EU Army on way? EU cannot rely on NATO and needs new defence policy...

[Ulmita]

...says Brussels chief

THE European Union cannot rely on NATO to protect its member states from external threats and must develop a policy of collective defence that allows it to "act autonomously if and when necessary".




According to a new foreign policy document from the Brussels-based institution to be handed to EU leaders next week, a "credible European defence" is also essential to preserve good relations with the US.
EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini's Global Strategy document states that "as Europeans we must take greater responsibility for our security".


The white paper adds: "While NATO exists to defend its members — most of which are European — from external attack, Europeans must be better equipped, trained and organised to contribute decisively to such collective efforts, as well as to act autonomously if and when necessary.
"A more credible European defence is essential also for the sake of a healthy transatlantic partnership with the United States."
While it stresses that "NATO remains the primary framework for most member states", it goes on to urge EU members to "channel a sufficient level of expenditure to defence".

The document continues: “We live in times of existential crisis, within and beyond the European Union.
“Our Union is under threat. Our European project, which has brought unprecedented peace, prosperity and democracy, is being questioned.
“To the east, the European security order has been violated, while terrorism and violence plague North Africa and the Middle East, as well as Europe itself.
“A fragile world calls for a more confident and responsible European Union, it calls for an outward- and forward-looking European foreign and security policy.”



The white paper will be seized on by Eurosceptics as proof of a plot to set up an EU army - a notion that has been widely dismissed by diplomats in Brussels and London.
The warning of a European army was at the core of the Brexit campaign and became a hot topic with both sides trading blows over the truth of claims Brussels wanted to create a NATO-style organisation.


America subsidises European defence by vastly outspending all other NATO members and the EU believes a stronger continental force would take the pressure off the Pentagon.
But while the latest EU policy document calls for joint working on matters of defence, it stops short of explicitly calling for the creation of an EU army, which would require treaty change.


The head of the European Parliament Committee on Foreign Affairs, Elmar Brok, has also argued for "more cooperation in the European defence policy".
Downing Street had previously stated there was "no prospect of an EU army".
However, with Britain out of Europe it will not be able to veto a treaty change on the combined force.

Interesting. What do you guys think? I personally have been calling for this for a long time now. We do need to differentiate from NATO, we need to pursue our own goals and strategy when it comes to security. Most importantly though, a unified army is a good step towards a super state, a federalized EU.

Britain was the only country that was opposing this and was threatening to veto. But now with the Brits outside the picture a way is paved for the creation of one.

[Kapadons]

Eh, if the US is doing the job, with NATO as backup, at this current time,I don't see why they would need to spend the money to fund it.

[Deleted]

Eh, if the US is doing the job, with NATO as backup, at this current time,I don't see why they would need to spend the money to fund it.

We don't want to do it anymore, go pay for your own shit, thank you.

[PACOX]

An EU army would be terrible. What could it do that NATO couldn't?

It would essentially be NATO without US funding. The article speaks of internal threats, so beef up your national guard/counter terrorism units?

[Deleted]

An EU army would be terrible. What could it do that NATO couldn't?

It would essentially be NATO without US funding. The article speaks of internal threats, so beef up your national guard/counter terrorism units?

It will streamline our defence. It would make nato stronger as well. You dont need every contry to have airforce or their own submarines. The eu countires working as one will make it easier to spend on the things needed for europe as a whole.

[Deleted]

An EU army would be terrible. What could it do that NATO couldn't?

a EU army take march orders directly from Bryssel and you do not have to negotiate and compromise about the march order with example US as it is now with a NATO army.

Hence I'm against a EU army it will be to easy and fast to deploy and therefore tempting to be use. Better to keep the hard to use NATO army, who only can act fast if Russian invade, but need month of negotiations if somtinghelse need to be done, hence it is slow to deploy and the public/politicians have time to think is this realy a good idea....

see how glibly US deploy there own troops... on the president's whim

[Miow]

An EU army would be "Lets hug the enemy to death. Political correctness is a must!"

[Daerio]

An EU superstate would only mean more robber barons to increase taxation and scam actual working people out of more money. Larger government means more government waste, and nothing else is certain.

[Mavett]

With the UK out, the only capable forces are that of France and Germany, the rest of the states are just paying the bare minimum of the 2% afaik and mostly running outdated equipment.

Relief of pressure from the Pentagon by creating a unified continental army would require increased spending from individual states and meeting hardware standards, that's a lot of $$$.

[Ulmita]

With the UK out, the only capable forces are that of France and Germany, the rest of the states are just paying the bare minimum of the 2% afaik and mostly running outdated equipment.

Relief of pressure from the Pentagon by creating a unified continental army would require increased spending from individual states and meeting hardware standards, that's a lot of $$$.

Germany has no army. I think from EU Greece has biggest GDP spending %

[DarkAmbient]

B-but we were told during the referendum that an EU army was pure fantasy.

[Rend Blackhand]

EU army. What a shit idea.

So you're going to have over 25 countries with several different languages, all sorts of equipment ranging from modern NATO gear to Cold War era soviet equipment. How the hell is that going to work?

Imagine for a moment they're all forced to speak one language for the army, French, and there is extreme variation in everyone's ability to speak French and these potential soldiers will have to give and receive orders, while working with others in logistics and intelligence, all in the heat of battle in a language which most of them can't speak fluently

Thank fuck for brexit

[nonameelf]

What about EU members that have chosen not to be members of NATO because they wish to stay out of conflicts? Would they get an opt out of the joint military or would they suddenly have to send their citizens off to die in other people's wars?

It sounds like they're trying to make this decision under the assumption that every EU member supports NATO, which just isn't the case.

[Deleted]

An EU superstate would only mean more robber barons to increase taxation and scam actual working people out of more money. Larger government means more government waste, and nothing else is certain.

Pretty much this. Language barrier alone is a huge no no.

[Deleted]

An EU army would be terrible.

Do you have any idea of how fucked up EU defense procurement is ? - It would be fucking awesome.

- - - Updated - - -

B-but we were told during the referendum that an EU army was pure fantasy.

A, it is, B, What this is greater cooperation, C, its what the EU army was supposed to do (let the Commission rule with an iron fist) was pure fantasy.

- - - Updated - - -

An EU superstate would only mean more robber barons to increase taxation and scam actual working people out of more money. Larger government means more government waste, and nothing else is certain.

This is like the opposite of correct.

[DarkAmbient]

greater cooperation

I wonder what that will end up looking like in the years to come.

[Daerio]

This is like the opposite of correct.

Total fantasy-land.

[Vorkreist]

The current EU defense is so fragmented and inefficient that they wouldn't be able to do anything in another Ukraine type of situation.
Russia could steamroll half the continent without breaking a sweat.

[Deleted]

There was an article on Euronews about this.
Needless to say, I totally agree. NATO is out of control.

[I Push Buttons]

Total fantasy-land.

So you think many small governments, with multiple completely redundant bureaucracies unto themselves, is more cost efficient than one large bureaucracy? Especially considering one large entity can negotiate from a far more advantageous position than multiple small entities can individually.