'Bad news for our enemies': EU launches defense pact - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Europe's nation states, the E.U. & Russia.

Moderator: PoFo Europe Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
#14870983
A first step towards making Europe more independent of the US.

'Bad news for our enemies': EU launches defense pact

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - European Union nations, now unfettered by Britain’s decision to quit, achieved a 70-year-old ambition on Thursday to integrate their defenses, launching a pact between 25 EU governments to fund, develop and deploy armed forces together.

First blocked by the French parliament in the 1950s and later by Britain, which feared creation of an EU army, the pact aims to end the squandering of billions of euros by splintered defense policies.

It is also aimed at lowering Europe’s heavy reliance on the United States.

“More than half a century ago, an ambitious vision of the European Defence Community was created but what was missing was the unity and courage to put it into practice,” Tusk, who chairs EU summits, said of the failed 1950s attempt.

“The dream was at odds with reality. Today this dream becomes reality,” he said in a speech in front of EU leaders and military personnel from each of the 25 countries involved.

Denmark, which has an opt out from EU defense matters, and Malta, were the only EU countries not to sign up, along with Brexiting Britain.

French President Emmanuel Macron, whose election victory in May gave new impetus to efforts to revive defense cooperation after Britons voted in 2016 to leave the bloc, hailed “concrete progress.” Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said the pact would make the EU more agile abroad and would support NATO.

The pact, called Permanent Structured Cooperation, or PESCO, is meant as a show of unity and a tangible step in EU integration, diplomats said, particularly after Britain’s decision to leave.

Caught off guard by Russia’s Crimea annexation in 2014 and facing threats ranging from state-sponsored computer hackers to militant attacks, EU governments say the pact is justified by EU surveys showing most citizens want the bloc to provide security.

EU governments proved unable to act as a group in the 1990s Balkan wars and relied on U.S.-led NATO to stop the bloodshed on their doorstep.

In Libya in 2011, a Franco-British air campaign ran out of munitions and equipment and was again forced to turn to the United States, in what is considered an enduring embarrassment for the EU, a major economic power.

U.S. President Donald Trump’s criticism of low European defense spending, a host of divisions on foreign policy, and Trump’s warnings to allies that they could no longer rely on the United States if they did not pay up, have also played a role.

“It’s sad that we needed Donald Trump to give us a boost, but whatever, it is the right outcome,” said former German foreign minister Joschka Fischer, who as minister backed NATO’s intervention in Kosovo in 1999 but opposed the 2003 Iraq war.

BRITISH INTEREST

Unlike past attempts at European defense integration, NATO backs the project, but NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, who attended part of the summit, warned against duplication. Twenty-two EU countries are also members of NATO.

“There has to be coherence between the capability developments of NATO and the European Union. We cannot risk ending up with conflicting requirements from the EU and from NATO to the same nations,” he told reporters.

“Forces and capabilities developed under EU initiatives also have to be available for NATO because we only have one set of forces,” Stoltenberg said.

Issues remain about financing future EU missions. An EU defense fund, with money from the European Commission for the first time, still needs to be approved, although a pilot phase is already underway for defense research.

In one irony noted by EU diplomats, British Prime Minister Theresa May, who attended the summit, was left seeking a way into the project now that it was an actuality.

A 1998 Anglo-French EU defense accord is considered the genesis of Thursday’s agreement. In a possible compromise on PESCO, Britain may be able to join in later on, but only on an exceptional basis if it provides funds and expertise.

Britain and France, both nuclear-armed, are Europe’s two biggest military powers, and in 2010 set up a Combined Joint Expeditionary Force to cement long-standing ties in defense.

“We do face a number of threats across Europe,” May said. “I‘m very clear that although the British people took a sovereign decision to leave the EU, that does not mean that we were going to be leaving our responsibilities in terms of European security,” she told reporters.
#14871213
SolarCross wrote:Third time lucky? :excited:

You mean fourth time lucky?

One of the chief architects of Brexit, Michael Gove, made special efforts, as secretary for education, to commemorate the 100th anniversary of WWI to impress on Britain's young that their wars are always just. No. 10 views Brexit in terms of war and the chancellor Hammond has identified the "enemy" in Brussels. It would be ironic if Britain were to commemorate the 100th anniversary of Germany's capitulation by its own Brexit capitulation in 2018. Thus are the changing fortunes of history. 8)
#14871265
A third World War over an agreed agenda? You really are a Brexiteer.

It was a war fought without troops, without weapons and without fanfare. It was a war fought in the shadows, waged in boardrooms and in conference centres, a war of hearts and of minds, a war which has brought Germany from the ashes and rubble of total defeat to the apex of European hegemony....
#14871268
Potemkin wrote:It was a war fought without troops, without weapons and without fanfare. It was a war fought in the shadows, waged in boardrooms and in conference centres, a war of hearts and of minds, a war which has brought Germany from the ashes and rubble of total defeat to the apex of European hegemony....


..it is also a war to save money, gain a military stronghold, remove themselves from US dependence on defence and allow the EU to seperate itself from US foreign policy. Some wars you are just better off losing.
#14871303
Potemkin wrote:It was a war fought without troops, without weapons and without fanfare. It was a war fought in the shadows, waged in boardrooms and in conference centres, a war of hearts and of minds, a war which has brought Germany from the ashes and rubble of total defeat to the apex of European hegemony....


Yes Pot, the shadowy world of Anglo financing from the City to Wall Street where your destiny is decided, the boardrooms of Murdoch et al where your leaders are appointed and the hearts and minds of the computing centers of Cambridge Analytica where your elections are won for the Mercers of this world.

They all tried to mobilize you to fuck Europe one more time. Yet in the deep and mysterious Tao of politics, effortless non-action is deflecting aggression back onto the imperialist aggressor. While Germany cannot win the war, Britain cannot win the peace. You are on the wrong side of history. 8)
#14871308
Atlantis wrote:A first step towards making Europe more independent of the US.


By that you mean create a EU army like Putin and BREXITEER told us was what EU was doing years ago? They are only making it official though, the EU army already exist. Not just an army, a navy, a police, a intelligence.

They don't want only to become independent, they want to have a USA equivalent army to literally dominate the rest of Europe

Nigel Farage is singing that song for good 4 years



B0ycey wrote:A third World War over an agreed agenda? You really are a Brexiteer.

:lol:


The wars are already happening, we are at war already you just didn't notice because wars aren't being fought the traditional way. IMO we are in a mineral, economical (currency more exactly) and cultural war for quite some time
#14871314
Good, and good for the US for Europe to be less reliant on us militarily. It's something we've been pushing for in a general way for quite a while now (not the eu army per se but just to up their own militaries).

As long as trump doesn't too terribly destroy our relationships with europe this is all for the good.
#14871318
Politiks wrote:Nigel Farage is singing that song for good 4 years

We owe Farage a great deal. In the few months after the Brexit referendum, EU military cooperation has made more progress than in the previous 70 years. Without Farage's tireless effort this would never have been possible. I hear they are considering naming a street in Bussels after him as a token of gratitude. :lol:
#14871429
B0ycey wrote:A third World War over an agreed agenda? You really are a Brexiteer.

:lol:

Yes it always starts innocently enough.

Oh the nasty Serbs shot some Austrian bloke we once met! We must invade Belgium, Luxembourg and France in self defence!

Or

Oh the nasty Polish are invading us! We must take over ze vorld in self defence!

This time when the Germans go piling into Russia we shouldn't get involved, let them slug it out.
#14871439
Rugoz wrote:NATO secured the EU's expansion to the East. EU fanboys are just ungrateful pricks.

It's the other way around. The EU was to consolidate Nato in the East. Why do you think the Brits are still pushing for Turkey's EU membership?

I would give anything to have the iron curtain back.

Honecker was right, the wall was an antifascist barrier. It was the only thing that protected us from the fascists in the East.
#14871444
Atlantis wrote:It's the other way around. The EU was to consolidate Nato in the East. Why do you think the Brits are still pushing for Turkey's EU membership?


Oh please, the EU was very keen to expand Eastwards. EU accession talks with Eastern European countries started in the mid-90s.

Atlantis wrote:I would give anything to have the iron curtain back.


Haha, good one.
#14871446
Beren wrote:And they lasted for a decade. :roll:


Not exactly, but regardless, accession talks are accession talks, the intention was always clear.

Look at the enlargement time line of the EU and NATO. They pretty much expanded in concert. Why should that be surprising? We all know Europe relies on NATO to defend its borders. It's a European pact after all which includes the US and Canada.

Isn't oil and electricity bought and sold like ev[…]

@Potemkin I heard this song in the Plaza Grande […]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

The "Russian empire" story line is inve[…]

I (still) have a dream

Even with those millions though. I will not be ab[…]