I think that although considered one of " The Big Five" and having veto
power at the U.N. etc. France realizes they don't really fill that bill.
And they do not know what to do to change that.
Anti-war powers to join forces
John Vinocur/IHT IHT
Wednesday, April 30, 2003
4 nations agree to set up autonomous Europe defense body
BRUSSELS France, Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg, four
NATO members opposing the American and British war against
Saddam Hussein, said Tuesday they were setting up their own
European military operations center next year.
The project was immediately dismissed by Colin Powell, U.S.
secretary of state, who called it "some sort of plan to develop
some sort of headquarters." He said the four would have done
better spending more money on guns, manpower and equipment.
Meeting in a rump summit spurned by the rest of the membership
of the European Union and NATO, the four countries seeking
greater European defense integration announced they would
establish a "multinational deployable force headquarters" for
operations where NATO forces are not involved.
They also said they would set up a "nucleus of collective capability
for planning and conducting operations for the European Union."
The vague language mirrored the awkwardness of an undertaking
coming in the context of damaged relations within NATO, and
tensions between the United States and France and Germany
because of their role in opposing the war.
Key EU officials chose not to attend a meeting called during the
height of the Iraq crisis and having the approval of only its
participants .
In the end, the initiative turned out to be a mild demonstration of
determination to develop a more autonomous European defense
force, backed with a concerted attempt by the four to avoid
appearing as would-be rivals of the Alliance's core membership.
President Jacques Chirac of France insisted the initiative enhanced
the Atlantic Alliance's interests while asserting it would "enable
European defense to make a quantitative leap forward" without
duplication or decoupling from NATO. For Chancellor Gerhard
Schroeder of Germany, the plan "is not directed against NATO.
Rather it strengthens the European pillar."
But NATO expressed clear doubts. In assessing the declaration,
NATO said afterwards: "We are concerned about how extra
capabilities will be delivered without extra resources, and we are
also concerned about the risk of unnecessary duplication."
For Powell, addressing the project in Senate committee testimony
in Washington, the need was for more European manpower, a
denser structure and better weapons - "not more headquarters."
And Powell emphasized that out of 19 NATO members, only four
had shown up.
Of the stay-aways, their attitude was stated perhaps most
strikingly by Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, the Dutch foreign minister, in
explaining his country's refusal to join its neighbors.
"Belgium and France will not guarantee our security," he said.
"Germany will not guarantee the security of the Netherlands. I
cannot imagine a world order built against the United States."
NATO, the United States, and Britain have long expressed doubts
about a European defense pillar replicating existing Alliance
functions and bodies, such as SHAPE, the organization's planning
headquarters in Mons, Belgium.
Both the notions of an independent European panning staff and
headquarters have been described as "red line" issues, which
NATO loyalists say is anything involving a "name that doesn't
suggest it's subordinate to the alliance."
An American defense expert, reading the declaration, said that
under these circumstances the four countries in talking about
Europe-only headquarters and planning staffs seemed to be acting
with this intent.
But the declaration's text was crammed with references to links to
NATO, and the four leaders, including Prime Minister Guy
Verhofstadt of Belgium and Prime Minister Jean Claude Uncker of
Luxembourg, barely let a minute pass at a news conference
without stressing that no antagonism to NATO was involved.
All the same, the summit played out against a backdrop of
remarks over the last two weeks by President George Bush and
Prime Minister Tony Blair warning France not to seek to form
groups opposing the United States or NATO.
Bush said he expected France to refrain from using "its position
within Europe to create alliances against the United States, Britain,
Spain or any of the new countries that are the new democracies of
Evian." Chirac will host Group of Eight leaders in Evian, France, in
June.
And Blair, in statements this week, described France's desire for a
multipolar world with different centers of power was one that
would create rivalries and instability. Instead, Europe and the
United States should work as a "one polar world" to tackle
problems, he said.
Chirac, in response to a question, said he had no criticism of
Blair's remarks. Then he returned Blair's fire:
"When you look at the evolution of the world, you see that quite
naturally a multipolar world is being created," Chirac said.
"For balance to exist there will have to be a strong Europe and a
strong United States linked together by a strong cultural pact,"
Chirac said. "That means our relations between the European
Union and the United States will have to be relations of
complementarity and partnership between equals. Otherwise it will
be a different world, which is not what France observes and
wants."
Schroeder, on the other hand, described Blair's remark as
"accurate", said it was not his view that Europe should be an
opposite pole, and expressed a desire to have Europe function as
a partner of America.
And the chancellor avoided repeating the word "emancipation" as
used by a reporter in asking him about the deeper meaning of
military decisions taken by the four in relation to the United States.
Indeed, a long list of statements of intention or propositions
included in the declaration seemed to repeat earlier proposals
within the EU or ones now being considered by the Convention
drafting the EU's first constitution.
Those ideas include setting up a rapid reaction brigade that fits
with existing NATO planning, a European arms procurement and
research agency, a European command for strategic air transport,
and European training centers.
At the same time, nothing was agreed about the low defense
spending levels of Germany, Belgium or Luxembourg, the issue of
their declining military budgets being taken care of with a reference
to the advisability of greater investment in the future.
International Herald Tribune
iht.com |
