Militarisation
of the European Union (5)
Future Action – European Civilian Capabilities
Contents:
•
Introduction
•
What
can be done at this stage?
•
What
longer-term options for action are there?
•
Other Papers in this Series
Introduction
The
Convention on the Future of Europe has completed its work. No more
lobbying can be done at that level. QCEA has already lobbied the members
of the Convention, the Presidium of the Convention and the Permanent
Representatives of the Member States and Accession Countries.
The Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) failed in December 2003. It
agreed to set up the European Armaments, Research and Military Capabilities
Agency and this is now being done. There have been further discussions
between Member States and the Irish Presidency and there are signs
that the Draft Constitutional Treaty will be agreed in June 2004.
There
is, however, no further room for lobbying on the contents of the
Treaty as all matters other than those on which Member States failed
to agree in December 2003 are essentially closed and will not be
re-opened. We have to assume that the Articles on the Common Foreign
Security and the European Security and Defence Policies will be
adopted as they stand. These were not items where there was any
disagreement between Member States.
Return
to top of page
What
can be done at this stage?
Once the
Draft Constitutional Treaty is agreed by the Council, it will need
to be ratified by Member States. This may be done in different ways
in different countries. It may involve a debate in the national parliament
or it may be done on the basis of a referendum.
The difficulty with all these processes is that it is an all or nothing
question. And as there is much that is good in the Draft Constitutional
Treaty, it would be counter-productive to suggest that, for example,
a referendum campaign should be fought against acceptance on the basis
of the issues relating to the militarization of the EU. Partly, because
this could only lead to a complete rejection of the treaty as a whole
if it were successful, and partly because much of the groundwork for
this militarization has already been laid in other Treaties already
agreed. A rejection of the Draft Constitutional Treaty on the basis
of the militarization issues would therefore not really achieve the
intended objective.
However, where the debate does take place publicly, it is certainly
worth raising the issues and ensuring that there is some public awareness
of this little publicised element of the Draft Constitutional Treaty.
This can be done through all the usual channels such as:
- Writing
to your parliamentary representative(s)
-
Writing to your local newspaper and raising the issue
-
Holding public meetings at which the issues are debated
-
Writing to relevant government ministers in your national government.
More
urgently, and on a European level, the issues can be raised with
candidates standing for election to the European Parliament. Even
though the European Parliament does not have the right to make decisions
in these matters, they do need to be consulted, their views must
be taken into account, they have a right to receive regular reports,
and they have a right to ask questions of the Commission and the
European Union Foreign Minister, once established. Special Representatives
of the EU to conflict areas can also be asked to report to the European
Parliament. Members of the European Parliament can therefore make
some impact by ensuring debate on these matters.
Return
to top of page
What
longer-term options for action are there?
QCEA and
EPLO have not stopped working on the proposal for a European Peacebuilding
Agency. The proposal has changed in its format but in terms of the
underlying principles and demands we are still saying very much the
same thing as we lobbied for during the Convention and the Intergovernmental
Conference. The
issue is not so much as to whether there is an ‘agency’,
an ‘institution’ which concerns itself with civilian
capabilities, but a recognition that the European Union, despite
its statements about its wish to intervene with civilian means,
does not have the capabilities to do so and won’t develop
them unless resources and effort are put into the process of developing
them and into creating the political will to support them.
Even
in the very narrowly defined areas of civilian crisis management
intervention in the areas of police, rule of law, civilian administration
and civil protection to which the European Union has already committed
itself in 2000, there are a whole range of issues which need to
be addressed in order to make such interventions possible, effective,
and safe for those who participate.
There
are issues of common understanding of approach, of logistics, of
physical resources, of availability of personnel, of training and
a joint approach to training. There are language issues and there
are issues of different systems adopted in each Member State. Not
to speak of questions of communication systems compatibility. Such
issues need to be addressed at a European level in order for the
European Union to be able to engage effectively in conflict situations
with civilian measures. This is acknowledged in the European Security
Strategy which suggests that where civilian interventions have followed
military ones, there ensued chaos. Such chaos is not inherent in
civilian intervention; it is the result of a lack of planning.
But
even that would not be enough to bring the peacebuilding model effectively
to the world. Peacebuilding is much more than crisis intervention.
Peacebuilding is a long-term process which involves capacity building
at local level, which engages in the transformation of conflict
before it erupts, which recognises the need for reconciliation to
help to avoid future conflict and which engages in the long-term
post-conflict reconstruction of communities, of infrastructure,
of political and social systems which lead countries and communities
to joint commitment and joint investment in their common sustainable
future. Peacebuilding also relies on an effective system of early
warning to allow intervention at a point when civilian measures
are still possible and when killing can still be avoided.
Much
of this work will need to be done at local level in areas of conflict
or potential conflict. Civil Society has much to contribute to this
process and does so; but it is not integrated enough into a strategic
approach to peacebuilding, simply because the approach to peacebuilding
is not strategic enough.
Crisis management and peacebuilding instruments are structurally
divorced from each other at European Union level and therefore the
overview of what is necessary and what is possible, the big picture,
the ability to export effectively the successful model of peacebuilding
that the European Union is, cannot be fully realised.
What
we are suggesting can be stated quite simply:
-
Focusing on the peacebuilding potential of the European Union;
- Developing
and planning the systems necessary to make peacebuilding initiatives
work well, and at short notice;
- Taking
on board and learning from experience;
- Identifying
the resources and the gaps in resources;
- Developing
common standards of training for joint action;
- Commissioning
research into peacebuilding;
- Ensuring
that where civilian interventions follow military ones, the intervention
is handed over smoothly and without chaos;
- Learning
about logistics and security for participants;
- In
short, planning for peace.
There
needs to be recognition of these longer-term aspects of peacebuilding
and the need for a coherent approach across all parts of the European
Union, its Member States and Civil Society within them. At this
stage and because there are some major changes happening in the
Institutions of the European Union (the change in the number of
Commissioners with the resulting changes in areas of responsibility;
the proposal for the EU Foreign Minister and the proposal for an
EU Joint External Service) it is not altogether easy to say what
the right method is to ensure that all these things are done, done
coherently and done in such a way as to engender the necessary political
will.
QCEA
and EPLO have therefore developed the original proposal and outlined
in some detail what is needed by way of action rather than by way
of institution building. These proposals were taken to the recent
Western European Conference of the Global Partnership for the Prevention
of Armed Conflict and were endorsed there. The resolution, which
found its way into the top spot of recommendations for the EU says:
‘European
structural reform for peacebuilding
We call for a serious dialogue between Member States, EU institutions
and Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) to agree on structural reforms
that will enable a more integrated and effective EU approach to
the preparation and management of short-term civilian crisis management
and longer-term peacebuilding. These reforms must cover planning,
implementation and evaluation of crisis management and peacebuilding
activities, including training, recruitment and research. We urge
European governments to support the development of Civil Peace Services
as an integral component of expanding capacities for peacebuilding.’
To ensure that this is turned into concrete action, there is much
work to be done. Here, at European level, we will continue to lobby
decision makers in the European Parliament, the Commission and the
Council. At national level, the issue must be raised with parliamentarians
and with relevant government departments in order to ensure that
there is the political will to make this happen. The key decisions
about such a proposal, about building the European peacebuilding
capability needed, will be made by Member States.
To build the necessary momentum for change which this requires,
it is important to raise awareness in the general public and in
the peace movement of the following issues:
- The
militarization of the EU
-
The need for building up civilian capabilities
-
The experience already gained by Civilian Peace Services in some
countries
-
The work done by international organisations which provide civilian
intervention.
You
can do this by:
- Writing
for local and other newspapers
-
Arranging public meetings
- Alerting
local peace groups to the issues
-
Discussions with candidates for election to the European Parliament
and national parliaments.
Whatever
action you take, QCEA would like to hear about it, so that we know
where our proposals are being promoted and what reactions you get
from decision makers and from the public.
For
this subject, our contact is:
Martina
Weitsch
QCEA, Square Ambiorix 50, B-1000 Brussels, Belgium
mweitsch@qcea.org
Phone: 0032 2 234 3064
Fax: 0032 2 230 63 70
Return
to top of page
Other
Papers in this Series
(1)
The Context of the Convention on the Future of Europe HTML
PDF (163kb)
(2)
Previous Treaties and Agreements: What they say about military issues
HTML PDF
(221kb)
(3)
The Role of and Connection between the EU, the WEU and NATO
HTML PDF
(176kb)
(4)
What is in the Draft Constitutional Treaty and what are the implications
HTML PDF
(223kb)
(6)
Finding
Further Information – Keeping (us) Informed
HTML
PDF (116kb
Instructions
on downloading PDFs:
To read PDFs you need Adobe
Acrobat Reader.
To
download the PDFs right click the link select "Save
Target As" and save it on your computer.
Please
note that these are large files and depending on your connection
speed may take some time to download
Return
to top of page
Return
to the Militarisation of the European Union Briefing Papers Main
Page |
