Vol. 509 No. 6
37 Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the discussions, if any, in which he has participated on an emerging EU security defence policy and defence entity; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21016/99]
I have participated in a number of discussions by EU Foreign Ministers on security and defence issues, following the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam on 1 May 1999. This treaty incorporates into the Common Foreign and Security Policy the Petersberg Tasks, that is, humanitarian, rescue, peacekeeping and crisis management tasks.
There is a strong view within the EU, which I share, that the EU should be better able to act at an early stage to prevent and resolve conflict and to prevent and manage the kinds of crises which we have seen in the Balkans during this decade. The Amsterdam Treaty's provisions respond to that viewpoint. The challenge facing the EU is to make a reality of the Treaty of Amsterdam's provisions.
The Cologne European Council in June, which I attended, adopted an important Declaration on European Security and Defence. The Cologne decisions reflect the EU's wish to give further impetus to the development of the EU's capabilities for conflict prevention, peacekeeping and crisis management, on the basis of the Treaty of Amsterdam.
The Cologne European Council focused on ways of enhancing the EU's ability to take effective and informed decisions in peacekeeping and crisis management. Various possibilities have been mooted and the Finnish Presidency has taken discussions forward. The Cologne European Council mandated the General Affairs Council to consider how the Western European Union's Petersberg Tasks functions could be adapted and brought into the EU to allow the EU to fulfil its responsibilities under the Amsterdam Treaty in the area of Petersberg Tasks. The Finnish Presidency will submit a progress report to the Helsinki European Council in December.
Ireland is examining this approach sympathetically since it emphasises the Petersberg Tasks but leaves the Western European Union's Article V, mutual defence clause, to one side. The Cologne declaration explicitly makes clear that the different status of member states in regard to collective defence guarantees will not be affected.
The purpose, as set out at Cologne, is to increase the EU's ability to contribute to international peace and security in accordance with the principles of the UN Charter. It is important that all EU members have the right to participate in the Petersberg Tasks. We welcome, therefore, the Cologne conclusion that the goal is to develop an effective EU-led crisis management in which both allied and neutral members of the EU can participate fully and on an equal footing.
Discussion has focused, in particular, on the question of setting up a CFSP committee of senior officials in Brussels with expertise in the area of Petersberg Tasks. Also of importance is the issue of the EU's ability and capability to respond rapidly to international crises. In this connection, the Western European Union is currently undertaking an audit of assets and capabilities for Petersberg Tasks. The Western European Union observers are associated with this audit which should be completed before the Helsinki European Council.
These are issues for further reflection under the Finnish Presidency and subsequently. The current aim of the EU is to take the necessary decisions by the end of the year 2000. Security and defence issues within the EU are intergovernmental matters, subject to the sovereign decision of the member states. It is accepted that participation in Petersberg Tasks is a voluntary and sovereign decision for member states in each and every case.
NATO, which has already welcomed the EU debate in this area, has indicated its readiness in principle to grant the EU direct access to its resources for Petersberg Tasks.
In a separate but related process, the EU is examining its capacities for non-military crisis management. This issue will also be considered at the Helsinki European Council. The possibility is being considered of a stand-by capacity to pool national civil resources and expertise for responding to crises. Work on this issue is still at an early stage. I very much welcome the objective of this work which will go hand in hand with the work on Petersberg Tasks.
The Minister will be aware of the appointment of Javier Solana, the former Secretary General of NATO as the Council of Ministers Secretary General and High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy – Mr. CFSP – and his imminent appointment, if it has not already taken place, as Secretary General of the Western European Union. Would the Minister agree that, in view of this development, the Cologne declaration and the report of former Prime Minister Jean-Luc Dehaene, former President von Weizacker and Lord Simon in relation to security and defence policy issues, that EU common security and defence policy issues are clearly coming centre stage? Does he agree that it is in Ireland's interests not to allow other member states to make the rules, such as occurred with EMU, which states joining NATO will have to take on? Does the Minister agree that whether or not we participate from the beginning, should any such entity emerge, we should develop a strategic approach which seeks to have the article 5 commitment negotiated as a protocol rather than a full treaty section, thereby leaving us the option to opt in or out. Has the Minister pursued this line of reasoning, or does he agree it is a line which should be pursued?
I agree it is a line which should be looked at. With regard to the so-called three wise men's report – the report by Mr. Dehaene, the former Belgian Prime Minister, a former German President and a Member of the British House of Lords – I totally reject it. I do not welcome the involvement of the Dehaene group in the defence area nor did I welcome the unhelpful speculation in Brussels prior to the report's publication on 18 October. The Dehaene group's report is not binding on any member state. The Deputy will be aware that the Cologne conclusions clearly entrusted the follow up in the security and defence areas to the Finnish Presidency and, of course, to the General Affairs Council. The Finnish Presidency is to submit a progress report, as I already stated in my answer, to the Helsinki European Council in December. There is no reference in the Cologne conclusions to the Dehaene group. Rather than the so-called three wise men Dehaene group, the issues are being effectively considered by, I would consider, 15 wise men and women of the General Affairs Council led by a very wise women indeed, the Finnish president of that Council.
As regards Javier Solana, it is clear the Western European Union may well cease to operate by the end of the year 2000. Clearly, Javier Solana will have a responsibility, as "Mr. CFSP", for the Petersberg Tasks. It is in this context that I see his role, which would also touch on the Petersberg functions of the Western European Union, which may, as the Deputy will aware and to which I believe he adverted at a previous Question Time, be incorporated into the EU. I would be opposed to any role for Mr. Solana in the mutual defence dimension of the Western European Union, as the Deputy properly states, the so-called article 5 clause. No such proposal has been made in the European Union.
