For differentiated European diplomatic and military mission
1
Highlight the role of the EU in the field of Security and Defence towards the European public and European partners
2
Clearly distinguish the diplomatic work of the EU from the Security and Defence work
3
Provide a clear name for the EU Foreign Affairs Office currently hidden under technical jargon called "European External Action Service"
In 2020, the European External Action Service will reach ten years of existence. Numerous assessments and analyses will probably appear, in particular regarding its capacity to defend the interests of the European Union (EU) and to promote its values. A part from the issue of impact, it is also an opportunity to reflect on the nature of this structure which presents the originality of combining the European diplomatic services and the European defence services.
At the time of its creation, many rejoiced at the disappearance of what was perceived as a redundancy, namely, on one side an External Relations Commissioner and on the other side a High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy. The relations between the two components of the EEAS did not however last and it is important today to take stock.
At the origins of the EEAS
While members of the European Community already shared a common trade policy and worked together in the field of development assistance, it is only in 1993 that, at the time, the 12 member States decided to launch a Common Foreign and Security Policy.
Following the joint France - UK declaration of Saint Malo in 1998, the Common Security and Defence Policy was introduced at the European Council meeting in Cologne in 1999. The plan was to develop a European capacity for small military and police operations in third countries. Member States decided to appoint a so called High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy. To frame positions each Member State appointed an Ambassador dedicated to the task and who was then implicated in weekly meetings in Brussels.
The first military operation (Concordia FYROM )1 took place in 2003 in the Republic of Macedonia. It consisted of the deployment of 300 European troops to provide security for EU and OSCE2 observers. Since then more than thirty European military operations or civilian missions have taken place. In order to ensure the implementation of the mandates, the EU Council progressively developed a significant administration in charge of assisting the High Representative. By 2010, just before the creation of the EEAS, there were around 9000 personal (military, police, logistics, etc.) on the ground combining both civilian Missions and Military Operations.
In parallel, the European Commission developed and expanded a network of Delegations of the European Commission dealing essentially with trade and development assistance. By 2005, the number had reached 140 offices worldwide. The Heads of Delegations were associated with all aspects of political relations with a third country and would soon be called Ambassador as a courtesy. A Commissioner was in charge of the External Relations of the EU. The combined staff of EU Delegations and headquarters Commission directorate general for external relations was around 5000 personal.
In 2011, the European External Action Service (EEAS) was created as a result of the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty. The EEAS is often referred to as the diplomatic service of the European Union. Those were terms used by the first Head of the EEAS, Mrs. Catherine Ashton3 whose official title is High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy and Vice President of the European Commission. The creation of the EEAS consisted in the merger of the administration of the Council of the EU mainly in charge of the Military Operations and Civilian Missions and the administration of the European Commission in charge of External Relations. To increase the commitment of the Member States towards this new structure, it was agreed to also include a percentage of Member State’s diplomats (30%).
The name EEAS is certainly not very transparent. It is intuitively difficult for media and politicians to explain to EU citizen what exactly the EU is doing in the field of external relations. The Constitutional Treaty (which was rejected by referendum in France and the Netherlands) invented this original name which was then kept in the Lisbon Treaty. Maybe the denomination Foreign Affairs was intentionally rejected to spare the susceptibilities of member States faced with EU diplomatic activities. May be a desire not to insist on the defence and security missions which are EEAS sovereign tasks.
The right time to establish a distinction
As the EEAS only saw the light of day in 2011, one could consider that it is premature to open the debate regarding the reorganisation of the EU administration in charge of external relations. That would be to forget that a possible revision should not so much be guided by its longevity but by the evolution of mandates and the issue of efficiency and readability. Regarding these aspects, there is food for thought.
Since 2017, several initiatives have taken place to reinforce European defence including the creation of the European defence fund endowed with a significant budget and the permanent structured cooperation (PESCO) aiming to reinforce the interoperability of member States armies4 . These initiatives again raise the institutional issue as one now finds three structures involved in the European defence file:
- the European Commission which will manage the European defence fund following community procedures,
- the European Defence Agency which supervises the Permanent Structured Cooperation in coordination with EEAS and
- EEAS which continues its management of the European civilian missions and military operations.
These developments provide additional elements in favour of a serious deliberation regarding the establishment of a single body which would supervise all the activities in the European military field (framing of strategy and management of operations, management of the European defence fund and reinforcement of interoperability). This would imply a refocusing of EEAS on its diplomatic mandate.
A favourable context
Since 1st December 2019, the EU has a new team. In her speech to the European Parliament on 16 July 20195, Ursula von der Leyen, the new president of the European Commission, announced a Conference on the future of Europe which should start in 2020 and last for two years6. This represents a unique opportunity to begin a discussion on the best way to organise European diplomacy and European defence. Eurobarometer opinion polls7 regularly show that most member States and citizens are in favour of an increasing role of the EU in the field of defence and security.
The role of the EU defence and security administration would be to develop its defence and security tools and to manage existing missions and operations under the direction of the head of a new entity which would ensure coordination and meet European Defence Ministers on a monthly basis. In parallel, the EU would designate a Head for Foreign Affairs who would continue to coordinate with the different general directorate of the European Commission in charge of files related to external relations such as trade, justice and home affairs, development cooperation, humanitarian assistance, climate change and enlargement.
If the creation of the EEAS has reached its goal of merging services which did not talk to each other, maintaining the current structure could create serious constraints for an efficient European defence administration as it has a specific way of operating.
Author:
Former EU Ambassador, Guy Ledoux served under several positions for the European Commission and the European External Action Service in headquarters in Brussels. Appointed head of the “Mission Support” Civilian Planning Conduct Capability, he was able to observe from the inside the operation of the EEAS security component. He is today consultant in public diplomacy.
2"Action commune 2003/92/PESC du Conseil du 27 janvier 2003 relative à l'opération militaire de l'Union européenne dans l'ancienne République yougoslave de Macédoine", Journal officiel de l’Union européenne, 11 février 2003.
3"Catherine Ashton High Representative / Vice President Joint Debate on Foreign and Security Policy European Parliament Strasbourg", ec.europa.eu, 10 mars 2010.
4Voir Federico Santopinto, "Pesco: The Belgian Perspective", Ares, numéro 33, novembre 2018.
5"Opening Statement in the European Parliament Plenary Session by Ursula von der Leyen, Candidate for President of the European Commission", ec.europa.eu, 16 juillet 2019.
6La Conférence sur l’Avenir de l’Europe est un processus de réflexion devant durer deux ans. Il doit servir à dessiner le contour des prochaines étapes de la construction européenne et proposer de nouvelles avenues pour la mise en œuvre des mandats actuels. Voir European Parliament, Conference of Presidents – Minutes of the ordinary meeting of Wednesday 16 October 2019.
7Eurobarometer opinion pools can be consulted on line.
