering the oil of Muslims.”

Examples of planned or executed maritime terrorist attacks January 2000 Al-Qaida members carried out an unsuccessful attack in Aden against the USS Sullivans. But the attack boat, overloaded with explosives, sank before it could reach the target. October 2000 Successful Al-Qaida attack against the destroyer USS Cole in Yemen. 17 U.S. sailors were killed and 39 wounded. June 2002 Members of Al-Qaida, who had planned attacks against British and U.S. ships in the Strait of Gibraltar, were arrested by Morocco’s secret service. October 2002 A terrorist group from Yemen, having connections with Al-Qaida, attacked the

French oil tanker Limburg off the harbour of Ash Shahir. One crew member was killed, others wounded. 90 000 barrels of oil spilled into the Gulf of Aden. As a result, the monthly container transhipment in Yemen declined from 43 000 to 3 000 containers. 3 000 dock workers lost their jobs and the national economy contracted by 1 % GDP. February 2004 Bomb attack by the Abu Sayyaf group against a passenger ferry in the Philippines. Over 100 people were killed. August 2005 Israel’s security service Shin Bet warned four Israeli cruise liners – on their way to Turkey – about a possible terror attack and redirected the ships to Cyprus.

July 2009 Egypt’s security authorities prevented an attack against the Suez Canal and the adjacent oil pipeline. According to sources in Cairo, the terror group consisted of 24 Egyptians and one Palestinian. January 2010 Egyptian authorities investigated a new suspected terrorist group which planned attacks against U.S. ships in the Suez Canal. This group also planned to deliver weapons and explosives to Hamas in the Gaza Strip. July 2010 Suspected terrorist attack against the Japanese oil tanker M. Star in the Straits of Hormuz by the Abdullah Azzam Brigade. One crew member was injured and the ship was heavily damaged.

POLICY and POLITICS

It is quite probable that there is a division of labour between Al-Qaida and pirates. The pirates are effectively carrying the battle to Al-Qaida’s enemies and have a financial benefit in these activities. After all, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. It is worthwhile to note that during the last 15 years, maritime terrorism accounted for only 2% of all terrorist attacks. In this context, we should not forget the plans of Al-Qaida chief strategist for maritime terrorism, Abd Al Rahman Al Nashiri, also known as the Prince of the Sea, who was arrested in November 2002 in the United Arab Emirates. Nashiri had developed a strategy including the following four elements: • Ramming or blowing up medium-sized ships in the vicinity of other ships or in harbours • Attacking super tankers from the air with small planes, laden with explosives • Conducting underwater attacks against ships using divers • Attacking cruise liners with taking of hostages The Prince of the Sea somehow forgot to include oil rigs as a potential target. The environmental damage of an exploded oil rig has been well documented in the case of Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico. How easy it is to storm an oil rig was demonstrated by Greenpeace in August of this year when they occupied Cairn Energy’s Stena Don oil rig in Baffin Bay, west of Greenland. The rig, by the way, was closely guarded by a Danish warship. Malakka – one of the most sensitive straits for sea transport.

Terrorists focus on “choke points” and mega harbours Terrorists will ask themselves at which locations they can decisively hit the infrastructure of the industrialised world, because up to now, the maritime terrorist attacks have not seriously threatened world trade. They will direct their attention to so-called choke points and mega harbours, as 75 % of the international ocean traffic with approximately 50 000 ships is processed in approximately 2 800 harbours. Straits The strategically important Strait of Malacca is one of the critical choke points. It connects the Indian Ocean with the South China Sea and the Pacific. It is the most important trade route between the Far East, the Gulf States and Europe. 90 000 ships per year pass the Straits of Malacca. One third of worldwide trade, 80 % of oil imports for East Asia and two thirds of worldwide liquid gas transports pass via this route. A terror attack, for example the sinking of a tanker in the Straits of Malacca, would block the straits. Ships would have to make a detour of 1 000 km via the Indonesian Strait of Sunda and Flores. The ships would have to be at sea for two extra days, resulting in 8 billion U.S. dollars of additional costs per year. Freight and insurance rates would increase and the market price for all transported goods would also increase in a short period of time with negative economic effects on the region and world trade. But terrorist attacks can also be

Photo: xylit.files.wordpress.com

expected at other choke points such as the Straits of Hormuz, Bab al Mandat, the Suez Canal, Bosporus, the Straits of Gibraltar or the Panama Canal. We in Europe should also not forget the English Channel. Harbours As many of the biggest harbours in the world are located in East and Southeast Asia and most of the trade is directed via sea routes in this region, terrorists will pay special attention to it in their target planning. This may include the following harbours: Kobe, Tokyo, Yokohama, Pusan, Shanghai, Kaohsiung, Hong Kong and Singapore. Of course, mega harbours in the United States and in Europe such as Los Angeles or Rotterdam may also be in the sights of terrorists. Destroyed container ships could block harbours for weeks – quite apart from an attack in one of the twenty mega harbours with a so-called dirty bomb. Closure of the Singapore harbour, for example, would cost more than 200 billion U.S. dollars per year. A terrorist attack using a fully loaded gas tanker in one of the mega harbours would have a devastating effect on world trade and provide terrorists with an event comparable to 9/11 – one of their stated goals. In short: yes, world trade is potentially threatened by maritime terrorism.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

ATALANTA – The EU-operation is stopping pirates before the coast of Somalia Photo: Jason R. Zalasky/U.S. Navy

Cooperation on fighting maritime terrorism and piracy Efficient cooperation between states could improve the maritime security situation. An example of this is the intensive and successful cooperation between Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia during the last few years. Facts and figures As a result of this cooperation, pirate attacks in Indonesia have been reduced from 121 in 2003 to 15 in 2009. In the Straits of Malacca we can also observe a positive development. In 2004, 38 attacks were recorded, but in 2009, only two. A similar development can be seen in the Straits of Singapore: eight attacks in 2004 and nine attacks in 2009 – only a slight increase. The situation off the Horn of Africa is very different. In the year 2009, 217 incidents were registered. 47 ships were hijacked and 867 seamen were taken hostage. Whereas in 2008 pirate attacks concentrated at the Gulf of Aden, in 2009 more ships were attacked off the coast of Somalia. Since October 2009, attacks in the Indian Ocean increased: 33 incidents were registered including 13 hijackings. Many attacks took place within a distance of 1 000 nautical miles from Mogadishu. How to fight against maritime terrorisme The presence and of international naval forces and their cooperation on fighting piracy in the region has had a positive effect. The Container Security Initiative (CSI), initiated by the United States in 2002, is also helpful. The aim of this programme is to identify – out of the 230 million containers which are transported by sea every year – those containers with weapons of mass destruction or dangerous nuclear substan-

ces which could be used by terrorists for their attacks. In cooperation with state organisations and industry, technical means are also used to protect against potential terrorist attacks. For example, the scanning of huge containers, the use of Long-Range Acoustic Devices (LRAD), or anti-boarding systems such as 9 000-volt protective fences for merchant ships make boarding for pirates or terrorists more difficult. Unmanned ‘inventus systems’ with cameras are capable of searching large ocean areas and transmitting data to a ship or ground station. Due to the intensive attacks against ships leading to the loss of sea freight and increasing insurance rates, with resulting losses of 16 billion U.S. dollars annually, states are intensifying their cooperation with private security companies specialised in maritime security. In this field, British and U.S. companies are playing a leading role.

The way ahead Given the configuration of modern naval warships, designed to counter the threat of other modern navies, it becomes clear that such ships are not very suitable to counter terrorists or piracy. What is required is a ship design which combines long patrol time, state-of-the-art reconnaissance systems and adequate fire power to combat surface vessels only. Such a solution could easily be provided by the private sector. If we understand security policy in a more comprehensive way, meaning that the political, economic, social, ecological and military dimensions are considered together and necessarily brought together, then maritime terrorism can only be fought successfully in cooperation between state institutions and the private sector.

POLICY and POLITICS

NATO’s new Strategic Concept A commentary by Dr. Klaus Wittmann, Brigadier General (ret), Berlin

Soon, at the NATO Summit meeting at Lisbon on 19/20 November 2010, the Alliance’s new Strategic Concept will see the light of the day and be agreed by NATO’s Heads of State and Government. The Strategic Concepts, constantly reviewed and periodically updated, constitute the concretization of the North Atlantic Treaty of 1949. The Treaty remains valid, but the 1999 Strategic Concept has for some years been overtaken by developments. In this awareness, at the 60th – anniversary Summit in April 2009 the NATO Secretary General was tasked with the preparation of a new one.

NATO in a changing security landscape The new basic document should be an evidence of the Alliance’s continuing relevance in a greatly transformed and dynamically changing security landscape, and convincingly explain NATO’s identity, legitimacy and efficiency. In view of the demanding Afghanistan mission, divergent positions in salient areas and great financial constraints, the new Strategic Concept should recommit Allies to the common cause. It will address three audiences: NATO’s governments to remind them of – hopefully – newfound unity, and consensus about the commitments Alliance membership entails; the force planners who require clear guidance for this next decade; and member countries’ publics, but also a global audience, explaining NATO’s role and policy as a force for liberty and peace, and as an essential source of stability.

The Group of Experts prepared the ground NATO’s Secretary General, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, tackled his task in an “inclusive and participatory approach” and “interactive dialogue with the broader public”. He established a Group of Experts, chaired by former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, which, after an intense series of seminars and consultations, on 17 May 2010 presented its Report. It was not very innovative, but contained many good thoughts. That it commanded the consensus of the 12 Experts from different member states does, however, not mean unity among all 28 governments. While the Albright Group did a good job in “loosening the ground” as it were, preparing consensus, fuelling public debate and interest in NATO, getting the strategic community involved, inducing member states to clarify their positions and to “show the colour of their cards”, this does not replace the political work governments must do in order to create or reestablish consensus on the central contentious issues. The Se-

Dr. Klaus Wittmann Dr. Klaus Wittmann, Brigadier General (ret.) was born in Lübecki in 1946. In 2008 he ended a 42 year career in the German Bundeswehr service that included troop command, academic phases (university studies in history and political science as well as a year at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, London), political-military work in the German Ministry of Defence and at NATO Headquarters, and positions in higher military education. His last assignment was Director of Academic Planning and Policy at the NATO Defence College, Rome). Dr. Klaus Wittmann was closely involved in the development of NATO’s Strategic Concepts of 1991 and 1999. In September 2009, he published “Towards a new Strategic Concept for NATO” (Forum Paper 10. Rome and in September 2010 he presented “NATO’s New Strategic Concept. An Illustrative Draft” (http://www.natowatch. org/node/400).

cretary General presented his draft at the end of September, and there was a first discussion by Foreign and Defence Ministers in mid-October.

Substantial questions remain without common answers But even if there seems to be some satisfaction with the “language” proposed, Allies are far from being united in substance about questions such as: Is NATO a global or regional organisation? What is the right balance between collective defence (art. 5 of the Washington Treaty) and out-of-area orientation? How to achieve a common approach towards Russia? How to improve cooperation between NATO and the EU? How to make the Comprehensive Approach work? What is NATO’s future nuclear policy and strategy? What lessons to draw from Afghanistan? Is a UN Security Council mandate the absolute precondition for NATO military action? And what will be NATO’s contribution in countering “new” threats? What has to be recognised: In the three phases of its history, NATO safeguarded Europe’s security during the East-West conflict, helped consolidate and stabilize Central, Eastern and Southeastern Europe after the end of the Cold War, and took on peace missions beyond its area of mutual assistance after the terrorist attacks of 9/11 2001. But the tasks of a new phase have not simply replaced the old ones: Protection of member states’ territory, populations and forces remains a permanent duty; much remains to be done to achieve a Europe “whole

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

At the Strasbourg/Kehl summit in 2009, Heads of States and Governments asked the Secretary General, to elaborate with the member nations a new strategic concept und to submit it at the Lisbon summit 2010. Photo: www.nato.int

and free”; and out-of-area missions will continue to be asked of NATO, albeit not as its only action pattern for the future.

What the Strategic Concept should state On the contentious issues mentioned above, the Strategic Concept should state the following: • NATO’s reach: The Alliance remains a regional organization, but with a global horizon. Without necessarily implying military action, much more intense consultation will take place on all security-relevant issues. • Core function: Although out-of-area missions are more prominent in NATO’s spectrum of tasks, assured protection of all member states, manifested, tous azimuts, by preparations, planning and exercises, remains necessary even without any concrete adversary, and is a prerequisite for everything else NATO does. • Understanding with Russia is mandatory, and the Strategic Concept should send out an offer for broad cooperation, expressing clearly that NATO takes its share of the responsibility in the worsening of the relationship over the last ten years, but also stating unequivocal demands as to where a change of mind is necessary in Moscow. Common interests and tasks need to be underlined, and NATO will promote confidencebuilding, including a new departure in conventional arms control. • NATO-EU cooperation needs a new impetus, which also means overcoming blockages resulting from national interests, in order to make it function in a synergetic way. • The Comprehensive Approach does not require more theory but more serious implementation, including all actors: nations, international organizations and non-governmental organizations. NATO does not aim to lead and to coordinate all others, but to coordinate with them. • Clear lessons are drawn from the Afghanistan experience and will lead to guidelines for future missions of that kind. • NATO embraces the vision of a nuclear-free world and supports nuclear disarmament, but for the presumably long tran-

sition period it will maintain deterrence with the right mix of conventional and nuclear weapons. It will however move to a “sole-purpose” (not a “no-first-use”) doctrine and further increase transparency. • UN mandate: NATO respects the prerogative of the UN Security Council, but does not totally exclude a Kosovo-like situation, should the Security Council in a similarly exceptional case be unable to reach necessary decisions. • Particularly on the new “unconventional” security challenges such as international terrorism, cyber threats, piracy and energy issues, NATO’s (limited) role needs to be explained. • Overall, article 4 (consultation) of the Washington Treaty will be rigorously activated in order to establish thorough analysis and debate on all security-related issues worldwide, including long-term implications of socio-economic problems, climate change, water and food scarcity, resource competition etc.

A real consensus is still missing There are more subjects, but already this list shows that consensus cannot solely be achieved by informal groups and seminars. Work on a draft cannot create political unity on highly controversial matters. Ideally, the Strategic Concept would reflect the consensus previously established among governments. Obviously, the Secretary General wants to avoid long drawn-out negotiations on revolving drafts. But one must be concerned that in the short time until the Lisbon Summit disagreements will just be papered over and the process of finalization of the Strategic Concept might degenerate into something like communiqué negotiations. Still, for the future European and Euro-Atlantic security order, and prominently Russia’s place in it, November and December 2010 present important opportunities: NATO’s Summit in Lisbon should send a signal of “assured protection and comprehensive cooperation”, pointing to the subsequent OSCE Summit in Astana which would confirm OSCE principles, further develop the organization’s capacity and tackle unsolved security problems.

POLICY and POLITICS

Securing Europe’s energy supply – the priorities for European energy policy in the coming years by Günther H. Oettinger, Member of the European Commission for Energy, Brussels Energy is the heart of our economy and our society. If we invest in our energy system, we are investing in the future. In this respect, our plans regarding energy technology and infrastructure are crucial. The market guarantees our energy supply, but the proper regulatory framework is vital for the functioning of the energy market. However, energy supply and technology developments are not just closely linked to our daily life but also to major geopolitical events in the world. Political signals have a direct influence on the decisions of the energy industry.

Günther H. Oettinger Günther H. Oettinger is a Member of the European Commission responsible for energy since February 2010. He was born in 1953 in Stuttgart, Germany. He studied law and economics in Tübingen, and started his political career in the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) in 1977. Between 1982 and 1988 he worked as a lawyer for a firm of auditors and a tax consultancy, of which he was CEO in 1988-2005. In 2005-2009 he was Chairman of the CDU of Baden-Württemberg and from 2005-2010 Minister-President of Baden-Württemberg.

The need for enormous investment The need to invest in new energy infrastructure, technologies and sources of energy is enormous. It is estimated that by 2030 up to one trillion Euro will have to be invested in the European electricity grids and electricity generation and 150 Bn Euro in the gas network, excluding import pipelines from third countries. Investments in the energy industry work on a long-term basis. Investments made today date back to decisions made years ago and determine the structures of our energy supplies for the period up to 2030 or even 2050. The players in the energy arena thus have a major responsibility vis-à-vis future generations.

sourced from renewable energies and a 20% improvement in energy efficiency by 2020. The January 2008 legislative package for energy and climate binds the Member States to these ambitions. The EU has to make important and immediate changes to energy networks and comprehensive investments in new technologies and in a wide energy mix of emission-free and domestic energy resources, including nuclear technology if a Member State has decided in favour of it.

The role of energy industries

“The challenge for us is to attain a low-carbon economy, with the ultimate objective of achieving emission-free energy generation and transport sectors.” As the new Energy Commissioner, I can confirm that in recent years the EU has succeeded in developing a comprehensive European energy policy, a process pursued jointly and ambitiously by the Member States, the industry and the European Institutions.

Sustainable, competitive and secure energy mix The EU’s energy policy sets out clear requirements and targets for sustainable, competitive and secure energy. Our main aims are to achieve a 20% reduction in greenhouse gases, to provide EU consumers with a supply that includes a 20% share

The energy industry plays a significant role in this respect, by undertaking and financing projects to secure the energy supply and new initiatives for research and development. A clear and stable regulatory framework affects the privat sectorr’s willingness to invest. Implementing the third internal market package for energy will involve considerable changes in terms of network planning, including requirements on unbundling, coordinating the regulations through the European Agency for the Cooperation of the Energy Regulators and reorganising how the European Networks of Transmission System Operators (ENTSO-E and ENTSO-G) work together. Another key priority is developing of the Community-wide tenyear network development plans and increasing transparency to promote an efficient and secure network.

Towards a more sustainable Europe My first priority as Energy Commissioner is to implement the new European regulatory framework promptly and properly.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Wind energy – part of the energy mix

This will also considerably improve the conditions for the security of our energy supply. Together with the Member States and the European Parliament we have to develop European measures to foster new energy networks and innovations and improve the investment climate. The challenge for us is to attain a low-carbon economy, with the ultimate objective of achieving emission-free energy generation and transport sectors. I see three topics that are of fundamental importance: Infrastructure Infrastructure is the circulatory system of the internal market in energy. It is intrinsically linked to the security of the energy supply. It is vital for a successful decarbonisation policy, which requires adjusting the network to more renewable and decentral production. The new focus in the European Union’s energy strategy is thus on energy networks and transport. The gas sector The gas crisis of January 2009 and the power cuts in Italy in 2003 and Germany in 2006 show that Europe’s network is too weak to deal with such interruptions. In 2009, many of the new Member States had no alternatives to compensate for the Russian gas supply being cut off. And our gas pipelines are antiquated in places and there are inadequate links between the Member States. Domestic resources are also in continual decline. At the moment, around 61% of the EU’s domestic consumption of natural gas comes from imports. 42% come from Russia, 24% from Norway, 18% from Algeria and around 16% come from other countries, the latter mainly in the form of liquefied natural gas. Some Member States get their natural gas from a sole supplier for historical reasons. We need to increase import capacities and diversify sources. New gas pipelines are needed, particularly in the new Member States, and the import

sources and channels must be diversified. We must consider new possibilities for storing gas and new ‘reverse flow’ projects. The Nabucco pipeline in southeast Europe and the Nord Stream gas pipeline will play an important role in securing gas supplies for Europe in the future and our policies must support these. Liquefied Natural Gas is particularly important. It promotes not only the liquidity of the gas market, but also competition in the internal market for energy. The electricity sector The lack of suitable grid connections is an obstacle to investments in renewable Photo: www.wikimedia.de energies and decentralised production. But this presents an opportunity to develop sustainable and flexible smart grids. Increased use of renewable energy sources requires cross-border solutions. Wind, water, solar and geothermal energy are dependent on local conditions. We need a greater diversification of production and more flexibility in consumption. We need to be able to feed offshore wind energy and renewable energies into the European network to a greater extent. We need a plan for creating a European smart and high-performance grid system. We must also discuss and decide how to finance it (though subsidies or transit charges). We must also exploit the potential of the smart grid in combination with smart electricity meters. By better managing demand, network operators could better manage peaks and troughs in production and reduce the need for considerable surplus capacities (often from coal, gas or oil) by up to 50%. By better controlling electricity use, consumers could reduce their energy consumption by 20% and thus contribute to reducing the total demand, energy costs and CO2 emissions. The convergence between information and communication technology on one hand and energy production on the other is the central element of a smart grid. Thus, it is critical to address the challenges (such as the need for financing or technical uncertainties with regard to data protection and standardisation) for using smart grids at the European level. Technology and services We must develop a new generation of technologies with regard to achieving the ‘20-20-20’ goals and a C02-free energy sector by 2050. It is estimated that the global market for renewable energies will generate over 418 Bn Euro in the next four years. Energy technologies and services low in CO2 will undoubtedly be the biggest growth sectors in the coming decades. The best way to grow this market is through cooperation. The European Strategic Energy Technology Plan (SET Plan) has paved the way for this.

POLICY and POLITICS

What European policy has to do for technology research

of supply and reach our climate and energy targets. Securing the energy supply has a price and the earlier we invest in it, the lower this price will be. The European measures will not just stimulate the economy. They will also decrease our dependency on fluctuating oil prices in the future.

European policy must make it easier to introduce new and proven technologies. Many technologies, such as photovoltaics, offshore wind, network technologies or carbon capture and sequestration, are still too expensive and not yet efficient enough. Research and development are chronically New European Energy Infrastructure Instrument underfunded in the EU. The Commission is assuming that in 2010 the next ten years another 50 Bn Euro must be invested in By the end of the year the Commission will present a package energy research. This would almost triple the annual volume showing the challenges and specific requirements for develof investment in the EU by increasing it from three to eight oping new electricity networks to facilitate the integration and billion Euro. extension of renewable energy sources. It is clear that the Member States, companies and research We must proceed with a broad scope and also include for centres must combine example the promotion of their efforts. The Commisstorage capacities, of sion’s new EU 2020 smart European high-perNuclear energy can be an answer to both climate Strategy will be highly formance grids and netchange and securing the energy supply, and can relevant for this. There is a works and of low-carbon greater need than ever for energy sources (renewalso help make the EU more competitive both public and privateable energy sources and sector investment in CCS). As the public sector energy technologies. will not be able to pay for everything, new financing possibilities must also be fully utilised in the future, for Finances example through a combination of financing with grants and Strategic goals and political commitment alone will not help. low-interest loans (calls for tender: EIB). Money is needed. Following the financial and economic crisis, in 2009 investments in the oil and gas infrastructure decreased by around 21% worldwide in comparison with the previNuclear energy ous year. The amount globally invested fell by around 100 Bn There is a growing trend in nuclear energy worldwide. Around U.S. dollars. 60 States have asked the International Atomic Energy Agency Recovery plan (IAEA) for help in developing this technology. Within the EU, In their economic recovery plan, the Commission and the most countries use nuclear energy and others are taking Member States committed to boosting infrastructure investconcrete steps to start nuclear energy programmes, resume ment in the European economy in 2009 and 2010. In May 2009 them or develop them further. the European Parliament and the Council adopted an energy With around 150 reactors producing around a third of Eufinancial package of 3.98 Bn Euro as part of the European rope’s electricity, the EU has the greatest park of nuclear Economic Recovery Programme. This stimulus financing power plants worldwide. The nuclear companies in the EU are boosts investment projects in the gas and electricity connecworld leaders. This goes for all stages of the fuel cycle from tions sector (2 365 Mio Euro), offshore wind farms (565 Mio the construction and operation of nuclear power plants to Euro) and carbon capture and sequestration (1 050 Moi Euro). enrichment and reprocessing. Some of the package’s projects are also priority projects under Nuclear energy can be an answer to both climate change and the Trans-European Energy Network (TEN-E) programme. securing the energy supply, and can also help make the EU Promoting carbon-capture and sequestration more competitive. A source of low-carbon electricity, it is now Demonstrating and marketing carbon capture and sequestraa key technology in Europe’s energy mix. tion (CCS) will continue to be a high priority. In recent years, While public opinion in Europe does recognise its advanwe have seen a lot of positive developments in this area, tages, it is also aware of the risks of nuclear energy. This calls particularly in the business sector. Some CCS projects also for a continuing policy to ensure that maximum standards are received support from the economic recovery package. Other set and kept with regard to safety and security requirements. financial incentives for demonstrating CCS will be provided by This is the challenge that the EU is setting for itself. the new European emissions allowance trading scheme. The EU is therefore trying to stimulate a public debate on nuFunds needed to reach targets clear energy while leaving the Member States free to choose Without considerable funds, we will not improve the security their own energy mix. The EU is also prepared to use the in-

“

”

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

struments of the Euratom treaty to ensure the best framework for radiation protection, safety and non-proliferation. Last year the Council unanimously adopted a Directive on the safety of nuclear installations. And we remain ambitious. Showing that we can dispose safely of the waste produced by nuclear power plants or resulting from medical procedures is vital to ensure a higher level of acceptance of this source of energy. In this light, I intend to present a Directive on nuclear waste later on this year. The aim is a common framework for the safe disposal of radioactive waste and spent fuel rods throughout the Community. If we use nuclear energy, we must also develop a plausible solution for its final storage. With an effective legal framework for safety and non-proliferation, nuclear energy in Europe can make a long-term contribution to securing the energy supply, competitiveness and climate protection.

Ambitious but realistic objectivs Our vision of achieving a carbon-free energy and transport system by 2050 is indeed ambitious but entirely realistic. Besides a considerable increase in energy efficiency, we want to produce electricity exclusively from sources with the lowest possible CO2 emissions. We are talking about a future energy mix produced predominantly from renewable and nuclear sources, but also from fossil fuels with carbon capture and storage. For these reasons, the EU must above all create the necessary energy policy stimuli and incentives for investment to boost

Sources of electricity production in the EU today and tomorrow 2007

Visions for 2050

rgy effiziency Ene

23 % Gas

28 % Nuclear

Fossil with CCS

The European Union has to energy supply – but Memb

by Krzysztof Lisek MEP, Vice-Chairman of the Subcomm

Recent increases in energy prices reflect growing global energy demand. U.S. consumption of energy will increase by 60% over 20 years. Accordingly, energy security has become a policy priority for the European Union and its 27 Member States. The European Commission expects EU consumption to rise by 65% by 2030. The EU imports half of its natural gas and 30% of its oil from Russia. The European Union’s dependence on Russia for gas and oil imports is dangerous. Long term contracts for Russian oil and gas have fueled speculation that the country is using energy to try to influence European foreign and economic policy.

The EU’s energy security targets The general target of European energy security strategy is to achieve its core energy objectives of sustainability, competiveness and security of supply. Specific goals are reducing greenhouse emissions by 20%, increasing the share of renewables in energy consumption to 20%, and improving energy efficiency by 20%. European political leaders need to give clear messages on energy strategy. To achieve this goal, the European Commission has adopted an EU Energy Security and Solidarity Action Plan1 with five points of focus: • Infrastructure needs and diversification of energy supplies • External energy relations • Oil and gas stocks and crisis response mechanisms • Energy efficiency • Making the best use of the EU’s indigenous energy resources.2

3% Oil

30 % Coal

16 % Renewables

Renewables and nuclear

investments in infrastructure, technology and energy efficiency. The above-mentioned smart grids and networks and alternative fuels play a major role in this regard. Ultimately, it comes down to the energy mix and market players’ behaviour. The main issues for Europe’s energy policy are: The internal market in energy, energy supply security, energy efficiency, renewable energies, infrastructure and low-emission energy networks for tomorrow. Together with the development of an external European policy for energy, they are also my priorities as Energy Commissioner for the coming years.

Infrastructure needs An important priority for the European Commission is to transform the EU’s basic energy infrastructure to reflect essential needs: • Development of a Baltic interconnection plan • Development of the Southern Gas Corridor for long-term supply from Caspian and Middle East sources, improving security of supply • An action plan will be considered for liquefied natural gas (LNG), which is now significantly contributing to diversity of gas supply. • Completion of a Mediterranean energy ring, linking Europe with the southern Mediterranean through electricity and gas interconnections to improve energy security • Development of north-south gas and electricity interconnec-

POLICY and POLITICS

o guarantee its Member States an equitable ber States have to make greatest efforts

mittee on Security and Defence, European Parliament, Strasbourg/Brussels

tions with central and south-east Europe, building an energy community supporting the national energy regulators and transmission system operators • Development of a blueprint for a North Sea offshore grid, interconnecting national electricity grids and plugging into offshore wind projects. For the European Union, external relations with countries outside of the EU are very important, especially with Russia. Significant is the Directive on Security of Gas Supply. Indigenous production of energy provides 46% of energy used in Europe. The EU Agenda for 2020 has set out the essential first steps toward transition to a high efficiency, low carbon energy system. The fundamental technological shift involves decarbonizing the EU electricity supply.

The example of Poland Poland’s energy security policy conforms with EU policy. The problem is that Polish electric energy production is based on coal. Poland thus needs technological shifts involving decarbonizing its electricity supply. The Polish government announced a plan to construct two nuclear plants by 2020. Decarbonizing electricity supply will work to reduce the greenhouse gas effect.

Krzysztof Lisek Since 1988 Krzysztof Lisek worked in the Polish underground organisations and then headed the Independent Student Association (1991–1993). In 1997–2004, he was a member of the National Council for European Integration under the auspices of the Prime Minister of Poland. In 2005 Mr. Lisek became a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the Polish Parliament (Sejm), and later chairman of this committee (2007–2009). In June 2009 he was elected as a Member of the European Parliament. where he holds the position of Vice-chairman of the Subcommittee on Security and Defence. He also is a member of the Delegation to the EURussia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee and a substitute member of the Committee on Development.

Poland observes three approaches to its energy security: • Geopolitical (main goal of diversification) • Liberal (main goal of constructing a unified energy market) • Alternative (going beyond mineral energy resources) Poland has 100 billion metric meters of natural gas, including slat gas. Now is the time when technology and investors are needed. Imports of natural gas and oil from Russia are still important for the Polish economy. Efforts to improve political relations with Russia create opportunities to solve difficult questions in bilateral relations, including oil and gas contracts.

Diversification is a priority solution for the EU Diversification of oil and gas supply sources is urgently needed in Poland. Significant in this regard is the construction of an LNG port in Swinoujscie involving gas delivery from Norway and the Middle East. Part of this effort will involve construction of a gas pipeline from Brody, Ukraine to Gdansk and connected with the pipeline Nabucco. The future of Polish energy security policy is closely connected with EU energy security policy. Poland in the last six years has received a lot of money from European funds toward development and modernization of its energy sector. External relations with Russia have a special role, and the EU Member States must develop European solidarity. The German landfall of the Nord Stream Pipeline contributes to the development of Lubmin as a regional energy hub. This includes the Lubmin Greifswald Receiving Terminal (GRT) and the connections to OPAL and NEL which will link Nord Stream to the existing gas grid in Western Europe. Photo: www.nord-stream.com

1 EU Energy security and Solidarity Action Plan, available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/08/703&format=PDF&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en. 2 Ibidem, p.2

POLICY and POLITICS

An energy strategy for Europe – building brigdes, not walls by Dr.-Ing. Jürgen Großmann, CEO, RWE AG, Essen

Just last month, the German government reached an agreement on a new long-term energy strategy. Its laudable goal is to construct “a strong bridge to a new era of renewable energy”. This is a target most Europeans would be proud to achieve, and echoes the sentiment of a famous remark by Sir Isaac Newton, who said: “We build too many walls and not enough bridges.” In summary, the strategy aims to create a secure, affordable and sustainable platform (the “bridge”) on which to transform today’s high-carbon energy landscape into a low-carbon one based on renewable energy. However, two questions are as yet unanswered. First, how quickly can Germany achieve this goal without overstretching herself financially? And second, how substantial will the bridge to the new era need to be? These are questions not just for Germany alone, but for Europe as a whole. When it comes to energy, the 27 EU countries (EU27) are accustomed to “tending their own fields”. Sometimes they do so obstinately, ploughing their own narrow furrows according to national preference, but more often it is simply out of habit.

Staggering costs due to small-holding mentality However, this insular approach to energy is costing us dearly. According to a survey by McKinsey, Europe could save no less than a third of the money it spends on energy if it gave up its “small-holding” mentality. The figures are staggering. For

“In fact, by failing to act together we will fail to act at all, and by maintaining a Eurocentric climate policy we are taking on a burden that will hold us back.”

example, McKinsey estimates that the cost to the EU of a major shift to renewable energy supplies between 2020 and 2050 will be at least 6.6 trillion Euro. Meanwhile, the EU will have to invest 70-80 billion Euro in electricity generation every year, on average, to achieve its climate goals. These estimates depend on full cooperation within the EU-27. If EU nations fail to combine their intellectual and physical resources, these figures could increase by about 35% – i.e. another 2 trillion Euro, or almost 80% of German GDP.

Dr.-Ing. Jürgen Großmann Dr.-Ing. Jürgen Großmann has been President and CEO of RWE AG since October 2007. He was born in Müllheim an der Ruhr and studied Ferrous Metallurgy and Economics in Germany, and business administration in the USA then received his Doctorate from the Technical University of Berlin. From 1980–1993 he had various jobs within the Klöckner-Werke AG Group in Germany, he held management positions for various subsidiaries and became 1991 Member of the Board at the holding. In 1993 he became Managing Partner of Georgsmarienhütte Holding GmbH and later managing director (in 1997–2006). Since 2007 he is owner of the Georgsmarienhütte Holding GmbH.

Global thirst for energy Of course, these are just forecasts. But the harsh truth is that Europe’s energy policy has yet to progress beyond the mere setting of targets for CO2 reduction. But why is European energy policy based first and foremost on climate policy? To be blunt, this is more about emotion than hard facts and common sense, and the Copenhagen summit in 2009 showed just how reluctant the rest of the world is to follow us along our narrow path. The thirst for energy and the struggle for raw materials and energy sources have not only assumed global dimensions but are also, to the world outside Europe, every bit as important as fighting climate change. We in Europe should be playing an important global role in energy, but our persistance with climate change is preventing us from leading the way.

We’re out of step with everyone else. Last century’s philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein said: “The limits of my language are the limits of my world”, and this clearly applies to the energy debate. It is no longer enough to rely on our own mother tongue – or our group of European mother tongues – when dealing with the globalised world of energy. We need to look beyond our borders. We must recognise that a global struggle for energy resources is taking place, and whoever fails to stake a claim now will lose out. In fact, by failing to act together we will fail to act at all, and by maintaining a Eurocentric climate policy we are taking on a burden that will hold us back. We simply do not have the economic muscle to support unrealistic climate goals while, at the same

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

time, securing energy resources at an international level is crucial for Europe as it is and will continue to be highly dependent on energy imports.

Europe’s demand for energy will grow decisively Predictions of future gas consumption in the EU-27 differ for example, but most experts agree that our import requirements will grow dramatically. In fact, the International Energy Agency (IEA) expects the EU to have a net gas import requirement of almost 520 billion m3 in 2030, compared with around 300 bcm/a now. Unfortunately, this increased demand will coincide with a marked decline in our gas production. For example, the gas fields off the British coast provided some 115 billion m3 in 2000. However, the IEA predicts this will have fallen to about 20 billion m3 by 2030, while total EU production will be about 100 billion m3. Shale gas, which is becoming more and more fashionable these days, will not make much of a difference: the IEA expects it to account for only about 15 billion m3 by 2030. This leaves a massive gap between what Europe will produce and what it will consume. And it clearly shows the urgent need for the EU to globalise and diversify its gas procurement.

Who will pay the bill for a “green paradise”? Despite the widening gap between demand and supply, there is the target to source 80% of power generation from renewables within the EU by 2050. It will cost an almost unimaginable amount to achieve this, as a study by the European Climate Foundation shows. The organisation calculated the investment needed to convert Europe’s power generation structure and energy infrastructure, and found that 3 trillion Euro could be needed to develop new wind power plants and photovoltaic installations, and a further 150 billion Euro to develop a European “Super Grid”. And that’s before the

Power plant in Gundremmingen, Germany

billions needed to deal with CO2 emissions from coal-based energy generation; to increase energy efficiency in industry, transport and private households; and to develop the electricvehicle network. If we commit to spending this vast amount of money, someone will have to pay. But who? Taxpayers? Businesses? Or perhaps we should leave it to future generations? We should also admit that Europe is not yet a green paradise, and that we still need a strong industrial base. We cannot live off service industries alone. All this means that, while our concern to protect the planet demands a massive reduction in CO2, our economic wellbeing demands more energy. So, how can these opposing needs be reconciled?

Nuclear power is part of the solution The IEA recognises that nuclear energy is an important part of the world’s future, especially if we are to achieve the two-degree global warming target. From 2050, all countries will be allowed to emit only two tons of CO2 into the atmosphere per capita per year. Considering that they currently emit about 10 tons per capita per year, the massively reduced allowance will force ordinary people to make tough new choices – such as between keeping their home warm and running a car. This two-degree global warming target makes nuclear energy even more important – because nuclear will help us to save more CO2. According to a study by management consultancy Arthur D. Little, around 100 new nuclear power stations will be commissioned worldwide in the next ten years – but even that investment, without coal and gas, won’t be enough to build our bridge to renewables. Nuclear must be a big part of Europe’s future, as much as anywhere else. Our other main energy resources are either limited (gas) or are no longer considered appropriate (coal) because of their impact on the climate. And renewables? Well, despite all the efforts to improve storage options and create smart grids, wind and solar power alone will not provide

Photo: RWE

POLICY and POLITICS

enough energy to guarantee crisis-proof electricity supplies – even after the massive necessary investment. After all, it’s hardly uncommon for the wind to fail or for the skies to cloud over – and people’s demand for energy will be just as high then as when the sun shines or it’s blowing a gale. RWE’s experts have calculated that even if we were to achieve a position where renewables accounted for 80% of Europe’s electricity generation, we would still need to maintain 270 GW of reserve capacity using traditional power stations to ensure security of supply. That represents 65% of the coal and gasfired power stations currently operating in Europe.

Security of supply is all about diversity Europe cannot meet its requirements for gas and hard coal on its own, so we must look to the rest of the world to secure long-term and much more diversified energy supplies for the needs of about 500 million EU citizens. This won’t be easy, because there is a tremendous competing thirst for energy, particularly in Asia and North America. China overtook the U.S. in 2010 as the world’s largest energy consumer and, based on projections by the U.S. Energy Information Agency, will consume on average 2.6% more coal every year until 2035. To cater for this, it will develop a total of 1,000 GW in new power-station capacity by 2025 – the equivalent of all the power stations currently operational in the U.S. China has also secured access to enormous gas reserves in Australia, and is making its presence felt in Africa, the Near East and the Middle East. China isn’t acting alone. It recognises the importance of inter-

“Europeans must think globally about energy, and show the urgency and passion needed to lead the world” national cooperation – a lesson that EU countries would do well to heed. At the end of September, China and Russia signed a range of agreements to reinforce energy ties, as the latter seeks to open up new export markets and the former to secure supply routes. Meanwhile, India, Latin America and the Gulf States also want to import more natural gas.

A roadmap for Europe How can Europe compete in this global scramble for energy? First, we need a concerted European external energy policy and a coherent European Energy Map. These will help us to navigate the complexities of issues such as: security of supply, generation mix, the single European market, energy efficiency, grid expansion and diversification of energy sources and transport routes. EU Energy Commissioner Oettinger recognises the challenge this represents, and has announced that a pan-European

Pylons – important infrastructure assets for the transport of electricity Photo: Behörden Spiegel archieve

energy strategy will be published by February 2011. We look forward to seeing the details, and the first signs are encouraging. The EU is already making money available for the diversification of gas sources and transport routes – making the region more independent and helping to ensure security of supply. Linked to this, the EU is championing the Southern Corridor. This includes Nabucco, and will connect Europe directly via a new and direct transport route to the rich gas resources of the Caspian region and the Middle East. A true European bridge, spanning to other continents.

Europe must face reality As the thirst for energy is global and – to borrow Thomas Friedman’s thesis – the energy market is “flat”, we are facing more directly international price signals and fluctuations in supply and demand. This means that Europe’s security of supply will become less predictable, and that energy security cannot be achieved without long-term, global diversification. Nor can we rely solely on powerful companies to compete in this global struggle. We must compete politically too, ensuring that Europe has a strong voice and a powerful common external energy policy. Europeans must think globally about energy, and show the urgency and passion needed to lead the world – while knocking down some of the “walls” that Sir Isaac Newton told us prevent progress. The alternative is to be an also-ran and, in the worst case, to jeopardise our future wellbeing. Nobody in Europe can want that.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Securing energy supply for the European Union through an appropriate energy diversity by Herbert Reul MEP, Chairman of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, European Parliament, Brussels/Strasbourg On 18. January 1896, German Emperor Wilhelm II proclaimed that Germany´s future laid at sea. This key sentence triggered a new naval policy based on innovative technologies combined with large scale battle ships. It was also a direct challenge to the world’s leading seafaring nation at the time: Great Britain. Britain’s reply only came in 1911 and was nothing less than a revolution. Until then all major navies were fuelled with coal that was abundant not just in the UK but also in France, Germany or the USA. The ships were large and heavy but coal supply was assured through domestic production. None other than Winston Churchill, then First Lord of the Admiralty, introduced and enforced the change that would ensure Britain’s dominance during the First World War. Against the background of rioting coal miners in South Wales, he ordered the British fleet to be converted from coal to diesel. The result was twofold: on the one hand the new fleet was more manoeuvrable and faster, on the other this step made the entire fleet dependent on foreign oil imports. To his many critics in the House of Commons Churchill simply replied: “Safety and certainty in oil lie in variety and variety alone”.1

The actual context of discussion Changing the word “variety” into “diversity” and replacing “oil” with “energy” directly leads to the current debate taking place not only in many EU Member States but also at the EU level. But why is currently so much attention given to this debate? Of course the gas supply crisis in January 2009 has aftershocks still today, especially since this was not the first dispute between Russian Gazprom and one of its Western neighbours and it is unlikely to be the last. But only a few Member States witnessed real disruptions; in most others the shortage could be compensated either by redirecting gas flows or by using gas from storage or both. Then of course the issue of high energy prices, especially oil prices, was much debated until the financial and economic crisis hit the EU and the rest of the world. Many experts warn that prices will again be skyrocketing once economic growth picks up. But there seems to be a third, purely political, reason as well: concerns about security of energy supply are advanced by promoters of renewable energies in order to argue for an ever increasing share of the latter. In Germany some studies even argue that

Herbert Reul MEP Herbert Reul is a Member of the European Parliament (EP) and Chairman of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy. He was born in 1952 in Leichlingen. Before taking important political responsibilities in the CDU of North-Rhine Westphalia (NRW), he has been working as a high school teacher. 1985–2004 Member of the Regional Assembly in NRW; 1991–2003 Secretary General of the CDU in NRW; 2004 Member of the EP and since 2005 Member of the Office of the European Peoples Party (EEP). 2007 Deputy Coordinator of the EEP in the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy. 2003–2009 Member of the Broadcasting Council of the Public Broadcaster WDR, Köln.

by 2050 renewable energies could cover 100% of energy demand. It is in this context that energy security and energy diversity are currently discussed.

The competition for energy – a growing demand worldwide Figures for the EU show that the current situation is excellent, however: In 2007 the EU´s energy mix was composed of 18% solid fuels, 36% oil, 24% natural gas, 13,5% nuclear and close to 8% renewable energies in 2007. Overall, this is a very balanced mix. But it will change in the future. This change will partly be the result of market forces and partly a result directly from EU policies. The impact on prices Energy supply and demand predominantly outside the EU have a large impact on energy prices. Demand for example is growing fastest in Asia. China and India are key players in the race for energy - be it nuclear, natural gas, oil, coal, solar or wind. With a shifting centre of gravity in energy demand, energy supply will also continue to shift. Thus Russia is already operating a liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility on Sakhalin and planning another one in Vladivostok. LNG has a strategic advantage compared to pipelines: it can be sold to the buyer who offers most and can easily be transported over long distances. This also holds true for new energy infrastructures on the Russian Baltic and Nordic Sea, that will enable Russia much

POLICY and POLITICS

more flexibility than existing pipelines. Nonetheless, oil pipelines are also being built towards China to replace the shipments by trains and China is very active in the Caspian Sea to promote the building of gas pipelines towards China. In short, other market players are becoming increasingly attractive and the EU will have to increasingly compete for its fossil fuel supplies at a global scale. From a geographical point of view, however, the EU remains in an excellent position to do so.

regulation that puts the responsibility of Member States into first place. This last example illustrates that the market is not the only driver for change. EU policies and policies at Member State level also affect the future energy mix altogether. For instance several Member States recently decided to build new nuclear power plants. Thus the share of nuclear energy in the overall energy mix might decline less than former predictions supposed.

Energy infrastructure

Coal is penalized On the other hand, coal might decline even quicker than the Commission predicted in its Energy and Transport Trends to 20302 due to the reformed EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) and the growing opposition against the building of new coal fired power plants by citizens in many Member states. The effect of full auctioning of CO2-Emissions certificates for energy producers will be a steep rise in electricity prices in Member states with a high percentage of coal in their energy mix. In those Member States generation costs could grow by 50% (Germany) or more (Poland) if the plants do not use Carbon capture and storage technology (CCS), a technology that is yet to be tested on large scale power plants. At the same time as coal is penalized, renewable sources of energy receive massive support not only through the 7th Research Framework Program but also by fixing concrete targets to be fulfilled by Member states with respect to the share of renewable energies in the national final energy consumption by 2020. The overall EU target is fixed at 20% by 2020. The country target very much depends on geographic and climatic conditions in the various Member States. Some examples: Germany has to reach a share of 18%, France 23 % and Poland 15%.

One of the main challenges will be to remain flexible when it comes to energy infrastructure, especially within the EU itself. The January 2009 gas crisis clearly showed that overall, the EU was well prepared for such a crisis and that companies reacted well. But it also revealed a few missing links and room for improvement in crisis response. Safeguard of Security supply – a national responsibility The new EU-regulation concerning measures to safeguard security of gas supply addresses these issues and will considerably enhance the EU´s security of supply. The N-1-Standard according to which the remaining gas infrastructure has to be sufficient to ensure supply in the event that the primary infrastructure fails – is a cornerstone of this piece of legislation. It requires Member States to ensure sufficient gas supply to meet the demand even if the largest infrastructure fails. The message is clear: Member States, and not the EU, are responsible for security of supply. Only in the event of a crisis will the EU step in and coordinate action at the EU level if, and only if, the market fails to master the crisis and if regional cooperation and reverse flow do not solve the supply problems. The role of EU regulations This regulation will be complemented by a review of the TransEuropean Energy Networks (TEN-E) that is due mid November 2010. The Commission estimates total investment needs in the gas sector alone, including LNG and storage, to amount up to 50 billion Euros by 2020. The Commission will propose to single out priority projects and help fund those projects of European importance for energy security and the completion of the internal gas market. The European economic recovery program might well serve as a model for the new infrastructure package. However, it is unclear if Member states will be willing to devote a much larger part of the budget to energy infrastructure, taking into account the multiple energy programs such as the Strategic Energy Technology plan (SET) presented by the European Commission in November 2007 and already requiring additional funding today. According to Commission estimates dating from October 2009, the total amount of additional funding required in the coming decade is of 50 Bn Euro – for research in energy technologies alone. Furthermore, not all proposed projects might be economically viable. EU funding for such projects might contradict the security of gas supply

Market distortion risks It is up to the Member states to decide on the appropriate support schemes in order to achieve their relevant national targets. However most Member states have opted for the overly expensive German EEG-Model with guaranteed remuneration for feeding in electricity produced from renewable energies in combination with a feed-in guarantee. Yet the German feed-in system leads to market distortion, ever rising energy prices for all consumers, lack of incentives for research and innovation for companies producing solar panels or wind farms and finally to a misallocation of funds. Renewable energies versus backup capacities Furthermore, increasing the share of renewable energies will require a massive extension of volatile wind and solar power, since the potential for more reliable sources such as water is marginal. However, volatile electricity production requires backup capacity that can quickly react to changing production levels. Currently such backup capacity consists of traditional gas fired power plants. Large scale batteries as backup capacity

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

technologies - especially when they are not competitive. This leads to the second risk we face. By promoting policies that raise energy prices ever higher, with taxes and other levies exceeding 50% of the energy price in some Member States already today, we put at risk precisely the industry that can best promote energy savings and efficiency and has to date done most to increase its own efficiency. Millions of jobs are at stake.

are yet to be developed. In the meantime, increasing the share of renewable energies also increases the dependence on gas. With domestic production declining, this means rising imports.

The EU – Roadmap 2050 and its risks Is the EU about to jeopardise its excellent energy mix? The Roadmap 2050 is not yet published but it seems clear that the climate target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80 to 95 percent by 2050 will lead to a further call to increase the share of volatile renewable energies and decrease the share of fossil fuels, especially in transport and in electricity generation. The Desertec project has many supporters within the European Parliament, even though the electricity will be generated outside the EU, thus increasing import dependency and massive costs. The risk therefore is real that the energy mix in 2050 will be a lot narrower than it is today. We run several risks with such a focussed policy. The potential for innovation risks being neglected when only renewable energies are promoted. What if a breakthrough is made in the research for fusion energy by 2035, making fusion energy available at a large scale in 2050 at a much lower price than current renewable energies? In short: we should not foreclose other technologies by overly promoting currently existing

We need true diversity in energy supply We should therefore act wisely and certainly not unilaterally. What we need are not only many interconnections for gas and electricity and different supply routes, but also a broad energy mix in the EU, one that allows true diversity. Churchill is no doubt perceived as a wise decision maker. It might be an idea to stick to his century old claim and to ensure energy security by promoting diversity. 1 Parliamentary Debates, House of Commons, Bd. 55, Sp. 1474-1477 (1477), 17. July 1913. 2 European Commission, Directorate General for Energy and Transport, European Energy and Transport Trends to 2030, Update 2007. http://ec.europa.eu/energy/observatory/trends_2030/doc/trends_to_2030_up date_2007.pdf.

The European – Security and Defence Union THE QUARTERLY MAGAZINE FOR EUROPE’S SECURITY AND DEFENCE COMMUNITY

Please send your Subscription order to Re-Fax to +49(0)228 9709738 Karin Dornbusch · Advertising Manager · Phone: +49(0)228 9 70 97 40, E-Mail: subscription@euro-defence.eu

Quarterly, including postage and delivery (four issues): International subscription 88,- Euro

Company:

Subscription EU 56,- Euro

VAT no.:

Address (Street, Zip-Code, Town, Country):

Phone:

Fax:

E-Mail:

Date, Signature:

FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THE MAGAZINE CAN BE FOUND ON WWW.EURO-DEFENCE.EU (“THE EUROPEAN”)

POLICY and POLITICS

The environment and the energy supply in Europe by Jo Leinen MEP, Chairman of the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, European Parliament, Brussels/Strasbourg Environmental cooperation has always played a major part in the European integration process. It was quite natural and logical for Member States to work together across borders in the fight against the pollution of air, of waterways, rivers or basins.

The new European Union’s responsibilities in the energy field Energy too, was an integral part of the European cooperation that actually started with the European Community for Coal and Steel. However, while environment policy soon developed into a competence anchored on the supranational, European level, energy policy remained a national competence of the Member States, until recently. With the entering into force of the Lisbon Treaty the EU now has a new responsibility in the energy field. It shall ensure the proper functioning of the energy market, in particular energy supply, the promotion of energy efficiency and energy saving, and the development of new and renewable forms of energy. A secure and sustainable energy supply is a crucial corner stone for our modern society. Energy versus environment Against the background of ever scarcer fossil energy resources we have to develop new ways of securing our energy supply while at the same time reducing our GHG emissions in order to stop climate change. The EU’s energy system is heavily dependent on fossil fuels. The share of fossil fuels in total energy consumption declined only slightly between 1990 and 2005 from around 83% to 79%. In a single day we consume as much coal, gas and oil as nature produces in 500.000 days. It is obvious that we cannot continue in this way. In addition to the negative effects of fossil and nuclear energies on the environment, there is also the dependence on politically, socially and economically unstable production and transport regions and on unreliable and volatile fossil fuel markets. EU energy policy needs to focus on renewable energies Energy-related emissions remain the dominant source of green house gasses (GHG) (80% of the total) with the largest emitting sector being electricity and heat production, followed by transport. Energy production and use, particularly of fossil fuels, have a number of environmental impacts including air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions and adverse impacts on ecosystems. Thus, the EU’s approach to energy policy needs to

Jo Leinen MEP Jo Leinen MEP is the Chairman of the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Foot Safety of the European Parliament. He was born in 1948 and studies on laws and economics at the Universities of Saarbrücken, Bonn, the College of Europe in Bruges, Belgium and the Institute for World Affairs in Connecticut, USA. Leinen began his professional career as a legal trainee at the Higher Regional Court, Koblenz and became a lawyer in Freiburg/Breisgau. Before becoming an MEP, Jo Leinen was from 1985–1994 Minister for the Environment in the Saarland. From 1994–1999 Chairman of the Committee for European Affairs in the State Parliament of the Saarland. Since July 1999, he is a member of the European Parliament and a member of the Convention elaborating a Charter of Fundamental Rights for the EU. 2004–2009 he was President of the Constitutional Affairs Committee.

focus on renewable energies, on regional, decentralized production of energy and the appropriate infrastructure, on independence from foreign resources and on reducing the environmental pollution. EU key steps towards a low carbon economy Evidently, energy and environment policy are very closely interconnected and they both can no longer be solved at the national level alone. Action needs to be coordinated on the European and the international stage. The Spring European Council of March 2007 gave further impetus to European policy regarding climate change, underscoring the close interdependence between energy policy and the steering role of the European Union in international climate protection. It is therefore crucial to ensure that the EU has the power and the necessary instruments to act. With the legislation of the 2008 energy and climate package, the EU established security of supply as well as environmental sustainability of its energy policy as central building blocks.

Target 2050 – major adjustments to be done now The introduction of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) represents a key step towards achieving a low carbon economy. By putting a price on carbon, the EU ETS creates a

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

strong incentive for energy efficiency and investments that help cut carbon emissions. The EU has committed itself to a 20% Co2 emissions reduction target by in 2020 and to a lowcarbon economy and a GHG emissions reduction of 80-95% till 2050. These targets require major adjustments for our economies but are without an alternative if we want to preserve our planet and our ecosystems. Sustainability and intelligent as well as efficient use of resources must be the guiding principles not only for our environmental but also for our energy policy. The post-carbon era needs new strategies We need to set the course towards the post-carbon era now, developing and implementing strategies for the promotion of renewable energies, increased energy efficiency, better use of resources and raw materials and support for climate and environment-friendly technologies and production processes. In order to realize the EU’s objective of developing a low carbon economy and a sustainable way of living, thus successfully implementing the EU 2020 strategy as well as the Sustainable Development Strategy and achieving economic goals together with the biodiversity and climate protection targets, environment and energy policy in the EU must complement each other. The legal framework – a prerequisite to reaching targets With the energy and climate package, the legislation has started to develop a legal framework that aims at creating a balanced mix of incentives as well as obligations for industry and the society to safeguard ecosystems and the environment. Ambitious energy efficiency targets in combination with Co2 reduction measures play an important role in this regard. By putting a price on carbon the EU aims at internalising so called external costs, thus giving a monetary value to the contribution of our natural capital to our economic growth. A value e.g. for the 50% of anthropogenic Co2 emissions that are currently absorbed in terrestrial and marine ecosystems.

The run for renewables – an astonishing rush in upcoming countries Although the financial and economic crises have put European industries through a hard time and the consequences must not be underestimated, one must also not underestimate the opportunities. We have now the chance to kick-off fundamental changes in the policies for the environment, the energy, the security as well as for employment and the economy in a coherent manner, achieving simultaneously climate protection and a high level of welfare for all. The EU has to focus on its own interest and potential and embrace the opportunity to reap the benefits from steering its economy away from fossil fuels and toward green alternatives.

The run on green jobs While Europe in some areas such as wind or solar power has taken a head start, the race for green jobs is now on with e.g. China turning into the biggest exporters of solar panels and the U.S. spending 33bn Dollar under the Recovery Act for grants and contracts to support clean energy and energy efficiency projects. It goes to show that ambitious environmental and climate protection targets as well as the striving for a low-carbon economy are in sync with economic targets. Contrary to common belief, many countries such as India, China and Brazil are already pursuing rigorous environmental regulation and prepare for the transition to a low carbon economy. While most industry sectors were hit with losses by the economic crisis, green technologies had to take some setbacks but actually continued to grow. A milestone for the EU: the internal energy market One important milestone for the EU’s energy policy and the successful implementation of the climate protection policy is to create an internal energy market and to upgrade and improve the current electricity infrastructure to prepare for the integration of renewable energies. Extending smart grids, for example, will help to develop a decentralised energy supply and contribute to reducing the dependency on unstable production and transit countries as well as reducing the CO2 emissions. With a renewables supergrid and cross border interconnectors, electricity can be supplied across the continent from wherever the wind is blowing, the sun is shining or the waves are crashing. Securing the supply of renewable energies coupled with end-use energy efficiency measures will have a significant impact on maintaining affordable energy prices, while at the same time delivering environmental, such a reductions in CO2 emissions, and social benefits, such as higher quality of life.

The European societies are in line with the EU’s ambitions Environmental concerns, the availability of natural resources and the subsistence of ecosystems will increasingly influence economic decisions in the EU. The goal of a low carbon economy by 2050 has widespread support in Europe and action must be taken now. Against this background, energy and environment policies become increasingly intertwined. The way we produce our energy, which in turn is the fuel for basically all our economic activities, has a major impact on our environment. Using clean and renewable sources such as solar or wind as opposed to fossil or nuclear has a positive effect on the environment and makes us less dependending from an unstable production countries and volatile prices. We have to align our political efforts and strategies to achieve this goal, if we want to maintain our lifestyles and our nature.

POLICY and POLITICS

Nabucco – a historical undertaking by Stefan Judisch, CEO, RWE Supply & Trading, Essen George Washington once said, “be courteous to all, but intimate with few, and let those few be well tried before you give them your confidence.” Germany, Europe and Russia surely constitute partners that should, and indeed must, deal with each other not only in an atmosphere of courtesy but also of close friendship. We do not doubt the good faith and reliability of our Russian friends. After all, friendship implies honesty and sincerity. This is the best insurance against misunderstanding or disappointment.

Partnership with Russia - an essentiality The European Union has never concealed the importance it attaches to continuing its partnership with Russia. However, this does not stand in the way of its goal to seek a greater choice of energy sources and transport routes. Natural monopolies are not always a bad solution, although, unlike the transport of electricity, the transport of gas is not a natural monopoly. The 27 EU Member States import by far the greatest share of their fuels, such as oil, coal and gas, from the world market. The prosperity and well-being of more than 500 million European citizens depends on security of energy supply.

Stefan Judisch Stefan Judisch has been CEO and Chief Commercial Officer Supply of RWE Supply & Trading since 2009. He was born in 1959. He studied Business Administration in Frankfurt with key subjects data processing and financing and received his degree in 1984. From 1984–1992 he held various functions in Metallgesellschaft (MG), last as Managing Director of MG Commodity Cooperation. From 1992–1999 he worked for the Union Bank of Switzerland and was Global Head of Commodity Risk Management Advisory (RMA) for raw material derivates. Stefan Judisch joined RWE in 1999 and served in various positions including Managing Director of RWE Energy Trading (2000–2006) and CEO of RWE Gas Midstream (2007–2008).

Diversification of sources and routes This is the main driver for the Nabucco gas pipeline project, which is developed by six companies, including one headquartered in Germany, through the territory of five other countries. Until now, Central Asian gas has reached Europe via Russia, and the intermediator receives a significant margin.

Europe – a premium market for Russian gas This security is something that has to be developed, given the Highway Nabucco global competition for energy resources. Any society failing to The Nabucco gas pipeline is creating history. This is construcbuild up reliable partnerships around the globe now will soon tion for a direct ‘highway’ allowing for the first time Central be left empty-handed. Hence, the EU would be ill advised to Asian gas to flow straight and without intermediators through go knocking on the doors of the Kremlin like a repentant Turkey to Europe. For the first time, many countries in Southsinner; on the contrary, Europe is the premium market for Eastern Europe will be able to mitigate their unilateral deRussian gas, as it also is pendence on a single for gas from other counsource of gas. Nabucco Be courteous to all, but intimate with few, tries. Any other signal also helps to enhance would unsettle the councompetition in the gas and let those few be well tried before tries, as in the Caspian market, given that half of you give them your confidence. Region and the Middle its total transport capacity George Washington East – which want to share will be offered to all their rich gas resources interested parties in a with Europe. The perceitransparent procedure. ved new alignment between Russia and China Energy has one Naturally, Nabucco will only be constructed if it is possible to caveat: Russia wants China to pay the same price that we fill the pipeline with gas. Commercial talks on gas supply are Europeans pay – about 300 USD/1000m3, while China is only proceeding positively, and this is no surprise. Nabucco offers countries such as Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Iraq and may be willing to pay for Russian gas only the same price it pays for Turkmen Gas which is about half the price Russia is asking for. others, a direct link to creditable markets for natural gas. Europe has value for Russia and the Caspian Gas has value for What this does very clearly shows is that we must explore new Europe. Even in his day, it was clear to Churchill that security paths in gas procurement and become ‘globetrotters’ in the of supply can be only be achieved through diversify and diverprocess. Reinforcing old dependencies is a dead-end apsity alone – or, concretely, more sources and more routes. proach for which future generations will come to pay dearly.

“

”

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

The revolution in the energy supply chain and its implication for energy supply security by Michael Langer, Vice President EU and NATO Political Affairs; Head, Diehl Representation, Brussels

The revolution in the new networks for energy supply just started. For a decade it has been acknowledged, that our transeuropean network for energy supply mostly is from the past century and has to be upgraded significantly. The energy production mix is changing and for an efficient use of our energy limited supplies, the energy supply network has to become a so called smart grid.

Intelligent Smart Grids Smart Grids can intelligently integrate the behavior and actions of all users connected to it - generators, consumers and those that do both, prosumers, in order to efficiently deliver sustainable, economic and secure electricity supplies. Smart Grids do not only supply energy but also information and intelligence. The “smartness” is manifested in making better use of technologies, solutions to better plan and run existing electricity grids, to intelligently control generation and to enable new energy services and improve energy efficiency. A Smart Grid consists of the smart meters, taking of and bringing the information to the consumer or the local production spot. Local building networks (smart buildings) will be tied into the overall network through communication means like LAN, WLAN, internet or GSM. The information provided to the smart buildings will include price categories related to load and availability. With these the consumer devices can be more efficient and price optimized to use the energy throughout the day. Vice versa, the energy network can manage in the Smart Grid the balancing and efficient use of the produced energy. As we will have more and more a two way street the consumers will play the role of prosumers, who also will provide through their solar panels, local wind generators or geothermal generators. In the final stages we could call this Smart Grid an energy internet. This means also for the energy supply security that we will be encountered in future with all the security implications like in the internet, example cyber security. The major difference is that a steady energy supply is needed for all kind of processes in our normal human life and production environment.

First steps of implementation Currently the time of implementation of Smart Grids takes its first steps. Local Grid Demonstrations are under way, regulations call for implementation first in new buildings and structures. Legislation in Europe calls for implementation of Smart Grids with a coverage of 80% of the meter stations within the

Michael Langer Michael Langer, Vice President External Relations EU/NATO and Head of the office of Diehl corporate in Brussels since 2003. He was born 1957 in Iskenderun/Turkey. German School Istanbul and Study of Physics at University of Bonn. October ‘ 1984 Diploma with the thesis on high energy physics at the CERN-SPS-particle accelerator in Geneva. 1985–1990 Development Engineer and Program Manager Bodenseewerk GmbH. Marketing and Business Development New Product Areas and Training Systems at Diehl daughter company Bodenseewerk GmbH. Head External Relations Diehl; Offices Bonn and Koblenz. Mr. Langer is member of the Group of Personalities of the European Commission.on institutional questions.

next decade. Yet the process of standardizing the Smart Grids in its beginning. But this also means there are plenty of possibilities to design and build up the “energy internet” in such a way that it will have a built-in security by decentralized, networked coordination centers. They have to be able to learn, defend and leave the Smart Grid “self healing”. The implementation of the new Smart Grid energy networks will create a lot of investment in each country. The investments will jump from currently worldwide 18,5 Bn Euro to above 96 Bn in 2030. For the U.S. only, an overall investment of 165 Bn Dollar is estimated. In the U.S. Smart Grid installations are financially supported by the government, which accelerates the speed of the installation.

Security standards – a serious concern The security of these energy networks is under serious concern. At the first “Black-Hat” Security on Smart Metering experts mentioned, that due to the speed of implementation the current technology of the Smart Meters is a combination of old and new technology which does not have mature and proven security technologies built in. The Hardware and Software is not yet tested fully to security standards of IT networks and there is possibility for manipulation. Consumers can such lower their cost by manipulation. But more severe, by currently simple means you could even shut of local grids and as such block the supply of a small city. And to supply an increased security by updating the software later on is a complicated and costly alternative. Expert’s plea for concentrating the effort to make the systems ready secured before being implemented.

POLICY and POLITICS

Meeting the challenge – a roadmap for renewable energy toward a sustainable future by Matthias W. Send, General Manager, Head of Division Economy and Public Affairs, HSE AG*, Darmstadt Like hardly any other branch, the energy sector has experienced dynamic developments. The change was profound because the energy sector had to meet the demands of a new economic and ecological reality at the same time. Energy companies experienced that their former strategic approaches and business models did not fit the new situation. The bottom-line was: energy companies had to change because circumstances had changed. In fact, the challenge for energy companies was a strategic reorientation in order to keep up with the new developments. One of those energy companies, which invested in structural change and performed a strategic turnaround, was HSE. Its business case will be presented as follows.

The economic and ecological reality Let’s touch on the developments which caused a new economic and ecological reality for energy companies. The new economic reality was caused by several modifications of the business environment for the energy industry. There was no longer a pure monopoly with strict borders for trading energy. Things changed completely. Energy companies actually had to face open competition. At the same time the grids started to be regulated by the Federal Network Agency. On the one hand the consequence was, especially concerning regulation, reduction in profits of around 30 million Euro per year. On the other hand, one had to realize that in the long run substantial gains would only be realistic if investments in energy generation were going to be made. Crucial changes in the environment These economic developments are one side of the story. The other side is that the environment has shown crucial changes. The Polar caps are melting, the sea-level is rising, natural catastrophes like storms and floods occur more frequently. Climate change is not a long way off; its effects are present and noticeable. Climate change confronts mankind with one of the most crucial challenges in history. The consciousness that we have to react is growing in society. That is why climate change has become a defining parameter of life and economic activity.

Matthias W. Send Executive Vice President, HSE Foundation and Chairman of the Board of NATURpur Institute for Climate and Environmental Protection GmbH, Darmstadt, since 2007. Born in 1960, he studied law in Bielefeld, Osnabrück, and Münster. Matthias Send started his career in 1991 as an Office Manager at the German Parliament, Bonn. He worked as a personal Referee a.o. to Dr. Guido Westerwelle. 1996–1999 Head of Public Relations and Head of Human Resources, Trade Representative in the Hecker Unternehmensgruppe, Dortmund. 1999–2006 Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Frankfurt a.M.: Managing Director / Head of Corporate Communications; 2006 General Manager, Head of Public Relation Division and Corporate Social Responsibility of HSE – HEAG Südhessische Energie AG.

a dilemma. On the one hand utility companies rely on natural resources and guarantee the supply of electric and thermal energy as well as water, which provides the basic livelihood for mankind, growth and development. On the other hand, the power supply industry has a severe impact on the environment, jeopardizing the continuity of ecosystems and therefore the continuity of society and the economy. Energy companies are obligated to solve the dilemma caused by their economic activity. This can only be achieved by mental and technical change. The power supply industry has to consider its services for the public in the long term in order to stop climate change. Economical interests versus ecological needs Economic interests have to be brought into line with ecological needs. Energy companies that want to play a role in tomorrow’s markets must act immediately. There is no place for complacency. The opportunities of the future are in the green markets – and they are good and, in my personal view, they are better than many might think – as the business case of HSE shows.

How to manage the future The dilemma for energy companies With regard to this, utility companies face a particular challenge because their services for the public are characterized by

In order to meet the demands of a changed economic and ecological reality, HSE built up a completely new strategy. This mission was based on the experience we had with the NATUR-

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

pur Energie AG at the end of the nineties. This affiliated company was a little, fully integrated Green Energy Company, which delivered exclusively green power, but only for 2,000 customers, and it was too expensive at that time. The lesson learned: green power has market potential, but we had no competitive product. This experience was the basis for the strategic reorientation by combining the good of society and the good of our company. As the saying goes “if you are in a hole, stop digging”. HSE has massively invested in structural change. During the past five years we transformed the whole company, including all its subsidiaries, from a typical energy supplier to one of the most modern energy service providers in Germany. Today HSE is the leading energy service provider in the region Rhine-MainNeckar. The company meets the challenge of climate change and stands for sustainable energy supply by preventing, reducing and compensating CO2. Sustainability is the strategic linchpin for HSE: Our business takes account of consequences for the economy, society and environment.

How to reorientate towards sustainability In fact, our reorientation towards sustainability was a smart move as I may illustrate you by pointing out five examples: • Today we deliver green electricity for everyone. Through our sales company Entega we supply green energy to more than 440,000 customers, which is more than two thirds of our approximately 600,000 electricity customers. This makes us largest green energy provider in Germany. Concerning the current political discussions in Germany, let me stress that Entega does not use electricity generated by nuclear power for any of its supplies. • HSE is going to invest 1,4 Bn in renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, biomass and geothermal. In an absolute comparison, this puts us directly behind the four German national energy suppliers. Therefore e.g. we are a 25 % investment partner in the off shore wind park “Global Tech I” which is located in the North Sea and will start its wind-production in 2013. This is one major project to reach our aim producing up to 25 % of our electricity portfolio from renewable sources by 2015. • HSE pushes forward research and innovation concerning green power and energy efficiency. We cooperate with partners from science and economy. HSE was set up an independent institute researching and developing renewable energy sources. The NATURpur Institute for Climate and Environmental Protection was founded in March 2008. The non-profit limited liability company has an authorized capital of 25 million Euro. It supports the projects with its annual revenues of about 1,25 million Euro which are independent from HSE’s revenues. NATURpur serves as a future oriented competence

centre for renewable energies within HSE. This means e.g. cooperation with the Technical University of Darmstadt regarding foundation of professorship for applied geothermal energy. HSE has also established cooperation with partners from industry. It has a strategic partnership with Opel. We aim to develop an infrastructure for electric vehicles, especially the Opel Ampera, which Opel will bring to the market in 2011. Since the batteries of electric vehicles are suited as storage for regeneratively produced electricity, the strategic partnership pushes forward a climate neutral mobility. • The world’s population is growing – just as its hunger for energy, which is increasingly being quenched, especially in emerging markets. But solutions are in sight. Efficiency can stretch supplies and cut pollution. And new renewable energy technologies are around the corner. In fact, energy efficiency is crucial for enterprises, individuals and municipalities, because the consumption of resources is an important, costs and competitive factor. In the medium and long term, the general energy turnover will decrease by twenty percent. Considering this, energy efficiency develops a strategic market to become active in. In order to improve energy efficiency, HSE and its subsidiaries offer various measures which range from: • consulting, • planning, construction and energy efficient renovation of buildings and • the deployment and operation of energy efficient plants and technologies, to • innovative energy services and contracting. An increasing number of companies want to design their products and services to be climate neutral. We noticed this trend and founded the Forest Carbon Group in 2009. The Forest Carbon Group helps companies to balance the effects of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from their production facilities, products or services, using reforestation and forest protection projects. The solutions are tailor made and do not only compensate CO2, but also do offer an added value for biodiversity and the social sector. To put it in a nutshell, for HSE the strategic structural change is an investment in the future, especially because of the greener technologies. But furthermore, it is an investment in the future of generations to come. For us it is important to take responsibility for the climate change and to participate in developing sustainable general interest. And the success proves us right.

* From over 700 energy companies in Germany, the HSE Group is the number 10 by turnover. It covers the whole value chain: generation, trading and distribution of energy and water plus waste water management, technical services, IT and grid operation. The HSE is located in Darmstadt in Hesse; we operate our business with nearly 2,400 employees, of which roundabout 140 are trainees. The HSE supplies approximately one million people, the sales revenue is about 1,4 Bn Euro.

THE EUROPEAN â&#x20AC;&#x201C; SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Airtransport in Crisis Management The response to crises, natural or man-made, is a priority for the European Union (EU) and becomes more and more difficult to manage due to the plethora of actors, the complexity of the missions and the short time to react. Nevertheless, the EU has a wide range of instruments, both civilian and military, to act in the adequate manner. Disasters can happen any place in the world. The EU Common Security and Defence Policy is all about deployed operations and missions, predominantly outside the European continent. And since the EU, unlike the US, doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t field pre-deployed forces, equipment and personnel will have to be transported out of Europe to support these missions and operations in the different theatres, far away from the home bases. In addition, when talking about crisis management, speed of response is paramount to ensure timely intervention. All these aspects make airlift an absolute necessity and access to air transport a prerequisite for the EU to perform robust and efficient crisis management response.

No civil or military crisis management without transport aircraft by Laurent Donnet, Assistant Capability Manager ManĹ&#x201C;uvre, European Defence Agency (EDA), Brussels It goes without saying that a crisis can hardly be anticipated and is, most of the time, of temporary nature. Moreover, its frequency and intensity can vary a lot resulting in peak requirements for airlift. In a perfect world one could acquire enough assets to cover all the needs, including these peak demands. However, the financial reality as well as common sense dictate however another approach and to cope with crisis response requirements Member States and international organisations need to make the right balance between different options.

Restrictions for military means in crisis management In terms of strategic air transport for crisis management, civilian assets are rather scarce. Few nations and organisations own civilian means and most of the time, military resources are used to contribute to crisis response . This is mainly due to their unique capability, suited to the task, fully capable of operating in the required area. The major drawback however is that military assets might be perceived as having unwelcome diplomatic and military impacts and this might restrict potential use. The so-called Oslo Guidelines have been agreed at the UN level and endorsed by the EU in the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid. They stipulate that military assets should be used as a last resort, when there is no other civilian alternative to support urgent humanitarian needs in time.1

Laurent Donnet Laurent Donnet is Lieutenant colonel of the Belgian Air Force. He is detached to the European Defence Agency (EDA) since April 2009 as project officer in deployability, dealing with all strategic air and sea lift issues. Laurent Donnet joined the Royal Military Academy in 1985 and graduated as a military pilot in 1990. He served as a fighter pilot on F16 from 1991 till 2007. Throughout his career he occupied several positions, concluding as squadron commander in 2005. From 2000 till 2003 he was a planning officer at the IDCAOC in Ramstein and a squadron commander in 2005. In 2006 he attended the Staff College in Paris. Before joining EDA he was working at the Strategy Department of the Belgian Joint HQ in Brussels as an air expert.

Severe shortfalls of military strategic transport aircraft The EU Member States own a decent amount of military strategic transport aircraft. Nevertheless, effort still needs to be made to reach the level of ambition. This situation was already highlighted several years ago. In 2005 at their informal meeting at Hampton Court, the EU Heads of State and Government noted that strategic lift was identified as a key capability gap and one of the capability improvement priorities. Later on, in response to the Headline Goal (HLG) 2010, the Battle Groups initiative and in response to the expanded Common Security

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

and Defence Policy (CSDP) tasks the requirements for strategic lift increased even further. Finally, the EU Military Committee (EUMC) report of 2009 to provide a prioritisation for addressing the capability shortfalls identified inter-theatre transport again as a critical capability shortfall. Useful but not rigorous enough Initiatives Through the years various initiatives have been taken, either to secure the availability of assets or use existing assets in a more efficient manner. The SALIS2 contract and the SAC3 initiatives belong to the first group whilst the establishment of the Movement Coordination Centre (MCCE) in Eindhoven, the Athens Multinational Sealift Coordination Centre (AMSSC) and the build-up of the European Air Transport Command (EATC)4 account for the latter one. All these organisations show that multinational cooperation and coordination increase efficiency and aircraft availability. Nevertheless, even in combination, these initiatives do not yet completely satisfy operational requirements for some European nations.

How to better overcome gaps When facing a numeric shortfall, few solutions are at hand to alleviate it. The first option is to acquire more assets (buy/lease new or second hand aircraft) and thus enlarge the pool of available assets. This can be done as single nation or national organisation, but the tendency is to do this more and more in cooperation with partners. The second option is to sign framework contracts to secure assured access to strategic airlift capabilities, especially aimed to provide the needed supplementary capability for peak requirements. The third option, finally, is to go to the spot market to access the commercial market to fulfil the remaining specific needs for strategic airlift. The major drawback of this last option is that during times of crisis demands and prices are high and resources scarce. All the different options described have their advantages and disadvantages and need to be weighted by the Member States in accordance with the required level of ambition and the available financial resources. The ETAF –Initiative (see page 47ff.) In a similar framework, the European Air Transport Fleet (EATF) initiative led by the European Defence Agency (EDA) aims at increasing the military airlift provision within the EU by facilitating the acquisition of additional assets and better use of existing ones on one hand, and by developing concrete solutions to increase aircraft availability to meet operational requirements on the other. It looks also at creating synergy between air transport organisations and structures through far-reaching coordination. In a certain way, this EATF could be compared to similar partnerships in the commercial aviation business like the Star Alliance or One Star.

A400M at Farnborough.

Photo: www.yousendit.com

Creating synergies Finally, following the tasking by the Political and Security Committee (PSC) in 2009, the Council General Secretariat’s Crisis Management and Planning Directorate (CMPD) started to work on creating synergies between EU civilian and military capability development. The EU Military Committee (EUMC) and the Committee for civilian aspects of crisis management (CIVCOM) supported this work. In November 2009 the Council identified possible areas where synergies in the development and use of civilian and military capabilities could add value and should therefore be pursued. In a first phase, thirteen areas (strategic transport being one of them) were identified. Concrete work will only start in 2011. The EDA will no doubt lead the work on strategic and tactical transport and the challenge will be to develop transport capabilities for the EU, suitable for both civilian and military use, without downgrading the initial requirement specifications of these different assets. A first task will be to identify where existing shortfalls could be alleviated by each other’s capabilities and/or solutions.

Strategic airlift assets – a prerequisite for crisis management Availability of strategic airlift assets is definitively a prerequisite for an effective and robust crisis response and the Member States will have to make the right choices to close the existing capability gap, which can only be addressed by a real commitment to spend the necessary resources. And looking at the financial means available, the choice for the Member States will be threefold: keeping a full spectrum of military capabilities in an ever shrinking format, specialising in niche capabilities or pooling and sharing of concrete capabilities in a multinational cooperation. 1 Guidelines on the Use of Military and Civil Defence Assets in International Disaster Relief – ‘Oslo Guidelines’ 2 Strategic Airlift Interim Solution: quick access to AN-124-100 aircraft for the airlift of heavy equipment and/or outsized cargo. 3 Guidelines on the Use of Military and Civil Defence Assets in International Disaster Relief – ‘Oslo Guidelines’. Members: BU, EST, FIN, HU, LIT, NL, NRW, POL, ROM, SLOV, SWE, U.S.. 4 Multinational airlift command organisation that has taken over operational control on the transport fleet of following countries: Belgium, France, Germany and The Netherlands.

SECURITY and SECURITY SOLUTIONS

Is it possible to conduct a civil or military crisis management operation without tactical air transport? by Andrew Gray, Helicopter Project Officer, European Defence Agency, Brussels A civil or military crisis management operation (CMO) can always be conducted without tactical air transport – if you are lucky or patient. If you are lucky, the crises will happen near a deep-water port, or at the confluence of navigable rivers, or at the hub of major roads or railways. If you are lucky, the crisis was not caused by a disaster that affected the infrastructure, there will be no warring factions and no power struggles. Sadly, floods, fires, earthquakes and civil unrest all tend to have a negative effect on even the best line of communication. Consequently, relying on luck should ideally not be considered as a strategy.

Scenarios and perceptions If you are patient, then everything is possible. All obstacles can be overcome in sufficient time. Better weather will always arrive eventually, new roads can be built, mountain ranges can be passed, rivers can be bridged and ravines spanned. Cease-fires can be negotiated, treaties agreed and accords signed. But can we afford this time? From the sufferer’s point of view, it is easy to see that we cannot. Any victim wants to feel that someone cares, that the situation is getting better with time and not worse; a human emotion that transcends culture. This is true at the personal level; every emergency call to 112 is a request for crisis management and each an expectation of a speedy response. With each second of waiting, anguish and fear transform to anger and questioning – where are they, why don’t they come? CMOs are this individual need multiplied a thousand, ten thousand, a million times. On a strategic level, help that is late arriving – a perception of the recipient not the donor – is help that is devalued, judged as unwillingly given. This can lead to a loss of faith in the victims’ own government or a questioning of previously solid international relationships. Reporting of the Pakistan flood crisis often focussed on the perceived inability of the central government to respond and protect its citizens; there was also local condemnation of the international community’s response. There was widespread speculation that this was driving the citizenry towards extremism or at least towards a loss of cohesion in a potentially fragile State. This allowed other organisations, with reported links to wider unrest, to step into the vacuum and claim legitimacy. This was not caused by a

Andrew Gray Andrew Gray joined the RAF in 1985 and is a Qualified Helicopter Instructor and a Qualified Helicopter Tactics Instructor. He has commanded Puma operations in Northern Ireland and Belize and the UK Chinook deployment to IFOR. On the ground, he served in the Directorate of Air Operations, involved in strategic planning for operations in Sierra Leone and Kosovo, became an Assistant Professor in Military Strategic Studies at the USAF Academy, and instructed on the UK Command and Staff Course. In 2005, he rejoined the front line, where he commanded the Joint Helicopter Force (Iraq) and served as the Chief of Staff, 904th Expeditionary Air Wing, Kandahar, Afghanistan. On return from Afghanistan in Aug 08, he joined the EDA as the Helicopter Project Officer.

lack of overall aid, but by an inability to deliver it quickly and to be seen doing so. Consequently, whilst recognising that aid should be impartial, we should also recognise that when done right, it can be a powerful stabilising force, deliver positive political influence and serve specific national interests. When “done wrong” it is also capable of delivering the opposite. From all perspectives then, time is not just a planning consideration; it is a measure of success.

“time is not just a planning consideration; it is a measure of success” So, to succeed you need a way of rapidly getting the right aid to the right people. This requires a delivery system that is not limited by roads, rail, rivers or mountains; a delivery system that can place the aid at the point of need – the point of individual suffering – before the suffering ferments into resentment. Although not perfect, the only delivery systems currently able to do this, is in the majority of situations is a helicopter.

So what is the problem? A quick analysis will define the desired payload, range and the likely environmental conditions to be encountered. The helicopters need to be available on short –notice, rapidly deployable to the target area. All we need is sufficient capacity – and here the problems begin, we do not seem to have enough.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

the EAS must have the options available to respond and shape the conditions. Additionally, the EU Commissioner for International Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crises Response has stated that: “Raising the visibility of Europe and making sure that our flag shines when we are abroad helping people in need is something that I find incredibly important”3 Therefore, we need to find a way of sharing the cost of maintaining an expensive capability, and in this context, finding one which gives the EU a highly visible presence.

The reality

Rescue by helicopter in difficult terrain

Photo: EDA, Brussels

The United Nations World Food Programme (WFP)…. estimates that it requires at least 40 additional heavy-lift helicopters in Pakistan to reach the huge number of people cut off from land assistance by the recent floods with desperately needed emergency food and other humanitarian supplies. “We need more of these lifesavers,” said WFP Pakistan Country Director Wolfgang Herbinger. “Helicopters are the only way to deliver supplies into many areas which is why we’re already using every aircraft currently available to us.”1 Existing structures should, and often have, provided sufficient capability, but the burden to supply falls predominantly on the same nations. This is not a problem unless their willingness to support, or their financial ability to provide, is exceeded by demand. Given the number and scale of interventions in recent years, and the current financial climate, it is not unreasonable to assume that this point is about to be reached.

What the European Union needs Within a EU context there is another factor; the desire for Europe as an entity to be seen as a significant player, rather than delivering effect through the actions of individual member States or sponsored NGOs. If single nations provide, then influence and credit rightly falls to them. This may not serve the broader need. Commission President José Manuel Barroso urged member states to create “a truly European aid package...to show they are serious about the Union punching its weight in this area”2. How to achieve this has been the subject of much debate. However, it seems reasonable that a solution will have to be found given the growing prominence of the EU External Action Service(EAS). As already discussed, response to crisis is both a tool and a consequence of international relations and responsibilities. Consequently, to be seen as a viable actor in CMO,

The lack of helicopter capacity was recognised in a joint FR/UK declaration in 2008. This urged the EDA and NATO to focus on increasing helicopter availability for deployed operations. This led to the creation of a work strand within the EDA and provided additional impetus to on-going work within NATO. The EDA focussed on training as an immediate and effective force multiplier. In its first year, the EDA programme has involved 114 crews, 58 helicopters and 1300 personnel from 13 countries, coming together on 2 exercises to share experiences and prepare for operational deployments. NATO and the Multinational Helicopter Fund have also delivered tangible benefits upgrading helicopters and investigating new force structures, but there is still much to do. The need for multinational cooperation One way forward might be to form Multinational Helicopter Units (MHU). There are several possible models. One option is to aggregate smaller fleets that already exist, but do not have sufficient mass in national inventories to deploy efficiently. Alternatively, it could be a collaborative procurement, preferably in a key shortfall area, where there is a known gap in current inventories – heavy lift helicopters perhaps? However, both methods could meet the strategic needs of both individual nations and the EU as a whole. How to proceed Such a construct could allow nations to contribute in a meaningful way, even if their own resources cannot stretch to maintaining an organic capability. It could reduce the burden on nations whose capability has reached “critical mass”. Owned and controlled by the contributing nations, under MOU arrangements similar to those used in the Strategic Airlift community, there could be a codified understanding that the unit could be deployed under an EU banner for humanitarian aid when requested by the Commission.

Creating Synergies Despite some reservations over the use the military in the delivery of aid, the similarity in requirement makes civil and military synergies obvious. Dual-use of such a unit would maximise efficiency and minimise costs. The decision to deploy on a military CMO might be more complex, but the questions po-

SECURITY and SECURITY SOLUTIONS

sed in forming MHUs and deciding how to employ them apply to any capability sharing, and there are few in the defence or security field who believe future conditions will not necessitate such sharing. If we need the answers, why not choose to find them developing a capability that has both civil and military application and where the consequences of doing nothing are so unacceptable?

very complex machine, the lack of the correct helicopter lift at the correct time can cause strategic failure and human distress on a vast scale. Whatever the solution, it is unlikely to involve the large scale investment by one or two nations. In fact it is unlikely to come from maintaining the status quo in any sense. At some point we have to be original, innovative and brave. We have to think differently and act decisively and do both soon.

To avoid strategic failure and human distress The seeming increase in natural disasters, the continuing threat to isolated and marginalised populations, the rise in extremism and social discontent, all point to the value of quick and accurate intervention. Although only one part of a

1 WFP Press release 21 Aug 2010 2 European Voice 9 Sep 2010 3 www.euractiv.com/en/pa/georgieva-wants-eu-flag-shine-disaster-areas-news496952

VTUAV* and Safeguarding Military and Civilian Interests by Michael Isherwood, Senior Analyst, Northrop Grumman Analysis Center, Washington

The maritime environment is unforgiving due to the vast expanse of the ocean, the harsh weather conditions and the restrained ability of personnel to operate in this environment. Within these surroundings, however, there exists a variety of threats to military and civilian interests from natural and manmade origins – ranging from storms on the high seas, natural disasters, piracy and acts of war by nation-states. Detecting when European individuals and military forces are at risk is the first step to responding and protecting them.

Monitoring the maritime traffic Given the domain of the world’s oceans and seas, monitoring them continuously for maritime traffic is a daunting challenge. Fortunately, unmanned aircraft technology now offers a valuable tool to assist political and military leaders by permitting a persistent means to monitor, detect and track activities of interest. Unmanned aircraft can perform these surveillance activities at lower cost and greater efficiency than manned aircraft when the long endurance is valued. A balanced teaming of manned and unmanned aircraft, however, provides policy makers with the optimum approach to meeting and responding to challenges on the high seas. VTUAVs are offering a versatile and responsive system to the threat A vertical takeoff unmanned air vehicles (VTUAV) allow a versatile and responsive system to meet emerging and rapidly changing needs. As a rotary wing aircraft, the VTUAV can be land or ship-based, giving it the ability to forward deploy in

Michael Isherwood Michael Isherwood is a Senior Analyst in Northrop Grumman’s Analysis Center where he provides indepth analysis of military, political, and technological developments affecting national security. Prior to joining Northrop Grumman, Mike served for 24 years in the Air Force, retiring at the grade of Colonel. He is a command pilot with combat tours over Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan. He commanded at the squadron through wing level. His staff assignments included serving as a Special Assistance the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Chief of Staff, USAF plus serving as the deputy Air Component Command Element in Afghanistan. Mike was a distinguished graduate (with honors) from the US Air Force Academy, the US Air Force Weapons School and the National War College. His recent publications include: “Aerospace Forces for Hybrid Warfare”, Air Force Magazine, September 2009; “Strike Now: The Next Generation Long Range Strike System provides strategic options”, Armed Forces Journal, February 2009; “Over The Next Hill: The New Generation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems and the Marine Corps,” Marine Corps Gazette, February 2008. “Five Years After Operation ANACONDA: Challenges and Opportunities,” Joint Forces Quarterly, Fall 2007

austere conditions while being fully supported. In addition, a VTUAC such as the FIRE SCOUT, provides a variety of capabilities. It can maintain five and a half hour on orbit at 110 nautical miles from its base, providing search, surveillance and reconnaissance of a wide area. Its infrared (IR) sensor can detect a 2.3 meter object several kilometers away while the electro optical (EO) camera can spot this object almost twice as far. If outfitted with a radar package, it can search an area

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

over 59,000 square kilometers during a single sortie. Currently, an SH-60 (or similar manned helicopter) could fly for only two and half hours and cover just 45,500 square kilometers. In addition, FIRE SCOUT will use over three and half less fuel and require 14 times less maintenance time than its manned alternative, highlighting the efficiency potential of unmanned aircraft. Adapted to a variety of requirements in disaster management Military commanders can employ these technical capabilities in a wide range of scenarios. The Northrop Grumman VTUAV FIRE SCOUT Photo: NGC, Washington On one hand, the vertical launch and recovery capability of FIRE SCOUT renders it ideally beyond the horizon. From a nominal altitude of 15,000’ MSL, its suited for expeditionary operations when responding to a radar or signal intelligence sensor could range as far as 150 natural disaster, such as flood, hurricanes, typhoons, earthmiles away, depending on the aircraft’s payload and the tarquakes, mudslides and any variety of similar calamities. In get’s signature. these circumstances, humanitarian and medical assistance is not possible until the conditions of key infrastructure – such as sea and airports, roads, bridges, railheads, key buildings – is Best value: integration with deployed forces ascertained. In addition, finding potential pockets of survivors FIRE SCOUT’s greater value, however, will be how it integrates amid the debris will likewise inform civil and military relief with the deployed naval forces, such as Standing NATO Marefforts on where to concentrate resources to mitigate suffering itime Group 1 or 2 off the east coast of Africa in Operation and possibly the loss of lives. FIRE SCOUT’s ability to launch OCEAN SHIELD. In a situation where military forces are dedicatfrom a sea-borne platform or an adhoc land-based location, ed to preventing piracy, a teaming of manned and unmanned allows it to range throughout a disaster area and turn its IR, resources provides Commanders an optimum mix of capabilicamera or possibly all-weather radar. ties. In such a scenario, the FIRE SCOUT could be sea-based to extend the area under observation by several thousand square Monitoring ports, harbors, channels, oil depots, power supkilometers. Should a suspect vessel be identified, from its port plies… of origin, design, activity or other suspicious factors, the FIRE In addition, as a maritime ISR platform, it can support military SCOUT could maintain constant surveillance of it. With two to and civil authorities is monitoring ports, harbors, channels, oil three VTUAV embarked, the deployed commander can maintain depots, power supplies, natural resources and similar key ina constant monitoring of it. If the suspect vessel maneuvers in frastructure for potential hostile activities. Should a suspicious a hostile manner against a commercial ship, FIRE SCOUT’s event be detected, FIRE SCOUT can sustain its surveillance for sensors will report that activity back. If desired, it could maneuan extended period of time, with no risk to the aircrew or other ver closer in a show of force manner to potentially deter action, personnel. In this role, FIRE SCOUT can also monitor events of as the criminal element would not be aware of its unmanned an environmental focus, such as an oil spill from a tanker. In nature nor would they know if or how the helicopter was many of these situations, should an immediate request be armed. Should an intervention be required with a military ship necessary, FIRE SCOUT can pinpoint the distressed person(s) or manned helicopter with troops on board, FIRE SCOUT’s location, forward it to rescue agencies or potentially affect the reconnaissance information would inform and guide the inrescue in certain conditions. bound commander, giving these forces unprecedented situational awareness. The system FIRE SCOUT FIRE SCOUT offers military and civilian authorities a flexible and FIRE SCOUT is, however, primarily a military resource designed versatile resource when responding to a range of natural or to provide maritime, border and port surveillance in order to man-made crisis. It’s range, payload, and persistence provides detect, track and classify targets of interest. Based on its sena valued source of information to assist them and enhance sors or cued by other sensors, it can detect and provide precise their situational awareness far from where they must take tracking data on suspicious vessels, activities or people on the action to mitigate the loss of life or risk to civilian and military water or land. Working in concert with surface vessels, FIRE personnel and resources. SCOUT becomes an extension of the commander’s eyes well * Vertical take off unmanned air vehicles

SECURITY and SECURITY SOLUTIONS

NATO and the European Union need urgently their military transport aircraft, the Airbus A400M by Domingo Ureña-Raso, Managing Director Airbus Military and CEO EADS/Casa, Madrid No observer of the past 20 years of military history could dispute that we are truly living in the era of the alliance. Whether keeping peace, confronting aggressors or assisting victims of calamity, it is a rare action indeed that is taken without the active support of other nations. Nowhere is this clearer than among the NATO nations, and in Europe in particular. From the quintessentially multinational Afghan and former Yugoslavian campaigns, to earthquakestruck Haiti, the world’s developed nations have found themselves repeatedly shoulder to shoulder tackling the challenges of an unpredictable world. The operations themselves, conducted in increasingly difficult locations, have been of extraordinary complexity and have generated a heavy financial burden.

Domingo Ureña-Raso Managing Director, Airbus Military and member of both the EADS and the Airbus Executive Committee since February 2009. He was born in Camarena (Toledo) and graduated in 1982 from the Polytechnic University of Madrid 1982 started his career as an engineer in CASA in Spain. 1989 Airbus Industrie, Toulouse. 1998 CEO and Member of the Board of Aircelle’s joint venture between Airbus Industries and SNECMA. 2002 CEO of the first privatised defence company in Poland, PZL, and then Member of the Board for the Eurofighter programme, Munich. 2004 Restructuring EADS Defence division. 2006 Airbus Industries Toulouse as Head of the Airbus Industrial Strategy team. 2007 in charge of the vital Airbus “Power 8” turn around programme.

A plea for co-operability, interoperability and commonality Opportunities to reduce complexity and improve affordability in future must be seized, and the potential of the A400M to do precisely that is enormous. The Airbus Military A400M alone is genuinely capable of addressing today’s strategic/logistic missions as well as meeting the tactical requirements of front-line commanders, while additionally providing a true air-to-air tanking capability. But nations operating it also stand to benefit from interchangeable or even pooled spares, standardised operational equipment such as communications or cargo-handling systems, common operational procedures, shared training facilities, and the overriding advantage of a single set of development costs. Maximise the advantages of commonality Across Europe and beyond, the A400M partner nations, and prospective new customers, are in discussion to devise the multilateral arrangements that will maximise the advantages of this commonality. All of this would be of little value, however, if the aircraft were not a world-class example of its type –as the highly successful flight-test programme continues to demonstrate. Not only does this aircraft elegantly address the great European conundrum of balancing national and common requirements, but it is also a superb piece of equipment which will dramatically increase the effectiveness of its civil or military operators .

The time has come for an airlifter type A 400 M It is sometimes forgotten just how much more advanced than current transports the A400M actually is, and just what new capabilities accrue from that. This aircraft that first flew – just a year ago- truly represents the 21st Century state of the art in its sector. Over the lifetime of a fleet, to achieve the same productivity as 10 A400Ms it would require 22 C-130Js at 60% or 12 C-130Js and two C-17s at 25%, all at greater cost.

Meeting the advanced requirements of the Crisis Management Forces In the A400M, armed forces have a single aircraft type that can carry more troops or cargo further than legacy turboprop designs, and deliver them to forward locations denied to larger and much more costly jet transports. An A400M can carry twice the load of a C-130J the same distance, or the same load twice as far. And its large hold, with an inside fuselage height and width of 4m, means it can deliver large helicopters, heavy engineering equipment or combat vehicles direct to the forward operating area. Powerful in the air … In the A400M, armed and civil forces have a single aircraft type that can carry personel and cargo twice the load of a C-130J the same distance or the same load twice as far and deliver them to

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

forward locations denied to larger and much more costly jet transports. And its large hold, with an inside fuselage height and width of 4m, means it can deliver large helicopters, heavy engineering equipment or combat vehicles direct to the forward operating area. Its TP400D turboprop engines, advanced aerodynamics and sophisticated systems give it the ability to fly up to 4,700nm (8,700km) at a cruising altitude of up to 37,000ft and a speed of M0.72. This performance is comparable to jetpowered airlifters, at much lower cost. For military purposes the A400M can carry an NH90 or CH-47D Chinook helicopter, or two Stryker infantry carrier vehicles, for example. It can also carry a large semi-articulated truck, or a rescue boat, or large lifting devices such as excavators or mobile cranes in case of humanitarian assistance. The A400M can carry troops – up to 116 – and, thanks to its wider fuselage and internal configuration, can carry the same number of fully equipped paratroopers with their parachutes and related equipment and flying as slowly as 110kt (205km/hr), the aircraft reduces the scattering of paratroopers and allows two streams of paratroopers to jump simultaneously, halving the scatter compared to a single stream. It thus permits easier regrouping on the ground. Flying at the same altitudes as jets and at comparable speeds, the A400M can deploy further than existing types in one crewduty day. And humanitarian loads can be cost-effectively and rapidly delivered to the scenes of disasters, enabling more effective responses to be quickly mounted and saving lives that would be lost while waiting for slower aircraft. … and extended capabilities on the ground Furthermore, thanks to its short take-off and landing and roughfield capabilities the A400M is the only airlifter that can deliver these types of heavy loads direct to forward areas where they are needed. With its main landing gear designed for operation from stone, gravel or sand strips, efficient absorption of shockloads into the airframe structure, and minimised risk of foreign object damage, the A400M is able to use austere strips as short as 750m. Crucially it can use soft strips (down to CBR6 standard) repeatedly without quickly destroying them thanks to its 12-wheel main landing gear. Unloading or loading: Once on the ground, the A400M is designed for very rapid and autonomous cargo unloading or loading without specialised ground support equipment. Fitted with on-board winches and crane, the cargo hold is optimised for single loadmaster operation from a computerised workstation. So, by minimising the time on the ground, the A400M’s systems can also reduce the aircraft’s vulnerability to hostile action. Air –dropping: When air-dropping is the preferred option, the A400M is an outstanding machine for the delivery of either cargo loads or paratroopers. Loads can be extracted via the ramp by gravity or with parachutes. The aircraft can drop a

single load of up to four tonnes (8,800lb) by gravity or up to 16 tonnes with parachutes, or multiple loads with a combined weight of up to 25tonnes. Lights loads: Light loads can be manually delivered in bundles from the paratrooper side doors at altitudes up to 25,000ft using static line or freefall techniques. And for very low-level extraction – down to as low as 15 feet – up to three individual loads, with a maximum payload weight of 19 tonnes, can be extracted in a single flight pass using extractor parachutes. In all cases a Computed Air Release Point (CARP) system linked to the automated load release system helps the loadmaster and crew to manage the extraction of the material.

Multi role capabilities – a contribution to better spending budgets This remarkably versatile aircraft can also be quickly converted to a tanker, bringing an entirely new capability to tactical commanders. The A400M was conceived from the outset for this role and because all required provisions are built into the airframe, it takes under two hours to convert the A400M from an airlifter into a tanker. Structural hard points, fuel lines and electrical connections are installed in the aircraft during manufacture, and two underwing refuelling pods or a centreline fuselage refuelling unit are used to offload to receiver aircraft. Because its own fuel consumption is so low, the A400M can perform a four-hour mission while offloading some 35 tonnes of fuel, and it can itself be refuelled via a nose-probe. Perhaps most significantly, the A400M is the only tanker that can refuel the entire range of military aircraft at their preferred speeds and altitudes. Not only can it fly at the speeds of 280300kt (520-550 km/hr) and altitudes of around 25,000ft typically used by fast jets, but it can also fly at the low speeds of 105-115kt (195-210 km/hr) required to refuel helicopters. This latter mission is of increasing importance as the role of heavy lift helicopters on remote battlefields and in distant emergency situations continues to grow.

The aircraft will come later but not too late None of this is of value, however, if the aircraft is not available for use – and the A400M will set new standards for reliability of military aircraft. Drawing on the immense commercial experience of Airbus and the highly reliable A380 in particular, the aircraft has been designed to maximise availability. It requires only 84 days of scheduled downtime over 12 years, and it will have an availability rate of around 98% - comparable to civil airliners and much greater than current military transports. At a time of fiscal austerity coupled with unprecedented global challenges, the A400M is a vital tool for Europe and NATO. Compared with lower-performance turboprop types it saves money by delivering higher capability per aircraft and requiring fewer to be acquired. Compared with large jets it delivers comparable capability at lower cost. It is the best-buy for Europe and beyond.

SECURITY and SECURITY SOLUTIONS

European Air Transport Command (EATC) – a blue print for integration of European military capabilities by Major General (GE) Jochen Both, Commander EATC, Eindhoven On the first of September 2010, a discrete revolution happened in the European Air Transport landscape. A new Air Command was born. With the celebration of the opening of the EATC, Belgium, France, Germany and the Netherlands, will entrust most of their air transport and air to air refuelling aircraft to an integrated, multinational command. At the end of 2010, this command will control a fleet of nearly 170 aircraft of different types, strategic and tactical. Its activities will cover all aspects, from planning to mission execution, as well as ensuring the highest level of standardization, training and flight safety.

Air transport cooperation is a long story in NATO and even in the EU Air forces have a long lasting modern history of cooperation. Operating together is nothing new for air forces; this is especially true for air Transport. Due to strategic shortages and interoperability requirements, nations have to cooperate to deploy and then sustain routine exercises or engage in humanitarian, peace keeping or peace enforcement missions. It has been shown that we can use our resources in a more optimized way, to assure the most effective and efficient air transport operations.

Major General Jochen Both MG Jochen Both is COM EATC since 1 September 2010. He was born in 1954 in Brunsbüttelkoog. He started his officer career in 1972 and was educated as a Fighter Pilot. 1992 to 1994 Commander Flying Group. 1994 to 1996 Spokesman for the Minister of Defence (MOD), Berlin. 1997 to 2000. Commander Reconnaissance Wing 51 “Immelmann”. 2001 MG Both graduated from the NATO Defence College Rome, Italy. 2003 Commander of the German Air Force Academy. 2005 to 2009 DCOS Concepts and Operations in the Air Staff MOD, Berlin. 2009 to 2010 Chief of Staff German Air Force Command and was appointed Deputy Chief of Staff Air ISAF Joint Command Kabul.

In 1999 France and Germany started a politico-military initiative to “prepare the establishment of a European Air Transport Command”. The EU presidency report of the Helsinki European Council (2000) expressed will to co-ordinate national and multinational efforts for carrying out the full range of Petersberg tasks.

Developments in integrating European air trainsport capabilities 2000: European Air Group (EAG) The European Air Group was tasked in 2000 to conduct a study on this subject. It recommended establishing a permanent co-ordination element to manage the airlift co-ordination needs in an evolutionary approach by smoothly transferring competencies from existing national structures. This multinational management structure should be developed step by step from purely co-ordination to a common entity with full command authority. 2001: European Airlift Coordination Cell (EACC) In due cause the AG Nations decided in June 2001 to establish the European Airlift Coordination Cell as a first step. The idea was to improve the utilization of European

military air transport and air-to-air-refuelling (AT & AAR) capabilities and thereby gaining synergetic effects. This entity proved its success as the savings exceeded the operating costs in the first year. 2003: European Airlift Centre (EAC) Consequently, as a next step the EACC member Nations decided in June 2003 to further develop this cell by increasing the mission scope and responsibility. The European Airlift Centre was established, which on paper received an increased responsibility over the planning of air transport requests and, in the field of harmonization of air transport, related regulations. However, it lacked manpower as well as the political will to transfer adequate levels of authority to the EAC to fulfil these

additional tasks. Therefore France and Germany agreed on the next step expressing their aspiration for the creation of a multinational air transport command. 2006: Letter of Intent (LoI) A German-French Letter of Intent to establish the EATC was signed in April 2006 in Munich. FRA and DEU invited other EAC Nations (BEL, ESP, GBR, ITA, NLD, NOR) to join the LoI. Belgium and Netherlands did so by signing a Note of Accession. 2007: EATC concept In May 2007 the Chiefs of Defence Staffs of the four participating nations signed the EATC concept, thus setting the framework. for the working process as well as levels of responsibilities.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

The EATC concept As a multinational command, EATC will have to interact within the respective national chains of command, but the strategic prerequisite for more commonality and interoperability as well as deeper integration is the transfer of national responsibilities and the giving up of defined areas of sovereignty. Gradual transfer of national responsibilities The overall EATC concept foresees a gradual transfer and integration within one single multinational command of all relevant national responsibilities and personnel that together direct the force generation and the mission execution of the combined air transport capabilities, thus improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the participants’ military Air Transport (AT) efforts. Tailored, pragmatic and modular The concept defines the EATC with two main pillars: the operational and the functional. Within the operational pillar nations transfer defined assets under the authority of the EATC. For reason of effectiveness, it is mandatory for nations to transfer a level of authority over assets called OPCON (Operational Control). From the air transport requests sent by nations, the EATC planning process will guarantee based on the bigger variety of assets the selection of the best suitable airplane for a specific mission. Neither NATO nor the EU will have direct tasking or requesting authority. If it is decided to support an operation this request will be forwarded to the EATC via the EATC nations. The functional pillar will deal with training and exercises, doctrine, concepts and regulations, logistic capabilities and regulations and fleet management. The task is to develop policies and common standards related to air transport employment, training and technical and logistical support. As long as military structures as well as fleet composition and size are vastly different, it is understood and agreed that the EATC will be organised in a modular way allowing each nation to tailor its participation. According to their level of ambition, nations decide how deeply they want to integrate in the functional areas. Within the modular approach the most ambitious partner is setting the pace – and receives the requested output by the EATC. But working closely together will result in trust and confidence in each other’s capabilities and therefore foster effectiveness and efficiency. That’s the opportunity we need to exploit.

The EATC organisation In total, with Host Nation Support and the National Support Elements, the EATC will have a manning of about 160 personnel. The actual staff repartition is established proportionally to the numbers of assets transferred. At the beginning, Germany

and France will rotate between commander and deputy commander functions, while Belgium and the Netherlands will rotate between the Functional and Operational Divisions heads. The EATC will operate day and night (24/7) out of an operational centre with much less personel involved than currently in the four nations.

The road map to success The Initial Operational Capability (IOC) is foreseen to be reached by the end of 2010. This will mean, in particular, that all four nations’ transfers of different levels of authority for the functional part will be received and the EATC, through the operational control will be in charge of planning, tasking and controlling missions. The German Air Force has already assigned the operational control over her assets to the EATC and shall disband the German Air Transport Command by the end of the year. At the end, the EATC will have operational control over nearly 170 aircrafts. The EATC’s Operational Division will have to manage more than 70.000 flying hours on various aircraft types.

Challenges The real challenge lies in EATC integration into the respective national military structures so as to be accepted as a trusted agent. Mutual confidence and after will of nations to give up further authority especially in the area of our functional division are decisive points. Exchange and availability of information, transparency between customers and the EATC, sometimes classified or at least sensitive, are of utmost importance. Therefore the supporting and backbone information technology (IT) tools are a prerequisite for successful EATC operations. The specially developed IT-tool MEAT (Management of European Air Transport) will serve this purpose. In the end, the Treaty negotiations have to be continued by nations with a high priority also to give the EATC the status of a legal entity and open the opportunity for the accession of additional members.

The way ahead The EATC is as a concretization of a political long-standing will and it is a successful example of a political vision becoming military reality. As a Multinational Command, it marks an unprecedented level of European defense cooperation in the domain of military air transport and in the broadest sense it might serve as a blue print for the European future: Enabling common solutions with a deeper integration and consequently working more efficiently by making use of synergetic effects to save resources. No doubt that, in the future, other Nations will be interested to join.

SECURITY and SECURITY SOLUTIONS

Cuts to defence programmes means cutting deterrence, technology and jobs – the Eurofighter programme as an example by Marcus Messalla, Defence Analyst, Munich* The economic crisis had a direct and evident effect on defence budgets in the form of cuts. Are cuts – whether reductions or cancellations – to existing programmes really solving the problem or making it worse? Do they bring real long term benefits? Deterrence, technological benefits and long term job support are all elements negatively affected that have to be considered.

A changing world – climat change prevails

New lines of communication The melting of the sea ice has opened the Northeast and Northwest Passages, which is of enormous economical importance as the distance between Rotterdam and Yokohama is reduced from 11,200 to 6,500 nautical miles when sailing north of Russia. An additional opening in the Northwest Passage around Canada will shorten the route between Rotterdam and Seattle by 2,000 nautical miles, making it easier to connect the Atlantic with the Pacific.

Let’s start with some geo-strategic aspects. Often we read that defence programmes are too costly and no longer needed, and that we better should have a better look on the examples of climate change. This fairly new challenge affecting the Earth is playing a large role in the game of global geo-strategy. Unfortunately it will not be a positive role if one thinks of water which is becoming a decreasing resource in some areas – and therefore a contentious issue – along with hydrocarbons. The Artic further presents a case in point.

New areas of conflict During the Cold War, the Arctic region’s importance was dominated by the strategic military balance between the Soviet Union and USA/NATO. Nuclear bombers and ballistic missiles were held on constant stand-by ready to cross the Arctic on their doomsday mission. Despite the demise of the Cold War, the Arctic region has retained its strategic significance and the conflict potential has only increased. During a speech made in London last year, the American admiral James Stravidis, SACEUR, Supreme Allied NATO Commander for Europe, clearly stated: “The Far North may become an area of conflict and of probable competition”. Nobody can say for sure what will happen in the next 10 years as nobody could have predicted the fall of the Soviet Union just 5 years before it happened. In our troubled world we can never know the full potential of threats or challenges we will face down the road. In the Arctic, the pre-conditions have already presented themselves for a force escalation. This trend is the subject of analysis by the USA, Russia and the regional powers which are directly involved: Canada, Denmark, Norway and Finland. A sort of “New Great Game” has begun, in which military analysts are applying the same concepts of those used during the Cold War, and Moscow has attempted to claim ownership over the North Pole.

The fighter aircraft – here two Eurofighters – will still for a long time the quickest means of power projection. Photo: Cassidian, Manching

The freeing up of the ice-caps over at least half of Greenland (today 80% is covered by ice) will give Denmark a greater importance within the ambit of the European Union, whilst at the same time it up with enormous problems giving to the management of the new competencies relating created by these changing conditions.

The consequences In the future, Norway will have a different role in light of the increase in commercial and military shipping around its territorial waters and owing to possible disputes in respect to oil deposits around the Svalbard Islands. The United States, directly linked to the Arctic through Alaska, and already having quite a few military bases (the current F-22 basis not there by chance), has a number of disputes with the Russians over the Barents Sea confines, the Kuril Islands and the straits of Friza and Golovnin. In play is the control of the Northeast Passage as well as that of the Northwest, providing a

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

direct route between the Atlantic and the Pacific. This is an issue which will also attract the interest of China and therefore South Korea and Japan. Canada is one of the onlookers most affected as the melting of the ice-caps opens up the possibility of exploiting the bituminous sands of the Far North. Ottawa has always played a strategic role in the defence of the American Continent and was able to rely on a formidable natural barrier, as an immense land mass which was partially inaccessible.

How to prevent crises With no international consensus and no bilateral settlement in sight, the nations still need a deterrent today and in the future. Is that possible in a time of defence budget cuts? One of the most flexible and powerful means to show presence and deterrence is with the employment of the newest generation of fighter aircraft. Their sensors make them ideally suited to detect, track and monitor intruders over vast distances and, in most cases, their presence alone would force the intruders – airborne as well as seaborne – to flee. The fighter aircraft is also the quickest power projection means. But cuts to the defence budgets could mean that not enough fighters could be deployed for deterrence in an uncertain future. And the Arctic is

just one example. Similar potentially unstable areas also exsist in the Gulf region, the Middle East, Central Asia and in the Pacific Rim. Europe, as a key player in international politics, is running the risk of not having enough platforms to guarantee deterrence for its citizens and of not being capable of having a role in any coalition called to bring stability in disputed areas. Other key elements in times of defence cuts to be considered more “solid” in terms of public opinion and perspective are the loss of thousands of jobs (and thus, also taxes for the government) and halting the development of technologies and industrial capabilities for the nations, which brings, perhaps, short term benefits, but seems like an unwise political decision when seen from a medium-long term perspective. To consider the economic perspective, take for example the largest European collaborative program, the Eurofighter. The benefits of programmes like the Eurofighter, to the balance of payments to the four core nations of the programme: Italy, Germany, the UK and Spain, have been evaluated up to 60 Bn Euro. Something that no cuts can compensate for. * Marcus Messalla is an Italian defence and aerospace analyst with previous experience writing in monthly and weekly aerospace magazines in Italy since 1983 and as a contributor to international defence and aerospace magazines. He has participated in various conferences, studies and lectures and is a consultant for media activities with Italian and international defence companies.

SECURITY and SECURITY SOLUTIONS

Defending world security – an industry view by Bernd Wenzler, CEO, Cassidian Electronics*, Ulm

In the light of a growing number of military missions abroad as well as the ubiquitous terrorist threat, defending the security and well-being of our societies is becoming more and more important. It is not just the security forces that are on the line here, but, generally, all those supporting and accompanying these missions, including industry. Today, it is increasingly difficult to segregate the concepts of internal and external security. Due to the very nature of various threats in unstable environments, industry’s role in providing the tools to counter these threats must undergo a fundamental change.

Bernd Wenzler CEO, Cassidian Electronics, Ulm Bernd Wenzler was born in Berlin in July 1960. Studied Business Management at the University of Passau; Consultant Management Partner, Stuttgart (1987); Central Procurement, DASA (1995); Head of Stratgic Procurement Management for Non-Production Material, Daimler Benz & Coordinator Military Offset Business, Daimler-Benz (1997); Initiator of EADS business activities for national Public Private Partnership programmes (2001)

“to support those who are defending security [is] not just ordinary business.” How to protect societies We at Cassidian consider globally prospering societies unthinkable without security organizations protecting them. This means it is part of our Corporate Social Responsibility to support those who are defending security, not just ordinary business. If we have a look at the nature of these threats, it is immediately clear that we are facing a completely new kind of challenge: The threat is diffuse in terms of time, place, origin and means. In other words, attacks damaging the life, well-being and property of our citizens can happen basically at any place, any time.

High technology production at Cassidian

The current risks The current risk situation is characterized by globalization in mutual dependence and concentration on the protection of flows of personnel, goods, energy and data. Examples could be: • protecting critical infrastructures like pipelines, urban public transport, airports etc. • guarding big events such as political conferences, sports games etc. • securing military convoys in hostile terrain. In these situations, the speed in adapting protective concepts determines their protection level, i.e. the faster we are able to counter a certain threat scenario with an adequate protection

Photo : Cassidian, Ulm

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

To counter current risks: Guarding big events

scenario, the lower is the risk for safety and well-being of our societies. How to counter security threats It is clear that we cannot counter such diffuse threats by sheer quantity. The time of army corps with thousands of soldiers and tanks is over. Instead, small security taskforces have to be highly flexible, responsive and extremely target-efficient. This is only possible with the employment of high technology solutions, i.e. quality instead of quantity. This alone is not totally new; now, the defence industry is well-positioned to provide as of intelligent high tech solutions. But there is one game-changing factor: time. The threat utilizes extremely short innovation cycles, in part coming from commercial technologies. That means, that new kinds of threats appear in short intervals which cannot be countered by the existing tools and rules of engagement. Therefore, industry – just like the security organizations which it supports – has to become faster. It is simply irresponsible to let soldiers or policemen wait years for new equipment countering new threats. The rule must be “better 50 % now than 100% too late”. What are the prerequisites? To achieve more responsiveness, we need a permanent joint analysis of technological trends, political situations and risk patterns involving close cooperation between security forces, procurement officials, politics and industry. In this context, industry faces the challenge of permanently adapting its products to new requirements without falling back into a lengthy – and expensive – process of specification, development and procurement. I am convinced that this is not achievable by simply recurring to commercial-of-the-shelf

Photo: www.aboutpixel.de

(COTS) products because these products in most cases are not really user-oriented. But what we can and should do, is to adaptat the COTS processes, i.e. the perform of threat analysis and development in parallel with adding multiple options as necessary. This will lead to a kind of spiral development which can be supported by dedicated scenario and simulation techniques.

A holistic approach – and the need for user oriented procurement At the same time, versatile protection concepts demand a holistic approach integrating the whole value chain from concept, equipment and training through deployment, logistics and further development. The optimized distribution of tasks should enable security personnel to concentrate on their specific mission, i.e. integrated models of cooperation and public-private partnership will lead to more efficient and effective structures. Industry cannot just concentrate on the development and manufacturing of products. It has to widen its scope into the area of specification and architectural design on the one hand and to a life-cycle oriented approach into services on the other. Summarizing my analysis, it is clear: We need a permanent joint effort defining the requirements. From this transparency, corresponding steps into development or procurement must be immediately deducible. In a nutshell: We need develop into rapid, product- and user-oriented procurement structures a global network. Industry is able and willing to have its share in this transformation process.

* Cassidian is the recently re-named defence and security pillar of the aerospace and defence company EADS.

SECURITY and SECURITY SOLUTIONS

Solutions for better protecting civil and military crisis management forces by Nannette Bühl-Cazaubon*, Journalist, Paris

The public opinion in Europe is highly sensitive to the welfare of its military and civil servants, and the controversy over whether the armed forces’ transport vehicles in Afghanistan are properly equipped or not is not new. Each loss of soldiers, civil servants or of members of humanitarian organizations is a schock. It is essential to make sure that our crisis management forces, but especially the soldiers themselves, have full faith in the tools of their trade.

There are real shortcomings The repetitive loss of lives in Afghanistan demonstrate clearly and in a painful manner the shortcomings regarding helicopters and secured vehicles in the equipment of crisis management personnel, doing their jobs in a high risk situation. But those losses also have a source in the non availability of high performance airborne ground surveillance means. Only with a day and night and under all weather long endurance reconnaissance and surveillance means, military and civil leaders will get information superiority and can avoid sending their personnel to an unsecured environment. But not only soldiers are running a high risk in countries like Afghanistan, but as experience shows also military and civilian personnel involved in nation building and humanitarian aid need high protection.

Assuring a mixed equipment But in any case, equipping them with military vehicles is not the best solution. NGOs e.g. have complained that the military vehicles sent to guarantee their safety actually put them at risk. The aid workers want protection but are reluctant to cooperate too closely with the military for fear of becoming “military targets” themselves. A better solution seems to be the refitting of civilian vehicles, with armored plating and equipment to keep the vehicles interior safe from small arms fire, hand grenades, mortar and artillery shrapnel. And this is valid also for military personnel in humanitarian missions.

Are there enough industrial capabilities? In Europe, only a few companies are specialized in this job. One of them recently created an armored vehicle on the basis of a Toyota Land Cruiser equipped with ballistic steel, glass and composites etc. Others are specialized in blinding large limousines for protection of important and endangered personalities from governments, industries etc. When such transformed civilian vehicles are “hidden” in the streets of Kabul among thousands of other civilian vehicles, there is by evidence a much lower risk to become a target of the Taliban. This is also valid for military servants on a short logistic or exploration tour, and in those situations armoured civilian vehicles could thus ensure a higher security than the expensive and more visible military transport vehicles and allow more flexibility to military leaders.

Civilian vehicles for our soldiers – an issue to be considered Military transport vehicles are expensive and industries can hardly follow the rhythm of demand for highly protected vehicles with the most modern technology, especially against mines. Since defence budgets will not grow, couldn’t it be a solution to also equip our soldiers with a mix of military armoured and blinded civil transport vehicles? Instead of waiting for years for a few more new military vehicles to be produced, the use of refitted civil transport vehicles could offer to our soldiers in a relatively quick way the protection they need. The life cycle of such civilian armoured vehicles is of course shorter than for vehicles designed for military purposes. But the possible savings due to the far lower price remain important. However, one thing has to be clearly underlined: For combat missions our soldiers need high performing high quality military transport vehicles – and it is evident that the best civilian armoured vehicle can not be used for combat missions. *Nannette Bühl-Cazaubon M.A. is a journalist specialized in security and defence

Photos: STOOF International, Borkheide

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Unlocking value with informa

Economic conditions over the past two years have forced both private and public sector organizations to look for creat information technology professionals are continually being asked to do more with less funding. However, at the same support from IT in rolling out new initiatives. A global study conducted by HP in October 2009 revealed that more than fundamental enabler of their business success.1

“Innovation Gridlock” While department and communication and information systems services (CIS) heads alike agree that technology can drive overall benefits, the challenges of rigid infrastructures and aging applications have presented significant roadblocks. Both continue to eat up the bulk of IT budgets in operations, severely restricting the amount that can be spent on driving the introduction of new capabilities. The result is what HP refers to as “innovation gridlock,” a situation where the technology organization is blocked from driving new innovation due to the majority of funding being consumed in operating the current environment. Thus, a critical challenge for the IT department within a Department of Defense (DoD) today is finding ways to break this innovation gridlock.

Self-funding The secret to success will be “self-funding,” meaning investing in projects that will free up funds that can then be invested in new capabilities. To do so, IT section groups should look for projects that allow transformation within current budgetary constraints and have quick paybacks like application retire-

“The best IT value is the value of interlinking information, technology and people within any activity or command driven processes.” • IT budgets − cost cutting, expectations grow • COTS at the core of IT practices driven by technology and new business models − but challenging • Usage of IT as a business value enabler • In Time Information Management as the main weapon • Time for a new model of governance

Tobias Bahlinger Tobias Bahlinger was born in Sindelfingen, Germany. He has been working at HP since 1995 and has held different positions in consulting and sales. Tobias Bahlinger is the responsible Client Principal for HP’s Public Sector, Defense and Security segment in Germany since November 2006. In this role, he is accountable for driving growth, revenue, profitability and customer satisfaction of HP’s Public Sector Defense and Security business across the entire HP Technology Service Portfolio.

ment, creative financial arrangements and ways to reduce licensing requirements. MoD IT departments should turn to COTS (Commercial of the Shelf) technology vendors that can help their CIS departments self-fund and create technology environments that are architected for change. Architecting new solutions for change allows CIS departments to quickly and easily add new functionality as the command requires it. This ensures that today’s innovation does not become tomorrow’s legacy and reduces the on-going operational cost of the new solution as compared to its predecessor.

Consolidation, integration and virtualization In the past IT infrastructures were often put in place to support specific needs but this has led to islands of under-utilized, unconnected infrastructure and excessive wastage. Defense teams need to look across their entire CIS infrastructure and understand the full portfolio of their assets - data centers, networking, and systems, their tools, their applications, and their processes. They need to look for areas where they can consolidate, integrate and virtualize to drive out costs, increase utilization and ultimately provide the same or improved services at a reduced cost. IT departments also need to help the headquarters use IT as a means of reducing costs in their missions. IT needs to help the headquarters unlock mission value and enable new capabilities by changing the way an existing process is managed or delivered, or by helping to introduce a new capability. By utilizing technology services and infrastructure consulting intelligently, Hewlett Packard can create cost-efficient technology infrastructures that are reliable, more flexible, readily scalable and secure. In addition, projects that modernize the

COMMUNICATION

ation technology

tive ways to stay competitive. Even as organizations recover from this era of unpredictability, e time Ministries of Defense (MoDs) and the users are demanding increased service levels and n seven out of 10 business executives indicated that their technology department was a

applications infrastructure can increase responsiveness to MoD priorities, improve productivity and reduce costs, eliminating the complexity inherent in legacy systems.

Flexibility Many CIS departments are looking increasingly at the technology-based solutions that allow them to increasingly access IT as a mission utility – the same as you would consume your electricity. Utility mission solutions help reduce capital expenditures and pay more flexibly only for the services consumed. These can often provide a good solution to help introduce a new service or capability more quickly and cost-effectively but with the appropriate security and reliability.

In-time information Increasing focus is also put on extracting the information from the IT infrastructure with departments turning to IT as the information service provider. IT section groups are investing in solutions to provide the right information in a timely fashion to help military personnel. The extracted information from the systems will be used in critical and operational situations. Information needs to be turned into intelligence and needs to be available and secure. Regardless of the route chosen to break innovation gridlock, the key is finding a strategic partner who can bring together the skills, knowledge and capabilities to help MoDs to drive new mission innovation.

IT Towers Technology Utility Cost, availability and the range of technological innovations are mainly influenced by the offered IT functions.

Service Center IT function delivers IT services according to SLA. To extract the value of the IT Services out of the usage of IT is driven trough the Responsibility by the business.

Business Technology IT is considered as part of the competitive levers of the business. The value of technology and information are the main KPIs of the company.

HP Capabilities

Technology, Cost, Business, - oriented

Business owner – IT supplier model IT service delivery, - oriented

Business process Partnership,

- oriented

New model of governance It is time for a new model of governance. Public sector and commercial departments need to start sharing best practices and experiences from freeing up money and making it available to invest in new capabilities and missions. The rapid rate of change continues to escalate. Defense teams that are unable to harness that change will continue to rack up big disadvantages from the cost of lost – lost time, lost effort, lost opportunity.

Contact Details: Tobias Bahlinger, Principal Public Services Hewlett Packard GmbH Hewlett Packard Str. 1 61352 Bad Homburg, Germany Tel.: + 49-151 1475-1666

Abbreviations used: (CIS) = communication and information systems services (MoD) = Ministry of Defense (DoD) = Department of Defense (COTS) = Commercial of the Shelf 1 HP Research: Thrive in Unpredictability,” Coleman Parkes Research Ltd, October 2009.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Why does the soldier’s health always come last – an appeal for higher medical budgets for crisis management forces by Alexander Lutz, Zeppelin Mobile Systems1, International Head of Marketing and Sales, Meckenbeuren Armed forces all over the world spend billions upon billions on arms, weapons and highly sophisticated communication devices. The medical care of soldiers normally only consumes a very small fraction of the overall budget of an army. This applies particularly to the equipment used when the soldiers are in the field.

Medical services are becoming a strategic dimension The budget of the Medical Services of the German Armed Forces, for example is barely 1% of the overall budget of the Bundeswehr. The situation in other NATO countries is similar. Outside NATO, funds spent on medical services are even less. These figures have remained the same for decades without a significant change. The low budgets for medical services were not justified in the past and they are not justified today. The political situation has changed drastically in the last 20 years since the fall of the Berlin Wall. There are no real state enemies anymore. Does today’s terrorist threat justify that 90% of defense budgets are still spent on the acquisition of arms and their logistics for mechanized operations?

Alexander Lutz Alexander Lutz is International Head of Sales, Zeppelin Mobile Systeme GmbH, Meckenbeuren. He was born in 1972 and studied International Business Administration at the University of Mannheim/Germany. Lutz worked for a Swiss crane manufacturer and later for a German management consultancy before he joined Joined Zeppelin in 2005 in his current position.

countries normally do not operate more than one or two systems per Role. Yet they are in parallel missions in several countries all over the world. What is the result? The one that suffers from all of this is always the soldier, never the decision-maker.

Disasters, not wars, are prevailing Today, armed forces are sent all over the world on peacekeeping missions, with thousands of soldiers risking their own lives to save others. They are driving in armoured cars and trucks. They are using the latest command and control and surveillance equipment. The only thing that remains as poor as it has always been is the medical equipment. How many field hospitals have been tendered in NATO countries in the last 20 years? Perhaps 10 significant ones in 28 NATO countries. A few simple tents are not considered a field hospital in this case.

Norms and standards prevent rapid delivery of material During map exercises, everything seems fine. The medical service looks perfect in theory: Role 1 to Role 42 with all the details that can be imagined. However, suppliers are struggling with an enormous amount of norms, requirements and tests that have to be fulfilled - for a good reason, of course: the safety of the soldiers. But how many NATO members can really claim having implemented their own standards in terms of real acquisitions? Only a very few. Even the big European

What is the real global scenario that armed forces are faced with today? For the vast majority of countries in the world it is not war, nor is it an enemy threat. What they are faced with today are natural catastrophes such as hurricanes, floods, earthquakes, fires and so on. These are the scenarios where the special skills and the organization of armed forces are needed. Yet, the purchasing activities of most armed forces are still as if they would have to go to war the next day. Aircraft, tanks and other heavy weapons are still the preferred status symbols of an army. What will they do with war equipment in case of an earthquake? Are they bombing it back to where it came from?

Disaster management If we look just at the catastrophes in the last year, we had significant earthquakes in Haiti, Chile and Turkey, not to mention the many smaller ones that do even find a place in the European news. We most likely had the biggest flood of all time in Pakistan. The hurricanes in the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico and the fires in Southern Europe and California are annual phenomena which even have their ‘season’. Despite

SECURITY and SECURITY SOLUTIONS

Zeppelin expandable shelter – part of a Spanish Field Hospital.

Most modern equipment – view into the interior of an expandable medical shelter. Photos: Zeppelin GmbH

these facts, the affected countries as well as the helping nations and organizations seem to be surprised anew every time these disasters occur. And they will occur again, even more frequently in the future.

There is no global preparedness… There is no such thing as global preparedness for natural disasters. After every catastrophe the consternation is huge, particularly at the level of the political decision-makers. However, the half-life period of a catastrophe is short, especially when it is ‘replaced’ by another one that is of a bigger public or media interest. But when the first impact is over, everybody goes back to business as if nothing has happened. Chile had a major earthquake in February 2010. Until April the global concern was high and until the end of July there was at least a local concern. Then the mine disaster happened. From that day on, nobody has talked about the earthquake anymore and most of the rebuilding and purchasing activities have been stopped or at least delayed. The preparedness for the next earthquake – which will surely come – will be the same as before and dozens, hundreds or even thousands more people will suffer or even die because of this lack of preparedness. Even Europe does not yet have an overall organization as was proposed in the Barnier Report in 2006, which seeks keep to, among other things, a certain number of the most modern mobile medical systems in stock. Still only map exercises.

… without armed forces Armed forces remain highly important for disaster management. On the one hand, only armed forces seem to have the financial capabilities to acquire the necessary medical logistics for disaster management such as highly sophisticated field hospitals. On the other hand, it seems that only armed forces are able to manage a disaster in a proper and organized manner. Relief organizations neither have the funds nor the power to handle a mass catastrophe. They are doing a tremen-

dously good job which saves thousands of lives every year. But in the end their work can only be a drop in the ocean.

The example of Haiti If we take the earthquake in Haiti as an example, where a huge part of the political infrastructure and administration was destroyed, it is evident that only an organized and powerful entity such as an army could avert total chaos. The U.S. Army stabilized the country within a very short time and avoided complete anarchy. Nevertheless, the availability of mobile medical equipment and shelter was too small. Field hospitals had been imported from all over the world and they could cover just a small fraction of the real need.

An appeal for higher medical budgets Up to now, Europe has almost been untroubled by such infernal catastrophes as we have seen happen all over the world in ever shorter intervals of time. But will this remain the case in the future, or will the effects of global climate change also take place in Europe? Would the European countries and their armed forces be prepared for that? Reasonable doubts must be allowed, at least if the medical budgets are not increased significantly.

1 Zeppelin is the manufacturer of the most advanced field hospitals and mobile medical shelter solutions in the world. 2 Role Support : The term “Role” or “Echelon” is used to describe the stratification of the four tiers in which medical support is organised, on a progressive basis, to conduct treatment, evacuation, resupply, and functions essential to the maintenance of the health of the force. “Echelon” or “Role” is defined on the basis of capabilities and resources, and is not specific to particular medical unit types. The term “role” is used by land or air forces, while “echelon” is primarily a maritime term. While closely related, they are not exactly interchangeable. The treatment capability of each role/echelon is intrinsic at the higher level, e.g. a role 3 facility will have the ability to carry out role 2 functions. Each level of support has the responsibility to resupply and otherwise support the levels below them. There is no requirement that a patient must necessarily pass through each echelon of care in progression during treatment and evacuation.

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Epidemiology in the field – How mathematical modelling can save lives by Markus Schwehm, CEO, ExploSYS GmbH*, Leinfelden-Echterdingen

Up to the beginning of the last century more soldiers died from infectious diseases than from combat. Thanks to medical advances, infections among soldiers have become a far less significant problem in our times. Nevertheless infectious diseases still affect the health of soldiers and their availability. Advances in epidemiology offer opportunities to mitigate the effect of emerging infectious diseases upon military readiness. Dynamic mathematical models help to understand the driving forces of disease spread. Thus the models can be used to evaluate policy options like vaccination plans and social distancing interventions.

Military epidemiology From an epidemiology point of view, a soldier population is in some aspects very different from a civilian population. Soldiers tend to be young and healthy adults with few chronic diseases. People in this age range are sexually active and thus subject to sexually transmitted diseases. Living in barracks means crowded living conditions that enable direct transmission of diseases. Soldiers usually eat in large dining facilities, where common infections can be introduced via the food supply chain. Missions take place far away from home, where they may be exposed to exotic diseases. In the field, without sewerage or running water, hygiene standards are difficult to maintain. Missions to help a civil population during natural or man-made disasters bring soldiers into situations with high risk of infectious disease outbreaks. Infectious diseases are therefore a constant threat for the health of soldiers.

Dr. Markus Schwehm Dr. Markus Schwehm is founder and CEO of the Institute for Exploratory Systems (ExploSYS GmbH) since 2005. He was born in 1962 in Mannheim. Studies in mathematics in Karlsruhe and München, Dr.-Engineer in Informatics from the University of Erlangen-Nürnberg. Started his career in 1988 with the Institue for Medical Informatics and Health Research of GSF, München. 1990–1996 Researcher at University Erlangen. 1997–1998 research activities in the USA and Stuttgart. 1999–2008 Research Assistant at the University in Tübingen (Bioinformatics and Institute for Medical Biometry).

Modelling the military setting The military setting has some advantages with respect to modelling. The soldier population is clearly defined and counted. Military rules and regulations ensure a good surveillance of cases. Policy decisions and interventions are fully implemented. All participants, cases as well as health care workers belong to the same institution, which facilitates communication. Thus, the data available for epidemiological modelling is often more complete than data collected in civilian settings. However, modelling the military setting also faces some difficulties. The soldier population may change

Visualisation of individual-based (left), age-structured (center) and spatial-structured (right) models of disease outbreaks

Photo: ExploSYS

SECURITY and SECURITY SOLUTIONS

rapidly. There is only sparse knowledge about the natural history of the exotic diseases soldiers may come into contact with. Surveillance of the surrounding civilian population is difficult and only sparse data is available. Modelling results are required in real-time to allow instant policy decisions.

Exploratory modelling For most diseases the available data is very sparse and the execution of experiments to replace missing data would be unethical. Moreover, infection spread is in general a highly stochastic process, in particular at the beginning of an outbreak, while the total number of cases is low. The properties of pathogens can evolve over time, and they may develop resistance against pharmaceutical treatment. Therefore epidemiological models can in general not be used for predictions. In particular predicting the consequences of a bioterrorist attack as a singular event is out of the question. But what is the use of modelling, if it can not be used for predictions? Even a validated model is just one of an infinite number of possible correct models. We always have to deal with a set of plausible models. If validation of a model can be abandoned, this allows us to incorporate uncertain and partial knowledge. An exploratory sensitivity analysis can then reveal properties that are valid in all or most plausible models. By sampling the set of plausible models, the effect of alternative intervention policies can be evaluated. This mode of operation is called exploratory modelling.

Modelling a bioterrorist attack An example application of exploratory modelling is the preparedness planning for the control of a bioterrorist smallpox attack. Some properties like the natural history of smallpox or the efficacy of vaccines is well known. On the other hand it is not known how the spread of the disease is affected by changed hygiene and mobility behaviour in our modern society, nor how the spread would be in the theatre of operations. Other properties like the contagiousness of smallpox in a modern society or the expected size of a bioterrorist attack event are not known. Smallpox is officially eradicated, so the unknown properties can not be inferred from new observational data or deliberately executed experiments. We thus only have partial knowledge about smallpox spreading properties. Nevertheless it is necessary to devise preparedness plans for the unlikely but possible threat of a bioterrorist attack using the smallpox virus. How fast must cases be diagnosed? How many intensive care units will be necessary? Which threshold should be used to switch from a containment strategy to a mitigation strategy? How many resources need to be stockpiled? How do alternative vaccination strategies compare? Exploratory modelling can help to identify the key properties of smallpox spread and containment: that despite the long latency of smallpox rapid case detection and isolation of cases is decisive for any containment strategy; that more isolation capacity would be necessary than what is currently available. Mass vaccination is only useful, if started right after the first few detected cases. That alternatives to mass vaccination exist with comparable effectiveness.

Modelling for policy making Exploratory modelling is very different from predictive modelling. Predictive modelling is data driven, because the data is necessary for the validation of the model. Thus the model development process is focussed on the best fit for the available data. The result is a single optimal model that pretends to answer all possible policy questions. But by confining modelling to problems where validated, predictive modelling is like

Exploratory Analysis of 10000 smallpox outbreak simulations: How isolation capacity controls total outbreak size.

Photo: ExploSYS

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

+++ Security and searching for a lost key below a lantern because it is too dark to search elsewhere. Exploratory modelling, on the other hand is driven by the policy questions that need to be addressed. Abandoning validation allows expressing uncertain and partial knowledge, resulting in a set of plausible models, possibly one set for each policy question to be addressed. The model development is iterative and adaptive, where the next step is dependent of results obtained in previous steps. The result is not a fixed model, but a chain of models and model revisions that help to build a chain of convincing arguments that can be used for policy making.

Exploratory modelling tools Exploratory modelling can be supported by software tools in many ways. A model should be expressed in a high level domain specific modelling language that allows expressing uncertain and partial knowledge. A graphical editor facilitates developing and revising models for non-mathematicians. A library should provide modules for diseases and interventions to allow rapid prototyping of a first baseline model. Version management is necessary to support the iterative and adaptive model development process. Sampling and search algorithms are necessary for the automatic exploration of model properties. Databases maintain the large number of simulation results. Interactive data visualization and reporting tools help to translate simulated numbers into arguments for policy making. All these tools require a large amount of computing, so the modelling environment should be backed by remote high performance servers. The adoption of exploratory modelling techniques requires a more advanced toolset than the traditional predictive modelling technique. But by harnessing computational power and advanced software technology the practitioner in the field is empowered to develop question driven models himself.

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT European External Action Service (EEAS) The EU-Council endorsed the EEAS on 25 October 2010. This has become possible after the vote of the European Parliament (EP) on 20 0ctober 2010 on the budget control, the balanced recruitment and the role of Heads of Delegation.

Budgetary control and transparency In budgetary terms, the EEAS will be treated as an EU institution, that is, it will have its own section in the EU budget. The Budget require discharge of the EP. Monthly reporting on the EEAS is to be given to the EP, and a yearly report is obligatory. The EU Commission will remain in charge of the service’s operational budget.

Geographical and gender balance The essentials had been addressed to Lady Ashton by the parliaments rapporteur, Bernhard Rapkay (Germany: “We want to have a service that is modern, that is gender balanced. We need equal rights and equal obligations” for EU officials and staff from the national diplomatic services, and “they must be committed to the EU High Representative, they must be loyal to you, Mrs Ashton”. The recruitment has to be secured on highest standard of affordability, efficiency and integrity, on the broadest possible geographical basis from among national Member States. To ensure a gender balance in the EEAS, appropriate measures should be taken to promote equal opportunities for the under represented gender in certain function groups. By 2013 the HR will table a report on the implementation. Access to EEAS posts should be opened to the officials from other EU Institutions from 1.July 2013.

Modelling in the field Exploratory modelling can save lives by supporting military epidemiliogy in the field. Until now decision makers at the scene of the action had to rely on “black box” models developed by external modelling, specialists. Using exploratory modelling everything could be held under control by those who are in charge.

* The Institute is offering consulting and modelling expertise for health care agencies and the pharmaceutical industry in their preparation for emerging diseases and pandemics. Directly transmitted diseases like Smallpox, SARS or Influenza are modelled with deterministic and stochastic approaches. For the realistic modelling of interventions, individual- and network-based discrete event simulation techniques are applied. The services include parameter sensitivity studies and the optimization of intervention plans. His award winning pandemic influenza preparedness planning tool InfluSim is in use by many health care agencies throughout the world. Among his customers are health care institutions in Germany, Switzerland, South Korea and New Zealand.

Role of heads of delegation Before taking up their duties, heads of delegation “ must complete specific training courses on the tasks and responsibilities of authorizing officers and the implementation of the budget. The heads of delegations “should fully cooperate with the EP, provide necessary information and may be requested to attend committee meetings.”

Joint Press Statement by EP’s rapporteurs on the EEAS Strasbourg, 19.10.2010 EP rapporteurs Elmar Brok, Roberto Gualtieri, Bernhard Rapkay and Guy Verhofstadt issued a joint press statement concerning geographical balance within the EEAS.

SECURITY and DEFENCE NEWS

Defence News +++ “(…) The draft legislation as originally proposed by Lady Ashton and the Commission only mentioned the goals of geographic and gender balance in a very general, cursory way, and the Council did not either insist in its position on these principles. As obvious from the attached overview, the Parliament managed to improve the original drafts in the following steps: In the Madrid negotiations concluded on 21 June it was agreed that the EEAS staff is to comprise a meaningful presence of nationals from all EU Member States and that the review in 2013 is to result in “additional specific measures”, if imbalances are found. As a compromise agreed ahead of the EP plenary vote on 8 July, the Parliament underlined in its resolution that in its view, these specific measures to be taken in 2013 should include measures analogous to those provided for in Council Regulation 401/2004, which after the last enlargement enabled the application of temporary quotas. In the trialogue on the Staff Regulation the EP ensured that wording agreed in Madrid also applies in the Staff Regulation, obliging Lady Ashton to recruit staff on the broadest possible geographical basis.”

Remarks by High Representative Catherine Ashton after the adoption of the final legal acts for the EAS in the European Parliament Strasbourg, 20 October 2010 “I welcome wholeheartedly today’s votes by the European Parliament. We can now move forward to build a modern, effective and distinctly European service for the 21st century. The lives of the citizens of Europe are touched by the foreign policy every day. What we are doing in trade enables some to have access to markets and enables some to sell their goods. What we are doing in terms of counter-terrorism and security issues also helps keep people safe. So it maters hugely that Europe is a foreign policy actor and is able to operate in the world. I want the people of Europe to understand and recognize that and to support us in the work we are doing. (…) Today is a day that feels like the end of the first stage of a long journey, and I am really grateful to the European Parliament for the tough determination and negotiations, but now actually for giving us the tools to draw in the people that are coming in the service and do the work to create that service. Europe needs to shape up to defend better our interests and values in a world of growing complexity and fundamental power shifts. And this is what we are setting out to do.”

European Council Top Management for EEAS After the Council endorsed the complete legal base for the European External Action Service (EEAS) - adoption of the EEAS Decision on 26 July and the amendments to the Staff and Financial Regulation on 25 October, High Representative Catherine Ashton appointed Pierre Vimont as the Executive Secretary General and David O'Sullivan as the Chief Operating Officer for the future External Action Service. She completed her top management team by appointing Helga Schmid as the Deputy Secretary General for Political Affairs and Maciej Popowski as the Deputy Secretary General for Inter-institutional Affairs. The EEAS will start operating by the end of this year. Pierre Vimont has held many senior positions during a career that spans more than 30 years. Roles have included chief of staff for three French Foreign Ministers, Permanent Representative of France to the EU and Ambassador of France to the US. David O’Sullivan started his career at the Irish Department of Foreign Affairs and went on to work for the European Commission, where he was Director and Director General (DG Education and DG Trade), member of the Cabinet of two commissioners, and head of the cabinet of Commission President Romano Prodi. Helga Schmid has been the Political Adviser to two German Ministers of Foreign Affairs and the Head of the Foreign Minister's office, before relocating to Brussels to become the Director of the Policy Planning and Early Warning Unit of the High Representative in the General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union, a post she has held successfully for the last five years. Maciej Popowski took part in the negotiations of Poland with the European Union. He was deputy head of Poland's representation to the EU. He was 2004–2009 the first Permanent Representative of Poland to the EU's Political and Security Committee for over five years. He then joined the European Commission as the director in DG Development before becoming Head of the Cabinet of the European Parliament’s President, Jerzy Buzek.

EUROPEAN COMMISSION Roadmap on Maritime Surveillance On 21 October, the European Commission set out the “Roadmap towards establishing the Common Information Sharing Environment (‘CISE’) for the surveillance of the EU maritime domain”. It is an initiative under the EU’s Integrated Maritime

THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION

Policy, which advocates an integrated approach to the management and governance of the oceans, seas and coasts, and fosters interaction between all sea-related policies in the EU. In the Roadmap the Commission spells out how to bring together relevant Member States’ authorities across all maritime sectors to allow for the exchange of maritime surveillance data, held by authorities such as coast guards, traffic monitoring, environmental monitoring, pollution prevention, fisheries, border control, tax and general law enforcement authorities, as well as navies. The Roadmap proposes establishing the CISE network in the following six steps: • Identifying all user communities • Mapping of data sets and analysis of gaps for data exchange • Defining common data classification levels • Developing the supporting framework for the CISE • Defining access rights • Providing a coherent legal framework Cooperation pilot-projects are already taking place, and a full system of information sharing between the different maritime surveillance systems could be in place by 2014. The Roadmap has been validated by EU Member States during an extensive consultation. It is a follow-up to the first Commission Communication of October 2009 on this subject. It shall be fine-tuned by the end 2011 on the Council’s request.

To improve disaster response On 26 October, the European Commission presented proposals to reinforce the EU’s capacity to act on civil protection and humanitarian assistance. The aim is to improve the disaster response of the EU, both within and outside of its borders. Scenarios for the main disaster risks should be developed and the assets needed if these risks materialise should be identified. In addition, a map will be drawn of Member States’ assets that are currently available for EU response, and national authorities will be requested to voluntarily put core equipment on standby, available for rapid European assistance if needed. The Commission proposes that a European Emergency Response Capacity is set up, based on Member States' expertise and assets; and second, a European Emergency Response Centre will be the new platform for more effective EU coordination whenever disasters strike. This centre, which will merge the humanitarian aid (ECHO) and civil protection (MIC) crisis rooms, will collect real-time information on disasters, monitor hazards, alert member states, and coordinate the EU's disaster response actions. Kristalina Georgieva, European Commissioner for International Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response,

stated: “The world is changing and the number of disasters worldwide has risen fivefold since 1975. From the earthquake in Haiti to the industrial spill in Hungary we have seen that a combined European response can be more effective – both on the field, and in terms of cost. In a situation where every hour counts the European Union needs a system that guarantees the availability of key assets for immediate deployment. We can not afford to wait for the next mega disaster before we take action.”

ESDA/WEU Assembly EU-Africa: an “equal partnership” for development and security In the framework of the Belgian Presidency of the European Union and Western European Union and with the support of the Belgian Federal Parliament, the European Security and Defence Assembly/WEU Assembly held a high-level conference on “EU-Africa: Partnership for Development and Security” on 15 and 16 September in the Belgian House of Representatives in Brussels. A large number of speakers and members of national parliaments from European and African countries debated issues relating to development and security with top-level actors from European Union and African Union institutions, including three EU Special Representatives and Mr Jean PING, Chairperson of the Commission of the African Union (AU). The subject of the first session was the “Africa-EU Strategic Partnership on development – state of play and prospects”. The second session on “UN and EU cooperation with the African Union on Peace and Security” was attended by Mr Romano PRODI, Chairman of the AU-UN Joint Panel on Peacekeeping in Africa. During the third session on “Medical cooperation in EU missions”, speakers included a.o. .Mrs Tuija NURMI, Leader of the Finnish Delegation to the ESDA/WEU Assembly.( www.assembly-weu.eu.). The fourth session was dedicated to “Conflict prevention and crisis management in Africa – selected case studies”, with particular focus on Sudan and Chad/RCA and Somalia. At the end of two days of fruitful debate, the African parliamentary delegates invited to the high-level conference issued a “Joint Declaration” expressing the hope that the EU-African partnership should be consolidated and that the interests of both parties should be respected.