Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 23 Mar 2000

Vol. 516 No. 5

Written Answers. - EU Security and Defence Policy.

Emmet Stagg

Question:

23 Mr. Stagg asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the Government's position on the EU proposal for the establishment of a rapid reaction military force of 60,000 personnel capable of being raised within 60 days; if the force will be under the authority of the General Affairs Council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8482/00]

John Gormley

Question:

60 Mr. Gormley asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will report on the meeting of EU foreign and defence ministers held on 20 March 2000; and the developments in the Committee for Foreign and Security Policy being considered following the Helsinki European Council. [8330/00]

Alan Shatter

Question:

84 Mr. Shatter asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on the evolving EU security and defence policy. [8293/00]

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Cowen)

I propose to take Question Nos. 23, 60 and 84 together.

The question of European security and defence policy is the subject of continuing discussion within the EU on the basis of the provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam. The focus of these EU discussions is the Petersberg Tasks, and not mutual defence commitments.

The Helsinki European Council agreed on a voluntary target for establishing capabilities for the Petersberg Tasks. This target, known as a headline goal, which the member states aim to meet by the year 2003, is to be able to deploy fifty to sixty thousand personnel within sixty days and to be able to sustain this deployment for one year. This would equate roughly to a mission of a scale comparable to that of KFOR in Kosovo.

What Helsinki agreed upon was a capabilities target. As the Helsinki European Council conclusions make clear, this does not imply the creation of a European army. Nor does it alter the fact that participation in the Petersberg Tasks under the Treaty of Amsterdam is on a voluntary basis, and is a matter for sovereign decision in each and every case.

The General Affairs Council, with participation as appropriate by Defence Ministers, was mandated at Helsinki to take forward the elaboration of this target and to develop a method of consultation through which this target could be met, and progress reviewed. Member states will also use existing defence planning procedures which, in the case of Ireland and the other neutral and non-allied EU member states, would include the planning and review process of the Partnership for Peace.

The improvement of EU decision-making structures was also addressed at Helsinki, so that the EU can take effective and informed decisions on the Petersberg Tasks when necessary. Final decisions in this area are not foreseen until the end of this year at the earliest. The Helsinki conclusions make clear that the Council decides upon policy relevant to Union involvement in all phases and aspects of crisis management, including decisions to carry out the Petersberg Tasks in accordance with Article 23 of the EU Treaty. EU-led Petersberg Tasks will clearly be under the authority of the General Affairs Council.

On Monday of this week, the General Affairs Council considered these issues. Defence Ministers of the 15 member states, including the Minister for Defence, Deputy Smith, participated in the Council's consideration of the issue of capabilities for the Petersberg Tasks. The Council had a discussion on progress in follow up to Helsinki, addressing both the military and civilian tracks of the issue. In addition to considering a draft Presidency progress report to the Lisbon European Council, the General Affairs Council considered the way forward for elaborating the headline and capability goals set at Helsinki. The Council also considered the establishment of a committee for civilian crisis management, with a view to reaching a decision on the establishment of such a committee by the European Council in June. Ireland attaches importance to progress in this important area of civilian crisis management.

As regards the issue of EU-WEU merger, following the Cologne European Council of last June, the EU has drawn a distinction between, on the one hand, inclusion within the EU of the crisis management functions that exist in the Western European Union; and on the other hand, full integration of the Western European Union as an institution into the EU. Bringing into the EU framework some of the Western European Union's peacekeeping and crisis management structures could be useful in enhancing the EU's ability to address the Petersberg Tasks. But full integration of the Western European Union into the EU raises the issue of the Western European Union's Article V clause – this is the automatic mutual defence commitment which binds the members of the Western European Union only. This clause would not be compatible with our military neutrality. Ireland, other neutrals, and indeed some other partners see no case for bringing the Western European Union Article V clause into the EU debate. It is not central to what the EU is trying to do, which is to focus on peacekeeping and crisis management, and not issues of mutual defence.