A Continuation of Policy

There is much huffing and puffing about a proposal to share with the French one of the aircraft carriers currently being built for the Royal Navy.

This is being described as "barking mad" by military experts, a quote taken from the naïve Commander John Muxworthy, who thinks that the plan would jeopardise the UK's military independence and place security of the nation in the hands of France, our oldest enemy.

An MoD insider is also cited as saying that: "We could find ourselves in a very difficult situation if we wanted to carry out an operation using the French carrier, and it was blocked by politicians in Paris."

Well, these people want to wake up and smell the coffee. The whole thing is a done deal and has been since UK and French defence ministers (ours was Portaloo, I think) signed an agreement in 1996.

This was the UK/France Letter of Intent (LOI) on "co-operation and areas of mutual interest in maritime defence" and came as one of a series of agreements which was started by Major and carried on through the Blair administration with the St Malo agreement. It now picks up where it left off, with the Cleggerons.

Some of the highlights of this series are as follows:

On 30 October 1995, at RAF High Wycombe, they inaugurated the Franco-British Euro Air Group whose aim is to strengthen the two air forces’ interoperability, complementarity and ad hoc planning capabilities. On 1 January 1998, this became the European Air Group.

During the State visit in May 1996, M. Chirac and Mr Major signed a declaration of intent providing for the setting-up of the Franco-British Joint Commission on Peacekeeping, which is now working on a regular basis.

At the Bordeaux Summit in November 1996, France and Britain signed a letter of intent showing the extent of cooperation between the two navies. A year later, at the London Summit (6-7 November 1997), a similar procedure gave concrete shape to cooperation between the two armies.

The Saint-Malo summit in December 1998 saw the signing of a cooperation agreement on crisis management and operations and the issuing of a joint declaration on European defence. This initiative gave a major boost to the discussions on a European defence dimension, which is a priority for both governments.

At the Anglo-French annual summit in London on 25 November 99, the talks focused on European defence. A joint declaration sets out ambitious targets for strengthening European military capabilities.

Thus, we are back with the post-Maastricht agenda, where Major then agreed to an extension of European defence "co-operation", which was further strengthened at Nice and Amsterdam and then again with Lisbon.

Already, way back in 1996, the Major government agreed to formalise naval co-operation with the French, covering a "very wide range of activity", including operations. Twenty formal Working Groups were established under the direction of the British and French Chiefs of Naval Staff.

One of those working groups covered "Future Aircraft Carrier Development" and there was established an operations cell at the Commander in Chief Fleet Headquarters, Northwood. It is manned by French officers to facilitate liaison and co-operation between the Commander in Chief Fleet and CECLANT.

Of course, we wrote about this many times – but no-one took a blind bit of notice ... just the Eurosceptics, and North in particular, getting worked up about nothing. People have such short memories, and seem to forget the 2006 agreement on carrier development, when it all became settled policy.

After Blair, Gordon Brown was less enthusiastic but with Clegg and Cameron, the "project" is back on track. We are not getting anything new, but a continuation of policy which has been signalled very clearly at every step of the way. That it apparently comes as a shock is simply a reflection of nobody wanting to see what was in front of their very eyes. Now it is out in the open, they are all flapping their hands.

But one thing they have right - it doesn't make sense to share one carrier. The only logical thing to do is share all three – two UK and one French - to make it a joint force, complete with the escort group. And that is what has already been agreed. It is just a matter of time before we see it in action. European Navy here we come.

Expect now, also, that the JSF is junked and we end up buying the French Rafale. I always said this might happen, such as back in May 2008. Once again nobody took any notice.

But then we had all those assurances that Cameron was a "Eurosceptic". Surprise, surprise, the agenda goes on. Anybody who thought this was going to be different has their head stuck in the sand – or somewhere more odiferous. Nor does it make a blind bit of difference having 13th Century Fox in place as a supposed Eurosceptic. He is either too stupid to realise what is going on, or too ambitious to care.

In any event, it was always pre-ordained. There was nothing much he could have done about it as the agreements have already been signed. And Cameron has just made it certain. All those little Tory Boys who voted for him should hang their heads in shame.

COMMENT THREAD

One might have thought ...

The Irish Times is carrying a report headed: "French minister urges EU defence budget." referring to the European affairs, Pierre Lellouche, who has proposed setting up an EU defence budget similar to the Common Agricultural Policy.

One can immediately see why the Irish press finds this interesting enough to publish. EU defence ambitions are an issue in the forthcoming referendum, where the charge is that the militarisation of the EU through the constitutional Lisbon treaty will affect Ireland's neutrality.

However, one might have thought that a French minister making such alarming proposals would excite a wider interest. The man is, after all, suggesting that defence spending should be dealt with like spending on other EU priorities such as agriculture, technology or the environment.

Lellouche holds that there is little point in creating the external action force envisaged in the constitutional Lisbon treaty if "Europe" as an entity was not prepared to pay for its own defence.

Paris, the Irish Times reminds us, has set the goal of building EU common defence as one of its strategic priorities for the union. And, although there is no legal base in existing treaties or in the constitutional Lisbon treaty for the EU budget to be used for defence or military spending, there is the mid-term review of the EU budget looming. This could be an opportunity to open discussions on the issue.

In fact, the chances of anything firm emerging are slight, as any proposal to use the EU budget for defence spending would require unanimous approval from all member states. Ireland and Austria would most certainly oppose any such move.

However, as with the European Defence Agency, there is nothing to stop an inner group setting up their own fund, on an "intergovernmental" basis, and asking the EU to administer it. By these means do we see the steady encroachment of the EU into areas formerly reserved for member states.

Our problem is that these statements by obscure continental politicians so often have a habit of coming to pass, so we ignore them at our peril. By the time we actually take notice, it is often too late. The antidote is to scream loudly and early, before such proposals have a chance to take root. But that presupposes the media is on the ball. And, Irish Times apart, it is clear that it is not.

COMMENT THREAD

We already had one of those

With the finesse of a six-legged elephant wearing gardening gloves, German chancellor Angela Merkel has made a call for a common EU army. This, on the eve of the 50th anniversary celebrations, comes in an interview in today's edition of the mass-circulation German tabloid Bild Zeitung, where the chancellor is cited as saying: "We must come closer to forming a common European army."

This was not, you understand, a call for the expedition of the European Rapid Reaction Force, with its own separate national cadres, but a full-blown, badged army, ring-of-stars banners and all.

Those with long memories and/or a good grasp of history, will recall that this has been tried before, and that the last impetus in that direction also came from Berlin. Merkel, perhaps, has lost touch with her roots.

However, for all the sinister overtones, this is probably less worrisome that it sounds. In an earlier piece, we remarked how Germany, post-war, tended to look for a European framework for her foreign policy and military ambitions, in order to reassure her neighbours (and especially France) of her benign intentions. On that basis, the time really to start worrying is when Germany abandons the European route and strikes out alone.


What we may be seeing here, though, is a half-way house. Traditionally, the calls for a European military come from France, with Germany falling in with the Gallic partner. Merkel may get away with it this time on the grounds that she hold the EU presidency but later repeats may not be treated with equanimity. One can see France, at the very least, with its nose seriously out of joint - and Poland not far behind.

For the moment though, while the German media has picked this up, and the India media has also mentioned it, citing the Chinese news agency, our own media is still fast asleep. The British public need not be troubled.

UPDATE: The Times has picked up the story.

COMMENT THREAD

The tide retreats

With the withdrawal of 600 British troops from Bosnia – announced by defence secretary Des Browne on Monday – we now learn that the EU force to which they were attached is also to be reduced. EUFOR, as it is known, is gradually to be cut from 6,000 to 2,500 troops, achieving its new level by early June.

The EU took over in December 2004 from a NATO peacekeeping mission and launched an operation called ALTHEA, backing up around 16,000 Nato peacekeepers in Kosovo. The reduced EU force will continue to operate under a UN mandate which was given a yearlong extension by the Security Council in November.

The operation was the first in which EU-badged troops were seen to operate, with even our own Grenadier Guards wearing the hated "ring of stars" (pictured above), although it is interesting to see that two of the lads seem to have lost their badges.

Such was the initial enthusiasm for the EU identity that, in April 2005 a demonstration of EUFOR helicopters, held on Camp Butmir (Sarajevo) saw Italian Army A-109 helicopters also badged with the ring of stars (right). British Lynx helicopters carried no such markings. However, with EUFOR equipped to insert 150 troops in one wave of helicopters, it was at times better equipped than British forces in southern Iraq.

Fortunately though, the British departure will now mean that there are no longer any of our troops bearing EU markings. With that and the despatch of 1400 personnel to the Nato force in Afghanistan, this marks a decisive shift from the EU sphere of influence to the Nato/US domain.

It is one small sign, but it could indicate that the high-water mark of British participation in European defence integration is past. The tide retreats.

COMMENT THREAD