| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| European defence deal reached |
| 2003-11-28 |
| Blair’s given a big FU to NATO; plants a foot solidly over another of his vaunted "red lines". Britain, France and Germany have reached an informal agreement on a joint defence arrangement for Europe. The three nations are about to present the proposals to their European Union partners, French and British diplomatic sources said. The submission reportedly includes plans to structure defence co-operation and to create a European military headquarters. Correspondents say the United States is likely to balk at the accord. Washington will probably be unhappy with any moves which it feels undermine Nato’s influence over European security. But, speaking in Naples during a break in a meeting of the EU’s 15 current and 10 future members, French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin said it was crucial Europe forged ahead with plans for a common defence. "This is a key issue. We can’t have a Europe without defence," he told French state radio France-Info. "Why, the continent was vanishing before my eyes. Besides, you never know when the French military is going to go on strike." British officials confirmed that an agreement had been reached but emphasised that it was not a "formal solution". It would not appear on the official agenda but would be put to other delegates at dinner on Friday, they said. The US is said to be particularly upset at calls for a European defence headquarters. But a British official has said that "any EU operations planning capability has to be compatible with Nato". For now. Britain has said its right to control its own defence policy is one of the "red lines" it will not allow the new EU constitution to cross. It has reportedly also maintained that it envisages the European defence body will tackle missions Nato does not want to get involved in. Meanwhile, argument rages over the Great Con: Sorry, Constitution. On Friday, UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said the UK would reject the draft if it meant states would lose their veto over foreign policy. Which has just been proposed by the presidents, the Italians. Why? Possibly for it’s real, possibly it’s a symbolic issue for Blair and the like to ’heroically’ repulse for the benefit of the home audiences... Spanish Foreign Minister Ana Palacio, meanwhile, has said provisions in the text which dilute the voting power Spain and Poland won at the Nice summit three years ago are "unacceptable". We didn’t expect to lose our influence in this superstate! D’oh! Dutch Minister for Europe Atzo Nicolai said small countries like his tried without success earlier this week to force heavyweights France and Germany to play by EU rules. If they’re not playing by the rules, it might be time to stop playing the game. Under the draft constitution the number of voting commissioners will be held at 15 - meaning 10 countries would not have fully-fledged commissioners when the union expands. "We offer you a great opportunity to keep quiet!" The major disagreements are expected to be left for heads of state to resolve at a summit in Brussels on 12 and 13 December. Then some heads of state will ask the plebs if they fancy a change of citizenship. The ratification process is due to start in mid-2004. The constitution is expected to come into force in 2006 at the earliest. No need to worry then. ’Sages away... |
| Posted by:Bulldog |
| #4 I would agree, but if we disslove NATO then the only place left is the UN. NATO still proves a valuable alliance between nations who have the will to use force when neccesary. Hell, at least NATO is more effective than the UN. |
| Posted by: Charles 2003-11-28 11:02:38 PM |
| #3 With the Frogs running the EU Show its kinda hard to get excited about how they view NATO. I can see a new EU defense force as a bureaucracy every bit as effective and useful as the UN. I agree with bomb-a-rama. Dissolve NATO, fold our tents, and go home. Europe will most likely be another Islamic shithole in a few years anyway. |
| Posted by: badanov 2003-11-28 10:47:24 PM |
| #2 It's getting to the point where I don't see what the big deal about NATO is. If the Euros want to field their own "force" (whatever that is), then let 'em go. If it has a begative effect on NATO, then just dissolve NATO and call it a day. After all, the Soviet Union doesn't exist anymore, and isn't that the reason why NATO was created to start off with? |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2003-11-28 10:29:46 PM |
| #1 Will all this happen before or after the paper bill for the French Foreign Ministry gets paid? Oh, I get it, this is how the bill will be paid. |
| Posted by: Matt 2003-11-28 6:29:23 PM |