EurActiv Logo
EU news & policy debates
- across languages -
Click here for EU news »
EurActiv.com Network

BROWSE ALL SECTIONS

Nato chief calls for closer European cooperation on defence

Printer-friendly version
Send by email
Published 03 September 2013, updated 06 September 2013

Nato Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen has called on European countries to step up cooperation on defence yesterday (2 September), arguing in favour of moves towards a borderless EU defence market and intensified integration on military matters.

The Nato chief will join EU defense ministers for an informal meeting in Lithuania this week (5-6 September) where defense cooperation will feature high on the agenda.

“I intend to bring the issue of cooperation between NATO and the European Union on defense matters and the need for Europe to intensify its efforts in capability development and invest more in security,” Rasmussen said at the alliance’s monthly press briefing in Brussels.

“It is important for Europe and it is important for the transatlantic alliance because a strong Europe is also a strong Alliance,” Rasmussen stressed. “As the situation in Syria demonstrates, we continue to face significant security challenges and it is vital that we are prepared to meet them.”

In Lithuania, the EU ministers will discuss a policy paper tabled by the European Commission in July, which called for a relaunching of industrial cooperation on defence, including on drones where Europe currently lags behind the United States and Israel.

>> Read: Barnier urges Europeans to build their own drones

The Commission paper aimed at fostering innovation and growth by supporting small defence firms and encouraging synergies between military and civilian research.

EU heads of state and governments will revisit the matter at their December EU summit in Brussels and decide then whether to re-launch defence cooperation initiatives.

This could prove a daunting task. Previous attempts at launching joint European industrial defence ventures have yielded few results, apart from the Airbus A400M military transport aircraft and the Eurofighter jet developed by British Aerospace, which were both plagued by political interference and rivalry between participating countries.

But the Commission believes that deep cuts in national defence budgets following the financial and economic crisis makes a case for pooling resources. From 2001 to 2010, EU defence spending declined from €251 billion to €194 billion while defence budgets increased significantly in emerging markets, according to the Commission.

“In times of scarce resources, cooperation is key and we need to match ambitions and resources to avoid duplication of programmes,” said José Manuel Barroso, the Commission president.

Rasmussen echoed the same sentiment, saying at his monthly address that “For all of us, the key is cooperation – to work together to make us all strong, not to duplicate each other’s efforts and thereby make us weak.”

The Nato chief sketched a vision where Europe had “effective and modern defense industries, where competition drives innovation, where national borders are no barrier to international cooperation, and where effective equipment is developed in a cost-effective way.”

Rasmussen went further, saying closer cooperation on defense “is a vital part of Europe’s ability to ensure its future security.”

EU leaders will decide in December whether to follow his advice.

Next steps: 
  • 5-6 Sept.: Informal meeting of EU defence ministers
  • 19 Nov.: Defence ministers meeting
  • 19-20 Dec.: EU summit to discuss and possibly endorse Commission communication
EurActiv.com

COMMENTS

  • Seems odd that the NATO secretary General would talk to the unelected political failure barrosso regarding european cooperation on defence, or does this slimey individual, just one of the myriad eussr presidents think that he is so important he can interfere with everything.

    By :
    Barry Davies
    - Posted on :
    03/09/2013
  • An United European Military Force under one flag ! YES !
    That would make the strongest Army ever ! ...even more stronger than the U.S. ...!

    But still there are a lot of work in terms of much more closer coperation concerning military Hardware !
    We have already EU made Typhons ,nEURONn's,

    @Davies
    "Eussr presidents" ..hmmm
    Then simply vote federalists parties for The Europe to let europeans democracially elect the EU President
    ;-)

    By :
    an european
    - Posted on :
    03/09/2013
  • I forgot :

    EL PLURIBUS UNUM !

    By :
    an european
    - Posted on :
    03/09/2013
  • an european, are you Swiss by any chance? a european military force is a non starter, why would anyone in their right mind sign up to an armed force run by the unelected commission, after all national governments would have no say in it. "The strongest Army ever", you sound just like the power mad morons in cartoons.

    I don't want to vote for any federalist, they are idiots who don't understand the situation. I would only vote in anything to do with the eussr in a vote to leave it.

    By :
    Barry Davies
    - Posted on :
    03/09/2013
  • Europe lacks behind in murder machines for coward warfare. I could imagine worse gaps.

    By :
    Andre
    - Posted on :
    03/09/2013
  • @ Davies
    Maybe I just sounds one but you're actin' like them !

    By :
    an european
    - Posted on :
    03/09/2013
  • an european really? you state that you want the strongest army ever, but I who oppose it am acting like a power mad moron in a cartoon Hmmm no wonder you think the eussr is a worthwhile experiment, you see everything the wrong way round.

    By :
    Barry Davies
    - Posted on :
    03/09/2013
  • We need really ONE strong United European Army for Europe , for the States, for the people and for our strong defence !
    We don't need an Army à la casse for watching syrian killing themselves!
    We need ONE United European Army which is able to actimediately in case of !

    By :
    United Alliance
    - Posted on :
    03/09/2013
  • United Alliance Why do we need an Army for europe, just think if it wasn't for the British parliament getting it right for once the Syrians would be killing themselves, and all the forces that would be fighting for the side that might be responsible killing more Syrians and getting killed. We have seen the gung ho method of going in to attack before, it failed badly. Some people never learn they just repeat the same mistakes that they should have learned are mistakes from history. Just who would command a eussr army, and just who would decide to use it?

    By :
    Barry Davies
    - Posted on :
    03/09/2013
  • You are opposing EVERYTHING! including spreading " inadequate" as uneducated comments against southern states people and about the European Union in general and i wouldn't discuss furhther ...

    By :
    an european
    - Posted on :
    03/09/2013
  • @Davies
    You are opposing EVERYTHING! including spreading " inadequate" as uneducated comments against southern states people and about the European Union in general and i wouldn't discuss furhther ...

    By :
    an european
    - Posted on :
    03/09/2013
  • an european I wish you would stick to your promise and not bother discussing anything, your fictitious comments are not worth presenting anyway. I am against the eussr so naturally the idea of a foreigner making the decision to kill my nations citizens is abhorent to me, clearly your own nation which probably isn't in europe, would not be able to supply any arms or personnel so you wouldn't be against killing my nations citizens for your benefit.

    By :
    Barry Davies
    - Posted on :
    03/09/2013
  • As the West appears increasingly in disarray over Syria, President Bashar al-Assad told Le Figaro newspaper that the US and France have failed to provide any proof that his regime conducted a chemical attack that the White House says killed more than 1,400 people on August 21. And, in an unprecedented move, Russian President Vladimir Putin might be sending a delegation to the US Congress to convince American politicians to vote against President Barack Obama's plans to use military force against Syria.

    "Whoever accuses must provide proof. We have challenged thé US and France to publish a single proof. Mr Obama and Mr Holland were incapable [of doing do so]" the Syrian leader told Le Figaro adding that his own armies were in the zone where the attack took place and that the UN chemical weapons inspectors were in the country at the time of the alleged attack. "Where is the logic?" he said.

    Assad went on to warn the West that the consequences of military action against Syria would be unpredictable and that chaos and extremism would rule the day following such a move.

    "The Middle East is a power keg and the fire is approaching today. We shouldn't just talk of a Syrian react but also of what could be the result after the first strike. Noone knows what will happen. The whole world will lose control of the situation when the power keg explodes," Assad said. "The risk of a regional war exists."

    Can't say that I have any reason to agree with Assad or the rebels, there is no evidence to support either side, but Assad has made some very salient points that the lets go smash em up side should listen to.

    By :
    Barry Davies
    - Posted on :
    03/09/2013
  • Well it seems that france is waiting to see what the US is going to do before it makes up its mind, while this is going on there is the need for aid to the Syrians who have gone to Iraq, the UK as usual is up there with aid and is the second highest donator, what has the eussr done, the usual F all response because it won't make any money for the failed politicians who run it.

    By :
    Barry Davies
    - Posted on :
    03/09/2013
  • Despite chemical weapon or not ! But a lot of innocent children's are already dead ! Seems nobody is conscious about this !
    There are 2 choices Act or watch irresponsible how Assad is killing it's own people:
    UN: Syria death toll rises above 100,000 and climbing !

    "Assad went on to warn the West that the consequences of military action against Syria would be unpredictable "
    Assad said " The whole world will lose control of the situation when the power keg explodes"
    NO! The eastern world is loosing control !

    Indeed a defensive sentence from Assad!

    There is no logical step to predict the future !
    Is it bad or right when doing nothing while Assad's Regime still Killing people ??Will Russian Intervene?
    Speculations !

    Merely it's now unpredictible how many innocent will lose their life thus left by ASSAD if doing nothing!Even there is always a risk by a military intervention!

    But it seems B.Deavis merelely represent ASSAD's interests continuing killin's little kids !

    Where is Assad's armistice To the people to end this and search for an democratic solution?

    By :
    an european
    - Posted on :
    04/09/2013
  • As ever an european gets it completely wrong.

    Where is the evidence that it has happened at all, we haven't had a report from the UN yet. Is it only children that matter, there are adults as well but then that doesn't fit the emotional argument does it.

    Assad as the premier of Syria is going to react like any other Premier whose nation is threatened by other nations, no one with a working brain cell would expect any other response. Such an aggressive response should have been expected. The middle east not the eastern world has been unstable for decades, but presently and not least to western interference it is becoming dangerously unstable.

    Until the UN has reported the facts no one can predict the likely next move, after all is it Assad or Al Qaeda that is killing people in Syria, we do not know at this time.

    It seems that an european is in favour of a gung ho approach which could end up with us, that is individual countries not the eussr fighting for the perpetrators. In any civil war, or general war innocent people die, the level of deaths will increase with an ill considered knee jerk reaction to the situation. A search for a democratic soloution doesn't start with an unprovoked attack by a foreign nation, it seems that an european merely considers that gun fights don't kill anyone and prefers unpredicatable gun boat diplomacy, as Churchill said Jaw Jaw, not War War.

    By :
    Barry Davies
    - Posted on :
    04/09/2013
  • i said it already 100000 deads with a lot of children ..
    Assad will continue despite traces evidences of chemical weapon utilized by Assad or al qaeda..

    You said "democratic soloution doesn't start with an unprovoked attack by a foreign nation"
    Would Assad do it for the people ? I doubt !!

    Assad's speech about loosing control is only an intimidation ! He alread lost it's own !

    You said:
    "after all is it Assad or Al Qaeda that is killing people in Syria, we do not know at this time"

    We already heve seen Assad's Army killing people !

    You can insult me how much you want but no one takes these posts in consideration .

    The decision will be taken by U.S. Senators or by the Comission how about to act if needed!

    By :
    an european
    - Posted on :
    04/09/2013
  • LMAO the commission will do nothing but spout its normal excrement, US senators will only decide on what action the US intends to make. You make claims about 100,000 dead where is your evidence, and where is your evidence it was Assad and not the rebels that launched this attack, you might be proven right in your 50 - 50 guess, but at present that is all it is, a guess, there is no hard evidence to prove it which is why the British government are not acting.

    By :
    Barry Davies
    - Posted on :
    04/09/2013
  • Barry, please tell me, why a weak assemblage of Scotland, England and Wales under the rule of inherited chieftain CAN have a military force? And why EU can not?

    By :
    Otto
    - Posted on :
    07/09/2013
  • It's simple Otto the United kingdom has existed for 300 years as a single nation. I don't know which country you are referring to that is under the rule of an inherited chieftain. I don't think there is one anywhere in the world. As such it has long had an army and a navy and was one of the first with an air force, mainly to protect us from our enemies on the continent of europe. The eussr is not a nation, just as the UN, and other bodies like the G7 G8 and G20 are not a nation, so it can't have an armed force of its own, after all who wants foreigners deciding if their nations citizens should be putting their lives at risk especially for something they don't believe in. The corruption ridden democratically deficient eussr has made a complete mess of everything it has stuck its nose into so the idea of it having any armed force of its own is plain stupid.

    By :
    Barry Davies
    - Posted on :
    07/09/2013
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Nato Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen holding his monthly press briefing in Brussels, 2 Sept. 2013 (Photo: NATO)
Background: 

More than 10 years have passed since France and the UK launched the European Security and Defence Policy through the St Malo Declaration.

The European Commission attempted to relaunch cooperation in 2007 with a communication which aimed at fostering a more competitive European defence industry.

The EU executive set up a task force on defence industries and markets, outlining that more than 1,350 SMEs are present on the European defence sector. It re-launched its attempt in July 2013, with a follow up Communication on defence and industrial policy.

>> Read: Barnier urges Europeans to build their own drones

More on this topic

More in this section

Advertising

Communication Partners

Sponsors

Videos

EU Priorities 2020 News

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

EU Priorities 2020 Promoted videos

Euractiv Sidebar Video Player for use in section aware blocks.

Advertising

Advertising