 |
| |
|
|
DinoDoc
|
 |
AECCP loves Democracy
Sep 1999
time: 23:27
|
|
quote:
Anti-war Europeans open summit
Four European Union countries which opposed the war in Iraq have begun a mini-summit in Brussels on boosting defence ties.
The leaders of France, Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg are discussing ways to strengthen the EU's military links.
French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin on Monday called for a strong Europe which could speak with a single voice and act as a counterweight to the United States.
However the four countries attending the Brussels summit have insisted their meeting is not anti-American.
Mr De Villepin said the mini-summit was intended to strengthen Nato, not rival it.
"Everything is being done to act in tight co-operation and in strict harmony with the Atlantic alliance," he said during a visit to Prague.
"It is not a question of building a competing process but, on the contrary, of avoiding duplication and asserting Europe's responsibility."
But the apparent exclusion of the EU's pro-war nations - including the biggest military power, the UK - has prompted accusations that the meeting will only deepen the Europe's divisions.
The BBC's Chris Morris, in Brussels, says almost everyone agrees there can be no credible European defence policy without UK involvement, but Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt, who called the meeting, argues that Europe has to start somewhere.
Divided Europe
Hopes that Europe was ready to move towards a common defence and foreign policy have been left in tatters by the Iraq war, which polarised the EU into pro- and anti-war camps.
The EU's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, and the country currently holding the EU presidency, Greece, are not attending the summit.
And the UK Prime Minister, Tony Blair, attempted on Monday to play down the summit's significance.
"We won't accept, and neither will the rest of Europe, anything that either undermines Nato or conflicts with the basic principles of European defence we've set out," he said.
Italy, Spain and the Netherlands have also expressed reservations.
Reports before the mini-summit began said France and Germany were expected to back-pedal on the original proposals - including a European defence force run from a military command centre in Belgium - fearing further damage to their relationships with the US.
Mr Verhofstadt is still believed to support the creation of a European military command headquarters, but diplomatic sources quoted by Reuters news agency said the idea had been shredded.
Proposals for defence spending targets and common European military units had also been dropped, diplomats said.
'Scaled-down' plans
Instead, the four are thought more likely to stick to less contentious ground - with a final communique expected to contain only those ideas which are under discussion by the convention examining Europe's future.
Those include a solidarity clause offering support to fellow nations under terrorist attack, and plans for an EU arms procurement and strategic research agency.
Separate plans for a European rapid reaction force, which would operate under the auspices of Nato military planners, have the support of all 15 EU members.
Planners hope the 60,000-strong force will be fully operational by the end of the year.
The EU launched its first military mission last month, when it took over from Nato in charge of the peacekeeping operation in Macedonia. |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2984021.stm
Why would you hold a meeting to hammer out European defense policy and exclude one of the EU's largest military powers?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Demerzel
|
|
ooh watch out! "Old Europe" is on the rampage!
sheesh
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CerberusIV
|
|
Well, doing nothing is not a real option for the French and German governments so they will have a meeting about defence co-operation and make important sounding noises at the end of it but nothing substantial will happen.
One of the unspoken issues about common european defence is "who will pay for it?" The US has paid to provide a large proportion of the defence of western europe for the last 50 years. Historically the UK has spent more of its GDP on military than other european NATO members over the same period.
Nothing much is going to happen (apart from joint procurement projects like Eurofighter) until either there is substantial progress on political union through the EU or until the US pulls completely out and leaves the europeans on their own militarily. I doubt if a US withdrawal will happen because it could be the catalyst for a european defence force with eventual global ability - not in the US long term interests.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
"Old Europe" will keep it up until they find themselves on the back-burner of history. Belgium especially is becoming quite vindictive:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2983911.stm
excerpt:
"The Bush administration has reacted angrily to suggestions that General Tommy Franks, the commander of the US-led war in Iraq, might be charged with war crimes.
A Belgian lawyer says he is preparing a case that could see General Franks charged under a law which allows the prosecution of non-Belgian citizens for war crimes. ..
"If this prosecution goes ahead, Bush administration officials are making it plain they will regard it as a major diplomatic incident - an example of political harassment.
A senior administration official warned that even the issuing of indictments would result in what he called "diplomatic consequences" for Belgium. ..
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
And Belgium is the heart of Europe. That should tell you something.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
Not really. Just look at the euro or ineed the foundation of the EU. Only a handful of nations started it, the others joined in later.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
Yes the second is a bit more difficult. But even when the euro was first announced some decades back, Americans just laughed. Now it is stronger than the dollar.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
It depends on the US really. If it behaves...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
BTW Greece kicked out the turkish yoke in 1820's not 1880's and it's been uphill ever since.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
About the Kings, yes unfortunately. now they're gone too.
but do you have democracy now? even without kings? (or health care for that matter and peaceful life)
The Euro was deemed impossible but yet happened and it is stronger than the dollar now.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:27
|
|
 to the initiative. It goes completely against the historical trend.
Don't get me wrong, I would love to see a European bloc independent from the US (a relationship that would preferably involve cooperation, but I have no particular problems with rivalry).
But this initiative completely goes in the way, because it gives individual nation-states too much power in this. As the divisions on the Iraq war shows, a common voice on the foreign policy cannot be found in the EU as long as nation-states didn't give up this part of their sovereignity.
The big split in Europe was not directly about war. War was a convenient item on which the oppositions focused, but it wasn't the problem in itself. The real opposition was between countries that wanted to continue to guide the EU, and countries that wanted to take an active part in EU's guidance.
It was also very much about the positions on EU as a diplomatic and military power :
- France and Germany strive for the creation of an EU bloc.
- UK wants to keep its independance, and play on both sides (UK is at the edge of EU's current military cooperation along with France)
- Spain doesn't want to have to spend too much on military, especially since much of its EU money will disappear to profit the new member-states.
The only solution to adress this split would be to instill democracy in the EU, and let the supranational democratic institutions speak, to represent the will of the people, with minimal input from the haggling nation states. Unfortunately, we won't see it anytime soon, thanks notably to Chirac's outdated conceptions of Europe.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27.
Apolyton Time is 00:27. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
29-04-2003 14:07
If America says "Lets'have a war", do the Brits ever say no? How could Europe be a counter-balance to the US if they never stand up to its bullying?
I know that the French rejected them too
|
|