Independent Review on European Security & Defence − Winner of the European Award 2011 for Citizenship, Security and Defence
Volume No 11
Crisis Managem ent Forces C4 ISR
The EU Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy needs new inputs Will Europe be able to master the crisis around the EU?
The European Union is ready to fully engage Štefan Füle, Commissioner for Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy
Turkey is a reliable partner for Europe Ahmet Davutoǧlu, Foreign Minister of Turkey, Ankara
No economic development without security Dirk Niebel, Minister of economic cooperation and developement, Berlin
Protection of crisis management forces: “We need optimized protection for crisis management forces without sacrifying their operational capabilities” Michael Keinert, Managing Director BLÜCHER Group, Erkrath Edition 3/2011
Financial crisis and Security & Defence The Polish Presidency’s ambitious agenda in the area of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) is overshadowed by the debt crisis. In such difficult times developing defence is hardly a priority. This is not exactly the case for security, for which the European Parliament (EP) has demonstrated a strong sense of responsibility. The gap between security and defence continues to widen, to the detriment of defence, for which the nations have exclusive responsibility. There is the risk that the uncoordinated budget cuts in many EU member states could result in the complete loss of certain strategic capabilities which are already in short supply. This was clearly illustrated by the military operation in Libya: European nations would have been hard put to mount such an operation without US support. In this situation, the pooling and sharing of capabilities could remedy European capability gaps in such areas as air-to-air refuelling, maritime surveillance, UAVs and CBRN protection. This is an approach that is strongly supported by the Polish Presidency. The European Defence Agency (EDA), which is involved in this process, should be able to present a first selection of practical projects to the formal Defence Ministers Council on 30 November 2011. Once it has got the political green light it can get down to work. From this standpoint the financial crisis could, in my view, have a positive impact, by acting as a catalyst for pooling and sharing. The Defence Ministers must at last show their colours: are they ready to starting looking beyond purely national interests or do they intend to carry on muddling through at national level in the future? However, I think it is more realistic for the near future to imagine the CSDP happening through tangible projects, rather than dreaming of a major strategic leap forward, such as the UK, for example, suddenly agreeing to a permanent European headquarters.
Impressum The European − Security and Defence Union ProPress Publishing Group Bonn/Berlin Headquarters Berlin: Kaskelstr. 41, D-10317 Berlin Phone: +49/30/557 412-0, Fax: +49/30/557 412-33 Brussels Office: Hartmut Bühl Avenue des Celtes, 30, B-1040 Brussels Phone/Fax: +32/2732 3135, GMS: 0049/1723 282 319 E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org ; Hartmut.email@example.com Bonn Office: Am Buschhof 8, D-53227 Bonn Phone: +49/228/970 97-0, Fax: +49/228/970 97-75 Advertisement Office Bonn: Karin Dornbusch Phone: +49/228/970 97-40 E-Mail: Karin.firstname.lastname@example.org
The EP showed its new self-confidence this month with the vote of the final figures for the EU’s 2012 budget, proposing in general to reinstate the Commission draft budget that had been cut by the Council in July. The area of Freedom, Security and Justice shows an increase Nannette Cazaubon (+6.84%) due to the growing need to manage refugee and migration flows and step up maritime surveillance in the Mediterranean. In this context, the EP called for an increase of the budget for the EU’s External Border Management Agency, Frontex, by a reserve of € 25 million. Thanks to the Agency’s new powers on which the EP and the Council recently agreed, Frontex will now have the ability to acquire or lease its own technical equipment and to deploy European Border Guard Teams in the near future. Another positive point is the adoption by the European Parliament of a report based on a proposal made last year by Commissioner Georgieva on the strengthening of Europe’s disaster response. A single operations centre, active 24 hours around the clock, seven days a week, is to be created for the coordination and further development at European level of the existing national crisis units. The relevant legislative proposals are now being awaited for the creation, at last, of a genuine European civil protection force. The Parliament takes its strengthened role seriously – but as far as defence is concerned it can only do as much as it is permitted to do.
Publisher and Editor-in-Chief: Hartmut Bühl, Brussels Editorial Deputy: Nannette Cazaubon, Paris Publishing House: ProPress Verlagsgesellschaft mbH President ProPress Publishing Group: R. Uwe Proll E-Mail: email@example.com Layout: SpreeService- und Beratungsgesellschaft mbH Print: Heider Druck GmbH, Bergisch Gladbach The European − Security and Defence Union Magazine is published by the ProPress Publishing Group. The ProPress Publishing Group is the organizer of the congress on European Security and Defence (Berlin Security Conference), the European Police Congress and the European Congress on Disaster Management. For further information about the magazine and the congresses please visit www.euro-defence.eu Suscription: This magazine is published in Brussels and Berlin. The copy price is 16 Euro: 3 copies for one year: 42 Euro (EU subscription) 3 copies for one year: 66 Euro (International subscription) including postage and dispatch (3 issues) © 2011 by ProPress Publishing Group Bonn/Berlin ProPress Publishing Group is the holding of the trade mark BEHOERDEN SPIEGEL.
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
Štefan Füle Member of the EU Commission for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy, Brussels
Prof. Dr. Ahmet Davutoǧlu Foreign Minister of Turkey, Ankara
POLICY and POLITICS 3
Prof. Dr. Jean-Dominique Giuliani, Paris
Towards a new European Treaty Europe needs the French-German motor
Defence and Security 24
The impact of the financial crisis on the defence sector in the Member States The EU will lose strategic capabilities
Dirk Niebel, Berlin
Development Policy and the comprehensive approach – a German contribution Development has to team with security
Krzysztof Lisek MEP, Brussels/Strasbourg
Georg Nachtsheim, Lille
Multinationality – Enhancing Europe’s Military Capabilities To an end with disparate national solutions
Neighbourhood and Regional Policy 28 12
The European soldier – quo vadis The European Army – not more than a vision
Štefan Füle, Brussels
The European Union is ready to fully engage Historic changes with great impact
Prof. Dr. Ahmet Davutoǧlu, Ankara
Turkey’s accession to the European Union – a historical project The will to join the EU is persistent
Hartmut Bühl, Brussels
Davor Božinovic’, Zagreb
Achieving long-term stability in Afghanistan – the role of the “Comprehensive Approach” Practical challenges on the ground
Danuta Hübner MEP, Strasbourg/Brussels
The Regions of Europe – cornerstones for prosperity Diversity is an added value to the EU
Peter Hauk, Stuttgart
The importance of the Regions for the stability of Europe The EU needs strong regional authorities Photo: U.S. Army/Flickr.com
The contribution of the Regions to Security SMEs – regional power by linking together
Danuta Hübner MEP Chairperson of the Committee on Regional Development, European Parliament, Strasbourg/Brussels
Dirk Niebel Federal Minister of Economic Cooperation and Development, Berlin
SECURITY and SECURITY SOLUTIONS Protection
Interview with Michael Keinert, Erkrath
Peter Liebetrau, Eislingen/Fils
Hervé Guillou, Paris
Robert Kauth, Kaiserslautern
Military bridges – the highest standards for protecting forces Variety provides flexibility
Mathias Knops, Ratingen
Security versus flexibility – information security fights Wikileaks and Facebook New approaches need to be realized
Cyber protection –which strategy for industries There is a common enemy
Mike Burford, Heidelberg
Vehicle-based GPS receivers for harsh environments GPS Protection against explosives is vital
Military packaging solutions – durable protection for all types of weather Adaptive solutions for protection
Klaus-Peter Treche, Brussels
Supporting NATO in the next decade AFCEA – great support to NATO
Protection technologies for saving lives Protection – guided by the human factor
Joseph E.L. Souren, Lee, MA
A Paradigm shift in IT security – Hardware-based authentication and encryption A request for central administration
Interview with Ralf Griesbaum, Meckenbeuren
Medical container solutions for the protection of crisis management forces The runner is mobil field hospitals
Maritime Security 58
Dr. Michael Stehr, Bonn
ATALANTA – a continuously successful protection operation for the freedom of sea Pirates are still going strong
Stefan Katzenbeisser, Überlingen
A surveillance system for the immediate and nearby vicinity of maritime platforms Protection against local threats to the chip
“The European − Security and Defence Union” is the Winner of the European Award 2011 for Citizenship, Security and Defence
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
Documentation The ECB must show conviction
Towards a new European T
by Jim O’Neill
by Professor Jean-Dominique Giuliani, Chairman Robert Schumann
The European Central Bank (ECB) has again taken a reluctant decision: it is buying up Italian and Spanish debt in order to shore up those two countries’ finances. I admire the ECB’s flexibility. And I believe it is going to have to continue providing assistance for a while yet, until the new rescue package (EFSF)… becomes operational. The ECB clearly realises that the crisis has taken on a totally new dimension … with the involvement of Italy and Spain. Italy’s economy is the third biggest in the euro zone, and its public debt is one of the highest in the world. The European banks would not be able to cope with a serious Italian debt crisis, which means that banks outside the euro zone are also indirectly affected. Even worse, the problem is spreading. … France has more financial commitments in Italy than Germany has. The crucial question is whether monetary union can survive. It is decisive for countries to adopt the EFSF, which the Union hopes will strengthen the euro zone. (…) The euro countries have to choose between two extremes. They can allow monetary union to collapse, with all the chaos that would ensue, as well as the loss of the strongest symbol of European union after the Second World War. Or else they can come closer together and use common euro bonds to finance themselves, or in any case the first 60% of a country’s debt (in terms of GDP). I see the EFSF as a first step in that direction and I believe that if we want monetary union to survive we have no other choice. This option is unpopular with Germany, but I don’t understand why. … it gives economic union something it urgently needs: a genuine cross-border policy and a common aim. In any case, the financial markets realised a long time ago that this is the only way a common currency can work. During a transitional period the ECB will have to shoulder the burden of responsibility. Perhaps the ECB should change its tactics. It has, after all, rewarded market players for immediately stifling every political initiative. For the markets have understood that the ECB only intervened because it had to. It would be better for the ECB to actively intervene at the slightest sign of Italian or Spanish bonds becoming weak. … Among potential buyers are Asian sovereign funds, which are very interested in such relatively liquid and high-interest securities. Japanese investors, whose own country’s debt is almost twice that of Italy, would also be interested. But first they need to be convinced that European policymakers are really going to support Italy. Japanese bonds yield only about 1%, … as opposed to at least 5% for Italian bonds. European policymakers must make up their minds: do they really want to save monetary union? If they do, they need to act. The author is Chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management. Translated from an article published in the German newspaper Handelsblatt on 10 August 2011 with authorization of the author
The crisis across Europe has spread to nearly everything,
The summer has been particularly treacherous for the European Union. The crisis has spread to everything - there is the debt crisis, the deficit crisis and that affecting the generous social models we want to protect; imagination and even courage are distinctly lacking. We should however laud three specific exceptions. The European Central Bank did more than its duty and did much to calm speculators down. Germany and France rose to the challenge, firstly on 21st July by convening a euro area summit, during which some major decisions were taken; a further meeting on 16th August led to new prospects. By putting forward the establishment of the famous “economic government of the euro area” which we have been waiting for since the launch of the single currency, they went even further by deciding to harmonize their business taxes; which in all likelihood, will lead to other measures. If we add to this the fall of the Libyan dictator we see that results can be achieved when Europe finds leadership and above all, the ability to act as a responsible power.
The desire for integration remains However, the desire for integration remains in order to preserve and promote what is essential, whilst tiny details gradually distance Europe’s citizens from the Lisbon institutions. We ought probably to learn everything we can from this; the European model should not be ashamed of its achievements but it has to question its means of action: neither the UK nor any of its neighbour, who are not euro area members, can today assert their superiority over the European continental model, embodied by France and Germany. Economic uncertainty, legal issues and geopolitical surprises call for further European initiatives. The cacophony of the Europeans demands as much. Numerous ministerial meetings are organised with a large amount of media coverage, the main obstacle to responsible finance. Many Member States appear to no longer want to cooperate as a priority with their European partners, preferring shortsighted defence of their own interests. They do not feel responsible for the European project. Far too often in the past they have already refused to discuss any uniting of tax systems and have systematically opposed any joint expression of Europe abroad, nor have they joined the Euro, even when they had accepted the obligation to do so by treaty. Today they’re reluctant, on the pretext of popular opinion which is nothing more than suicidal egotism. Common institutions are no
but innovative and adapted solutions remain to be found
n Stiftung, Paris
longer inspiring confidence, they’re multiplying errors of communication, are taking too long to make decisions and in many cases lack both imagination and courage. Germany and France therefore have a particular duty in this regard because they feel responsible for Europe’s future and, in spite of everything, they have always been there when Europe has been called into question.
Harden the central corps of Europe The central core of the Euro must therefore be hardened around those who are ready for it, not only to defend their own interests but also for the shared destiny of the continent which now demands joint economic governance. Strict rules for stronger discipline in terms of public finance management are essential, but a real renewed policy of growth is also required, which calls for imagination too. Such are the conditions of European solidarity which must be reaffirmed. Our tax systems and our investments must be concerted. Before Eurobonds, which mutualise debts, let‘s pool our resources which are sufficient to meet the crisis. That the door was just slightly opened by the two partners on 16th August, when they decided to create a joint business tax for 2013. They must go further still. It is not necessary to have the same tax rates everywhere or the same priorities in terms of innovation, but it is imperative to decide on them together. That’s how a pragmatic and efficient tax and budgetary union would look like. At
Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy – will they be able to save “Euroland”
Dr. Jean-Dominique Giuliani Jean-Dominique Giuliani was born in 1956. He has a degree in law from the Institute of Political Studies and was nominated in 2000 Chairman of the Robert Schuman Foundation, of which he was one of the founders. 1981–1992 Secretary General of the Centrist Union of the Senate in Paris; 1992–1998 Director of the cabinet of Mr René Monory, President of the Senate. Designated Council of the Council of State (1995), he resigned to continue as the President of the Senate. Director for the General Management of the TNS Sofres, Paris 1998–2001. 2002 founded JD-G.Com International Consultants and is currently Special Adviser for the European Commission (2006). Jean-Dominique Giuliani has published among others “Pour l’Europe réunie” – 2 tome-collection “Les Notes” by the Robert Schuman Foundation (2002).
the heart of the euro area, France and Germany must firm up their will by means of a new bilateral treaty that will set out objectives and a specific timetable for their integration in budgetary, fiscal and investment terms. They should accept that others can join them, but only on these conditions.
Sending strong messages out Moreover, to respond to our needs whilst sending a strong message abroad, it would be judicious for the two partners to open up a new chapter in their cooperation in terms of defence and security. Germany has made enormous efforts to join the international community, but mistakes have been made too, which France could easily help to correct. By remaining open to those who want to join us, whilst making a solemn commitment between the two of us, by means of a legal act voted by our Parliaments, we will finally convince others that we are truly disposed to bringing a joint response to the current crisis of confidence and that we are in a position to make rapid decisions on the measures needed. Because this is, in fact, the question that everyone’s asking, starting with the financial markets.
www.jd-giuliani.eu and www.robert-schuman.eu
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
Security policy and development policy are complementar
Development policy in the strengthening the civil co by Dirk Niebel, Minister of Economic Cooperation and Developmen
German development funding for Afghanistan in 2011 The German government had divided the 2011 development funds for Afghanistan into two instalments with the aim to create additional incentives for the government in Kabul to meet the commitments it had entered into during the international Afghanistan conferences in London (January 2010) and Kabul (July 2010). This means tangible progress to be made by the Afghan government in central areas of reform, especially with regard to governance and anti-corruption efforts. In response to visible reform efforts on the part of the government in Kabul, Development Minister Niebel had released the first instalment of up to € 133 million (which includes 3 million euros in reprogrammed funds from earlier commitments) in June. On 2 October 2011, Gudrun Kopp, Parliamentary State Secretary to the Federal Minister for Economic Cooperation and Development, arrived in Afghanistan. During her political talks with Dr. Mustafa Mastoor, Afghanistan’s Deputy Minister of Finance, she committed on behalf of Development Minister Dirk Niebel another € 110 million to the Afghan government for projects and programmes under Afghan-German development cooperation this year. This means that a total of up to 240 million euros is available for development programmes and projects in Afghanistan in 2011. In addition, up to € 10 million is available for financial support for projects operated by German non-governmental organisations in Afghanistan. The second instalment was released after the government had demonstrated that further actions had been undertaken. The Strategy for German development policy “Minds for Change – Chancen schaffen” is available at: http://tinyurl.com/6k4ogs5
My aim is to enhance the effectiveness of German development cooperation. As part of that we have just completed the biggest reform of German development policy, merging three German implementing organisations into one. This will make our development policy more coherent and more effective. Another way of enhancing effectiveness is through close coordination with other international development players. That way we can avoid unnecessary duplication and each of the players can concentrate on their strengths.
Meshing of Development and Security Policy The majority of all violent conflicts in the world are played out in developing countries. More than half of the countries with which we have cooperation programmes are potential crisis countries. That is why, in order to do our work more effectively, we also need closer meshing of development policy and security policy. These two fields of policy need to overcome their qualms and work together in the way global challenges demand. Complex conflict situations such as can be seen in the Balkans, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, in Sudan or in Afghanistan cannot be resolved by means of development policy or diplomacy or military intervention alone. In order to prevent or manage conflicts, or to support and stabilise peace processes, more than one field of policy is needed.
The comprehensive approach Development policy makes an important contribution to security. It is also equally true to say that development is not possible without a minimum level of security. The only way we can deal with the present challenges posed by fragile, conflictridden countries is if we pursue a coordinated, coherent line. That is the core of the comprehensive approach and that is why achieving peace and security is an inter-ministerial crosscutting task with a clear division of labour: the objective of security policy is to avoid and avert dangers; development policy is about opening up opportunities.
Minister Dirk Niebel visiting a bakery in Moputu, on his travel through Mozambique in 2011 Photo:BMZ/Doris Lowack
Security policy and development policy are complementary to one another, with a fair division of labour between equal partners. A purely military strategy that takes no account of deeper-lying structural problems is not sustainable and is thus just as doomed to failure as an understanding of development policy that is too narrow and that basically ignores security issues.
y to one another, with a fair division of labour between equal partners
context of a comprehensive approach – mponent
Development Policy – reducing structural causes With our development cooperation, therefore, we play a part in reducing the structural causes of conflict by helping to improve the economic, social, ecological and political conditions in the developing countries. Our aim is that people will be able to lead lives that are not only free from fear but also free from want. In August, I presented the new strategy for German development policy: “Minds for Change – Chancen schaffen”. A key area in this strategy is our engagement in fragile states, which we intend to make a stronger focus of our work. Involvement in such countries is not easy, but not getting involved poses a far higher risk – first and foremost for the people in the countries concerned, but also for development, security and stability on a global scale. This means that a risky investment can become a long-term, sustainable investment in peace.
Afghanistan is an example... Afghanistan is an important example of that. The German government has almost doubled its funding for civil reconstruction and development in Afghanistan, pledging up to 430 million euros a year up to 2013. About 250 million euros of that total come from the budget of the Development Ministry. The German government’s involvement in Afghanistan is helping to develop the drinking water supply, improve the electricity supply, promote small and medium-sized enterprises, and create future prospects for boys and girls thanks to primary education and vocational training. We are also strengthening the rule of law, and championing human rights as well as gender equality for women. The development successes achieved so far show Afghan women and men that their living conditions are improving noticeably thanks to our assistance. This helps increase the acceptance of our work in Afghanistan overall. I am also expressly involved in lobbying for attention and recognition for our work in Germany. The many successes on the ground impress and move me anew each time I visit Afghanistan: the results are tangible! It is now possible, for example, to buy high-quality walnut oil from Afghanistan in Germany. The improved electricity supply that has been achieved with our assistance makes it possible to operate oil presses economically; at the same time Afghan companies are receiving advice on production and marketing. Customers were able to
Dirk Niebel Dirk Niebel is Minister of Economic Cooperation and Development in Berlin since 2009. He was born in 1963 in Hamburg. After his college entrance qualification 1983 he had been spending one year in a Kibbutz in Israel and joint thereafter the Bundeswehr for eight years and left the forces as an infantry airborne officer. He holds a Master degree from the College of Public Administration in Mannheim ( 1993) and served in the Federal Employment Office of Heidelberg until 1998. He became Member of the FDP (Liberal Party) in 1999 and Member of the Bundestag in 1998. He became Member of the Federal Board of the party. From 2000 to 2010 he had been Vice President of the German – Israelian Association. He was elected FDP’s Secretetary General in 2005 and became Minister at 28.10.2009.
see the results for themselves by testing the product at the Green Weeks in Berlin this year. For producers the results are higher incomes and a sustainable way out of poverty. We have promised the Afghans that we will stand by them and support the reconstruction and development of their country. We will keep that promise – in the short and in the long term.
...but does not provide a blue print Development cooperation with fragile states offers many opportunities, but it calls for patience and perseverance. We neither wish nor intend to leave abandoned development projects behind us. Instead we want to contribute in a longterm and sustainable manner to building an independent, stable state. Afghanistan does not provide us with a blueprint for this work. The comprehensive approach must be tailored to fit the context and situation of each respective country and of the players involved. What is always crucial for the success of our engagement in fragile states is that all players pursue a coordinated approach within the framework of an overall strategy, in order to achieve comprehensive and sustainable security that is more than just the mere absence of violence, but security that also includes political, economic, ecological and social stability. That is the only way we can achieve our goal of giving people hope for the future, prospects that offer them the freedom to develop and to free themselves from the misery of poverty.
Neighbourhood and Regional Policy
Documentation “A new response to a changig Neighbourhood” On 25 May 2011, the Joint Communication “A new response to a changeing Neighbourhood” was presented by Commissioner Štefan Füle and High Representative Catherine Ashton (Excerpts:) “To the East and South of the European Union (EU) lie sixteen countries1 whose hopes and futures make a direct and significant difference to us. Recent events have brought this into sharper relief, highlighting the challenges we face together. (…) The Lisbon Treaty has allowed the EU to strengthen the delivery of its foreign policy: co-operation with neighbouring countries can now be broadened to cover the full range of issues in an integrated and more effective manner. This was a key driver for initiating a review, in consultation with partner countries and other stakeholders, of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) in summer 2010. Recent events throughout the Southern Mediterranean have made the case for this review even more compelling. The EU needs to rise to the historical challenges in our neighbourhood. (…) Recent events and the results of the review have shown that EU support to political reforms in neighbouring countries has met with limited results. There is for example a need for greater flexibility and more tailored responses in dealing with rapidly evolving partners and reform needs – whether they are experiencing fast regime change or a prolonged process of reform and democratic consolidation. Co-ordination between the EU, its Member States and main international partners is essential and can be improved. (…) For those southern and eastern neighbours able and willing to take part, this vision includes closer economic integration and stronger political co-operation on governance reforms, security, conflict-resolution matters, including joint initiatives in international fora on issues of common interest. In the context of the southern Mediterranean, the Commission and the High Representative have already laid out their proposal for
Commissioner S̆tefan Füle at the Press conference on the adoption of the 2011 European Neighbourhood Policy Review, May 2011. Photo:European Commission
a Partnership for Democracy and Shared Prosperity The new approach, as described above, aims to: 1. provide greater support to partners engaged in building deep democracy – the kind that lasts because the right to vote is accompanied by rights to exercise free speech, form competing political parties, receive impartial justice from independent judges, security from accountable police and army forces, access to a competent and non-corrupt civil service – and other civil and human rights that many Europeans take for granted, such as the freedom of thought, conscience and religion; 2. support inclusive economic development – so that EU neighbours can trade, invest and grow in a sustainable way, reducing social and regional inequalities, creating jobs for their workers and higher standards of living for their people; 3. strengthen the two regional dimensions of the European Neighbourhood Policy, covering respectively the Eastern Partnership and the Southern Mediterranean, so that we can work out consistent regional initiatives in areas such as trade, energy,
transport or migration and mobility complementing and strengthening our bilateral co-operation; 4. provide the mechanisms and instruments fit to deliver these objectives. (…) The EU does not seek to impose a model or a ready-made recipe for political reform, but it will insist that each partner country’s reform process reflect a clear commitment to universal values that form the basis of our renewed approach. The initiative lies with the partner and EU support will be tailored accordingly. Increased EU support to its neighbours is conditional. It will depend on progress in building and consolidating democracy and respect for the rule of law. The more and the faster a country progresses in its internal reforms, the more support it will get from the EU. (…)” 1 The European Neighbourhood includes Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Egypt, Georgia, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, the Republic of Moldova, Morocco, the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Syria, Tunisia and Ukraine.
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
Neighbourhood and Regional Policy Europe’s prosperity and the well being of its citizens cannot be treated in isolation from nearby regions or other parts of the world Štefan Füle..................................................................................... 12 Ahmet Davutoǧlu ........................................................................... 15 Danuta Hübner MEP ........................................................................ 18 Peter Hauk MP................................................................................ 20 Ludovic Ouvry ................................................................................ 22 Photo: Magharebia/Flickr.com
The EU is offering a broad spectrum for neighbourhood cooperation from good-will to membership
The European Union is ready to fully engage by Štefan Füle, Member of the European Commission for Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy, Brussels
Historic changes have been taking place this year in the Southern neighbourhood of the EU. These changes will have a great impact with lasting consequences not only for the peoples and countries of the region but also for the rest of the world and particularly for the EU.
Partnership and Prosperity In March, the EU responded to these changes and offered to support the democratic transformation in its neighbourhood through a Partnership for Democracy and Shared Prosperity, which is based on three main elements: 1. democratic transformation and institution-building, with a particular focus on fundamental freedoms, constitutional reforms, reform of the judiciary and fight against corruption; 2. stronger partnership with the people, with a specific emphasis on support for civil society and people-to-people contacts and a particular focus on the young; 3. Sustainable and inclusive economic development – especially support to Small and Medium Enterprises, improving health and education systems and development of the poorer regions. The new Partnership for Democracy and Shared Prosperity is founded on the principles of differentiation, conditionality and partnership between our societies. The same principles also shape the recent review of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), which concerns not only the South but also the East of our neighbourhood. The entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty allowed the EU to strengthen its foreign policy and was a key driver for initiating the review in summer 2010. Events in the South Mediterranean made a review even more necessary. High Representative Ashton and I presented a communication on this subject in May.
Štefan Füle Štefan Füle has been EU Commissioner for Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy since February 2010. He was born in 1962 in Sokolov. He studied at the Faculty of Philosophy, Charles University, Prague, the Moscow State Institute of International Relations, and participated in the UN disarmament study programme. He started his professional career at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czechoslovak Federative Republic in 1987 where he was among others Director of the United Nations Department (1995-1996) and Director of the Security Policy Department (1996 – 1998). First Deputy Minister of Defense (2001-2002). From 2005-2009 he was Permanent Representative of the Czech Republic to NATO, before becoming Minister of European Affairs of the Czech Republic (May 2009 – November 2009)
“More for more” Overall, our new ENP approach incorporates a new level of ambition and commitment, greater differentiation, and aims to be prepared to go farther with our neighbors as they implement ambitious political and economic reforms. It is centered on the principle of “more for more”, i.e. more EU support for more reform and democratisation in partner countries. EU action will be more focused on support for reform in key areas for our partners. Sustainable democracy A key objective of the EU is to support deep and sustainable democracy in our neighborhood based on the following elements: • genuinely free and fair elections; • freedoms of assembly and of expression, including a free press and media; • the rule of law administered by an independent judiciary and
Neighbourhood and Regional Policy
The arabic spring has engaged Europe’s diplomacy – not always coordinated.
Photos: privat (map ), European Commission (Ashton – Füle), wikipedia (Jemen)
• the right to a fair trial; • fight against corruption and • democratic control over security and armed forces. These are the main areas where we will assess our partners’ progress toward reform. Of course, respect for fundamental freedoms and human rights will continue to be an overarching priority. Mutual accountability The renewed ENP is also based on mutual accountability, which works both ways. If a partner country wishes to obtain greater support from the EU, then it will have to demonstrate clear commitments to a number of significant political reforms. Conversely, the EU will be accountable to its partners for delivering on its offers of support.
The 3Ms These offers are incentives for political and economic reform and fall under three main categories, which we call the “3Ms”: money, mobility and markets. Money: We are adapting our financial instruments to make them more flexible and more focussed, and we will allocate, in 2011-2013, up to EUR 1.2 billion in grant money to support the new approach. This is in addition to funds already earmarked for our neighbourhood in 2011-2013, which amount to EUR 5.7 billion. We will also provide increased funding for investment in our neighbourhood through EIB and EBRD lending. The extension of the EBRD mandate to Southern and Eastern Mediterranean countries will help the EU to transfer the EBRD’s vast experience in transition and to boost support to the private sector.
Mobility of people: We are preparing to launch mobility partnerships (including visa facilitation and readmission agreements) with Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt and, when conditions are appropriate, also with Libya and others. In the East of our neighbourhood, we already have mobility partnerships in place with Moldova and with Georgia and are under negotiation with Armenia. Visa facilitation and readmission agreements are already in place with Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia and are under negotiation with other partners. Action plans for full visa liberalisation are being implemented with Ukraine and Moldova. Market access: We are already preparing mandates for the European Commission to negotiate agreements on deep and comprehensive free trade areas with Morocco, Jordan, Egypt and Tunisia. In the East, negotiations of an association agreement with Ukraine including a deep and comprehensive free trade area are nearing completion. We will also offer our partners further trade concessions, especially in those sectors that are likely to offer an immediate boost to partners’ economies. Ultimately, we hope to conclude deep and comprehensive free trade areas with each partner, which will allow economic integration into the EU single market. We will allow each partner to develop its links with the EU as far as its own aspirations, needs and practices allow. We will listen to our partners and we will adapt our offer where possible to their particular situation.
Neighbourhood Civil Society Facility We will work not only with governments, but also with civil society and peoples. According to the principle of conditionality, if a partner government does not uphold democracy, rule of
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
Documentation EU’s Eastern Partnership The EU’s Eastern Partnership was launched at the Prague Eastern Partnership summit in May 2009. It concerns six partner countries in Eastern Europe and the Southern Caucasus: the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Republic of Belarus, Georgia, the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine. Through this initiative, the EU supports reforms in the partner countries that are aimed at consolidating democracy, the rule of law, the respect for human rights and an open market economy. At the same time, it aims to offer gradual integration into the European economy, greater mobility for citizens and closer political ties. The European Commisson published on 26 September 2011 a Communication on Cooperation in the Area of Justice and Home Affairs within the Eastern Partnership. The Communication aims at further developing the dialogue and cooperation with the Eastern Partners on issues such as visa policy, asylum, border management, fighting organised crime and judiciary reform. The Communication is available at: http://tinyurl.com/5s46fkp From 29 to 30 September 2011, the second Eastern Partnership Summit took place in Warsaw, Poland. A joint declaration is available at: http://tinyurl.com/6jwq3kt
law and respect for human rights, we will reduce or suspend our cooperation with that government, but we will increase our support for the people and civil society in that country. For example, in the aftermath of the flawed December 2010 elections in Belarus, we took steps against the Lukashenka regime but we increased support for civil society in Belarus. A new Neighbourhood Civil Society Facility will support the development in our neighbourhood of a vibrant civil society that can provide advocacy to disadvantaged groups, monitor reform, implement EU programmes and also evaluate them. This facility will begin operations in early 2012, with an initial budget of € 22 million. Furthermore, a new European Endowment for Democracy will provide support for the development of democratic political cultures in the neighbourhood countries and to facilitate the sharing of relevant transition experiences from the EU to its southern and eastern neighbours. Preparations for the creation of the Endowment are ongoing, in cooperation with the European Parliament and other partners, including the European Network of Political Foundations and others. The EU also wants to strengthen political and security cooperation with our partners. The Lisbon Treaty provides the EU with a unique opportunity to become a more effective actor in our neighbourhood, but rising to the challenge requires that
EU and Member States policies will be much more closely aligned than in the past, in order to deliver the common message and the coherence that will make our actions effective.
Conflicts around Europe The persistence of conflicts affecting a number of partner countries is a serious security challenge to the whole region. EU geopolitical, economic and security interests are directly affected by continuing instability including the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and other conflicts in the Middle East, the South Caucasus, the Republic of Moldova and Western Sahara. These conflicts drain considerable local and international resources, and act as powerful impediments to reform. Confidence building The EU intends to enhance its support for confidence-building and outreach to breakaway territories, for international efforts and structures related to the conflicts, and, once that stage is reached, for the implementation of settlements. Many of the instruments we use in the neighbourhood to promote economic integration and sectoral co-operation could also be mobilised to support confidence-building and conflict-resolution objectives. Developing further incentives The EU is also ready to help develop post-conflict reconstruction scenarios which could act as a further incentive in the resolution of conflicts by showing the tangible benefits of peaceful settlements. Where the EU is already engaged operationally on the ground, e.g. with the EU Monitoring Mission in Georgia, the EU Border Assistance Mission in Republic of Moldova/Ukraine, or the EU Police Mission and the EU Border Assistance Mission Rafah in the occupied Palestinian territories, we will take further steps to exploit the synergies between this operational presence and the efforts to promote reforms. Where appropriate, the EU will offer to support partner countries’ efforts to reform their justice and security sector reforms with rule of law missions or other Common Foreign and Security Policy instruments.
Engaging all means to promote stability Historic changes in our neighbourhood, continued instability and regional conflicts pose great challenges to the European Neighbourhood Policy. The EU is ready fully to engage, based on the “more for more” principle and on a holistic approach that is made possible by the Lisbon Treaty. This approach allows us to use all the tools of the EU, including financial support, trade and investment, mobility of people, diplomacy and European Security and Defence missions, to promote deep and sustainable democracy, security and prosperity in our neighbourhood.
Neighbourhood and Regional Policy
The European Union and Turkey share the same values and have parallel objectives in foreign policy
Turkey’s accession to the European Union – a historical project by Prof. Dr. Ahmet Davutoǧlu, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ankara
Europe is our common home that we have built by uniting around common norms, principles and values. As a part and parcel of the family of European nations for centuries, Turkey not only had an immense influence on the political, economic and socio-cultural developments in the Continent but has also been influenced by them. Today, a full account of the history of Europe cannot be made without analyzing the significant role that Turkey played in the Continent. As in the past, the destinies of Turkey and other European countries are intertwined. We face the future together. Consequently, the debate on Turkey’s accession to the EU is a debate on the future of Europe. Turkey’s accession to the EU is a historical project about what kind of a Europe that we would like to see in the 21st century.
Prof. Dr. Ahmet Davutoğlu is Turkey’s Minister of Foreign Affairs since 1st May 2009. He was born in 1959 in Konya. In 1983, he graduated from the Bosporus University with a double major in Political Science and Economics at the Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences and later on he received his PhD from the Department of Political Science and International Relations. As a professor he was teaching among other assignments at the Marmara University and at the Beykent University in Istanbul where he was serving as Head of the Department of International Relations. Following the November 2002 elections he was appointed as Chief Adviser to the Prime Minister and Ambassador at large by the 58th Government of the Republic of Turkey. He continued to serve in the 59th and 60th Governments.
The EU is the most successful integration project If the 20th century was a century of political, economic and cultural division, the 21st century must be a century of re-integration. The EU, as the most successful integration project of mankind, has a lot to offer in that respect, provided that it acts with strategic wisdom and vision. Aspiring a strong EU, Turkey is ready to act with and in support of the EU to exercise its “soft” power, namely the use of diplomacy to bring about international understanding and peace and promote development, backed where necessary by trade, aid and peacekeepers to resolve conflicts.
integration is fully attained that it can become and remain a “sizeable actor” on international stage, bearing also in mind the global power shift which is taking place from West to the East in parallel to the growing economic strength of Asian countries.
Turkey’s accession – new dynamism for the EU With Turkey on board, the EU will be better equipped to confidently face internal and external challenges that would arise and would have the necessary vigor to effectively meet expectations from itself in times of need. Turkey’s accession
The Union needs to be more active, more coherent and more capable In today’s new global environment, there is no single set of solutions for the existing problems. Neither do we have a panacea at our disposal to deal with all economic and social troubles. Global problems call for comprehensive responses and active cooperation of all members of the international community. Therefore today’s issues also require more and effective EU involvement. This is all the more essential if the Union desires to be able to influence the speed, direction and nature of global changes. As the 2008 Report on the Implementation of the European Security Strategy highlights, the EU “carries greater responsibilities than at any time in its history” but needs to be “more active, more coherent and more capable” to deliver. The EU’s success in achieving its goals, first and foremost entails a clear strategic vision and the path goes through further European integration. It is only when European
The HR Catherine Ashton and Commissioner S̆tefan Füle are delighted to receive Prof.Dr. Davutoğlu at the Gymnich meeting in Sopot. Photo: EU
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
Documentation Turkey’s path towards the EU 1959 – Turkey applies for associate membership of the European Economic Community (EEC). 1963 – An association agreement (known as the Ankara Agreement) is signed, aiming at bringing Turkey into a Customs Union with the EEC and to eventual membership. 1970 – The Additional Protocol and the second financial protocol are signed in Brussels, preparing the ground for the establishment of the customs union. 1987 – Turkey makes an application for full EEC membership. 1996 – Customs Union between Turkey and the EU enters into force. 1999 – EU Helsinki Council recognises Turkey as an EU candidate country on an equal footing with other candidate countries. 2005 – Accession negotiations with Turkey are formally opened.
will undoubtedly enhance not only economic but also political competitiveness and puissance of the EU. At a time when economic governance, sustainable growth and the future of Eurozone continue to be the most pressing preoccupations of Europe, as a G-20 member and the 16th largest economy in the world, Turkey’s accession will bring a new dynamism to the EU, also by expanding the European internal market. Age of globalization urges us to live not only “side-by-side” but also “together” in a multi-cultural milieu based on mutual respect. We cannot build a common future based on ignorance, fear or isolationism. Neither physical nor invisible social and mental barriers can ensure remedies to the economic and social challenges Europe is facing today. In the emerging new world order, Europe has no choice but to deepen, strengthen and widen its web of relations. Turkey, like no other country, has the ability to advance European interests in security, trade and energy networks from the Far East to the Mediterranean, with its strong sense of belonging to European family.
The Turkish foreign policy as a boost to CFSP In this context, Turkey’s multi-dimensional, proactive and dynamic foreign policy contributing to global efforts aimed at bringing security, stability and development will be an exceptional boost to the Common Foreign and Security Policy. As a factor of stability in its region, Turkey derives its “soft” power from a range of assets emanating from its history, social and cultural ties, growing economic capabilities, multi-regional identity and above all, ability to understand different dynamics at play in a vast area from Europe to Asia. Turkey is not only a European country but also a part of the Balkans, Mediterranean and Black Sea regions, Caucasus and the Middle East. Thus, it has its comparative advantages with unique and strong ties with many countries in its region. While deepening its regional web of relations, Turkey cherishes memberships of
diverse political and economic organizations such as NATO, Council of Europe, Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation, Economic Cooperation Organization and Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, and plays an active role in all of them. The variety of these organizations testifies to the multidimensional nature of Turkish foreign policy. It also enables Turkey to be a net contributor to different aspects of global governance. While being a member of G-20, the “super league” of world economies, Turkey is no less diligent about issues like development. Turkey hosted the 4th UN Conference on Least Developed Countries in May 2011 in order to help tackle the global challenges related to development.
Turkey as a natural bridge to EU’s South Turkey’s assets, comparative advantages and active commitment for the attainment of peace and stability are important instruments for all those seeking ways to effectively address international issues of concern, including the EU. The future of our wider neighborhood will to a large extent determine that of the entire Continent and beyond. As Commissioner Füle also states in his recent article1 , Turkey’s location makes it a natural bridge between the EU and Turkey’s Eastern and Southern neighbors. In this regard, Turkey’s accession to the EU is a key strategic imperative for European integration, since it will certainly help the EU become a much more effective actor in these neighbouring regions. Moreover, European values and policies will certainly have a far greater reach and thus will take root in a wider geography with Turkey as a member. As a matter of fact, Turkey and the EU share the same values and have parallel objectives in foreign policy. Preserving peace and strengthening international security in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter, and promoting international cooperation are common denominators in this regard. Developing and consolidating democracy and the rule of law, and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms is another important shared goal. Turkey seeks to establish peace, stability and security in the Middle East and North Africa and assist these countries in their transition to democracy, to further integrate the Balkans with the Euro-Atlantic community, to bolster democracy and peaceful resolution of conflicts in the Caucasus and Central Asia, to contribute to enhanced energy supply and security of Europe and to strengthen security and stability in Afghanistan and South Asia. So does the EU. This dictates us to cooperate further, since the synergy to be created by such cooperation would be first and foremost beneficial to the Europeans.
Democratization and respect of human rights A notable proof of Turkey’s immense potential to contribute to the EU’s global position and capacity demonstrates itself especially during this period while the winds of change in the Middle East and North Africa are producing a significant effect on the global scene. The recent developments in our southern
Neighbourhood and Regional Policy
neighbourhood have revealed once again the difference that the EU can make together with Turkey to provide a better future for the peoples of the region. We have to ensure that the ongoing transition and transformation process in the countries of the region will bring peace, stability and welfare through democratization, respect for human rights and the rule of law. Turkey is ready to share its experiences and make contributions which the countries of the region may require in their reform efforts. With its two-century long modernization efforts, vibrant democracy and economy, it can be a source of inspiration for these countries. Thus, in this endeavor, Turkey can successfully complement the existing EU policies.
Turkey is an energy hub for Europe and Asia Another important area where Turkey can contribute to the EU is energy security. As a country situated in a unique strategic location neighboring major producers and consumers, Turkey has a significant role in securing reliable access to energy resources also by contributing to efforts to diversify energy routes. Accordingly, there are a number of existing or planned oil and natural gas pipelines crossing our country. In a way, that makes Turkey an energy hub for Europe and Asia. Energy security is one of the most important strategic challenges facing us as it is an indispensable element that gives power to the economic engine and therefore a vital field of cooperation for us. With this understanding, the Southern and East-West Energy Corridors were elaborated. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Crude Oil Pipeline, Turkey-Greece-Italy Natural Gas Interconnector and Nabucco Natural Gas Pipeline Projects are important components of these energy connections. We are also working on the Samsun-Ceyhan By-Pass Crude Oil Pipeline Project, which will enhance supply security by creating another alternative route that by-passes the already congested Turkish Straits.
A long-deserved place in the EU As all these demonstrate, collective wisdom is on the side of Turkey’s accession to the EU. With its young and dynamic population, high economic growth rates, deep-rooted culture and vibrant democracy and multi-faceted foreign policy, Turkey is playing an instrumental role in the evolving global scene. Turkey’s membership also is a litmus test, regarding the future vision of the EU. I believe that the EU leaders will fulfill their responsibility for future generations by endeavoring for a Union which is strategically visionary, geopolitically strong and an economically dynamic global power, with Turkey as a member. This undoubtedly would be a step towards the prevalence of Kantian “perpetual peace” around the world, as an ultimate goal. Time has long come for Turkey to take its long-deserved place in the EU and finalize this historical project. 1 Stefan Füle, “Turkey and the European Neighbourhood Policy”, Turkish Policy Quarterly, Vol.10, No.2, p.17-21.
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
The infinite variety and diversity of European regions is an added value to the EU
The Regions of Europe – cornerstones for prosperity by Danuta Hübner MEP, Chairperson of the Committee for Regional Development, Strasbourg/Brussels
Why is the sub-national level important for prosperity? In times of global competition and deepening economic crisis, Europe is in need of more sustainable economic growth. Important factors of growth such as innovation and “greening” require regional and local focus. Innovation can boost productivity and offer a new competitive edge to companies and industries, while greening can create new markets and increase efficiency. It is the diversity of the European regions which allows us to better exploit opportunities and comparative advantages in light of current challenges.
The diversity of the European regions is an added value to Europe Europe is famous for its diversity, the integration of which is first and foremost about geography and a combination of tangible factors such as natural resources, infrastructural endowment, capital, and labour. Integration of diversity also depends on intangible factors such as institutions, skills, creativity, and cultural diversity. In addition, economic activities in Europe, in terms of population settlement patterns, are much less concentrated than elsewhere in the world. Ultimately, this diversity translates into the unique way our economy is organized. Tangible problems While regional diversity is undoubtedly a very desirable characteristic of the EU, less appealing aspects are regional disconnect and uneven distribution of resources. To give an example, on average some 93% of households and businesses in urban areas have broadband access, compared to only 66% in rural areas. The gap is even wider in new Member States.1 Unfortunately, today regional diversity in the EU also means persisting regional disparities in economic development. Territories have unequal capacities to face the challenges of the internal market, let alone global competition. Integration in the context of globalization European integration is now taking place in the context of globalisation, which adds a new dimension to the economic environment, including investment and human resources development. Regions have to deal with global competition, in particular from newly emerging large economies, where social and environmental conditions can be very different. Today, successful regions are those with a clearly defined
Danuta Hübner Professor Danuta Hübner, Ph.D. MEP, Chairperson of the Committee of Regional Development in the European Parliament, since 2009. Studies at the Warsaw School of Economics, where she obtained an MSc (1971) and a PhD (1974). 1988 – 1990 Fulbright scholar at the University of California. 1992 Professor of Economics conferred by the President of the Republic of Poland. Five doctorates honoris causa by European universities. In 2004 Danuta Hübner was entrusted as Commissioner with the regional policy portfolio. Her earlier roles in Poland’s Government among others: Minister for European Affairs, Minister Head of the Chancellery of the President.
image and a clear strategy on policies to strengthen their features. All regions therefore need to exploit their natural assets and become attractive places in which to live and work. Such trends became evident with the impact of the financial crisis and the evolution of public investment and growth policies. It is apparent that a place-based integrated approach needs to be adopted.
Reducing disparities via the EU Regional Policy Policymakers have clear guidance in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union: “In order to promote its overall harmonious development, the Union shall develop and pursue its actions leading to the strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion. In particular, the Union shall aim at reducing disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least favoured regions.” Though it does not claim exclusivity in fostering EU regional development, the primary EU-wide vehicle to pursue these objectives is the EU Regional Policy. The Regional Policy is an investment strategy that, by building on regional strength and potential, contributes to profound structural changes and paves the way for future progress. It was originally conceived to assist regions in creating economic and social structures which would enable vulnerable regions and Member States, and those undergoing economic and social restructuring, to
Neighbourhood and Regional Policy
compete fairly in the internal market and have the financial means to face the budgetary constraints of the Economic and Monetary Union.
The shift to greater regional competency We should, however, not forget that “regions” are not only about economic indicators, business and competition. There is also a political-administrative dimension, placing regions into a prominent spot in the rich web of European governance. The past decade has seen a trend toward political decentralisation in Europe, with competencies shifting from central to regional and local levels. Sub-national government control of public finances varies across countries, but some two-thirds of public investment in the EU is accounted for by sub-national authorities. Interdependency The growing territorial interdependence between regions has made clear the need for better territorial integration. Today, a number of issues have to be tackled at various geographic scales, often over areas covering two or more national territories. Hierarchical or top-down approaches are disappearing from governance best practices and are being replaced by interventions taking a horizontal, integrated approach.
bouring countries, aiming to establish an area of prosperity and good neighbourliness, founded on the values of the Union and characterised by close and peaceful relations based on cooperation”. Cooperation across national borders, in particular with regions in third countries, improves communication and understanding and thus contributes to security and stability in these regions. This can induce a positive cycle with enhanced stability leading to increased confidence of economic actors and investors, and consequently in growth and employment. The process in turn leads to deeper territorial integration and hence further stability.
Internal and external borders Cross-border cooperation is also an issue in regard to internal EU borders. While almost 40% of the EU’s population lives in border regions, 36% in fact live along its internal borders.4 Sometimes strikingly different levels of development can be found on opposite sides of a border, whether internal or external. Internally, we strive for more regional integration, cross-border-cooperation, and overcoming political and administrative barriers. Externally, the priority is improving basic infrastructure such as transport and communications.
Removing barriers and creating synergies Subsidiarity These trends have been backed by the changes brought about by the Treaty of Lisbon: the extension of the principle of subsidiarity to regional and local levels, and the recognition of the general principle of local and regional autonomy.3 Local and regional governance is capable of translating European (and national) strategic goals into diverse territorial specificities. The regional level is instrumental in reaching stakeholders in business, academia, and civil society working and living in a certain area. Its capacity to arrange and spark complex partnerships between public and private actors should not be underestimated. Regions are real laboratories for producing results – workshops for the implementation of European and national policies. A culture of partnership Regions must be willing and able to take up such a challenge and to set up the necessary structures to make the system work. Thus, on the one hand structural reforms need to be put in place. On the other hand, a real culture of partnership and responsibility needs to be developed.
Going beyond Europe It has to be emphasized that the EU’s territory, its economic prosperity, and the well-being of its citizens cannot be treated in isolation from nearby regions or other parts of the world. In this context, the Treaty on the European Union states that “The Union shall develop a special relationship with neigh-
Territorial cooperation provides exceptional potential for economic development and territorial cohesion. It is supported by the cohesion policy’s “European Territorial Cooperation” (ETC) objective, which works to remove barriers to the European single market and enhance the mobility of people and services. However, the objective is no longer only to abolish barriers, but is increasingly about facilitating the improvement of administrative standards, generating added value, and taking advantage of opportunities. The challenges discussed above present a rationale for more co-operation, both within the Union and across its external borders. This implies a more strategic approach to the ETC, with more finely-tuned cross-border programmes suited to specific border contexts. It also suggests bottom-up transnational programmes based on larger regions with shared problems, identities and histories. At the same time, the ongoing discussion on the future of the European Neighbourhood Policy should result in more effective functioning and cooperation at external EU borders. Synergies between European external and internal policies need to be enhanced.
1 Growing Regions, growing Europe: Fourth report on economic and social cohesion, European Commission, May 2007 2 Source: Investing in Europe’s future: Fifth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion, European Commission, November 2010 3 Articles 5 (3) and 4 (2) of the Treaty on the European Union 4 Source: Investing in Europe’s future: Fifth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion, European Commission, November 2010
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
Regional authorities react quickly and efficiently with population supported efficiency
The importance of the Regions for the stability of Europe by Peter Hauk, President of the CDU-group in the State Parliament of Baden-Württemberg, Stuttgart
In 1954 Konrad Adenauer stated: “The unity of Europe was the dream of a few. It became the hope of many. Today it has become a necessity for all of us.” More than five decades later, these words have not lost their timeliness and their truth. Nonetheless, today European integration has entered a critical stage and the development towards the “ever closer Union” as described by the founding fathers encounters a growing skepticism amongst citizens across Europe. The European Union and its Member States face serious challenges, both internally and externally. Many have to cope with extremely high unemployment rates and slow growth rates. In several Member States, these economic concerns are combined with severe fiscal problems.
Peter Hauk Peter Hauk has been President of the CDU Group in the Baden-Württemberg State Parliament in Stuttgart since 2011. He was born in 1960 in Walldürn. He studied forestry in Freiburg and passed the state forestry examination in 1989. From 2002 – 2005 he was head of the Forestry Office in Adelsheim. In 2005 he became Minister for Food and Rural Areas in the Baden-Württemburg State Government. The political posts he has occupied include: 1992: Member of the State Parliament, Stuttgart. Since 1999 CDU Vice District Chairman for North Baden. 1998 – 2005 Vice-Chairman of the CDU Group in the State Parliament, Stuttgart
Weakness and loss of influence The Euro-zone and its crisis management apparatus face an enormous challenge. The architecture of the European Monetary Union has shown its shortcomings. Despite existing European rules such as the Stability and Growth Pact, many Member States did not maintain the necessary budgetary discipline. As a consequence, the European level will gain more influence in the financial and economic governance of the Member States. The crisis has shown the interconnected character of the world economy and the limited influence of national actors. The European states witnessed a situation of weakness and a loss of influence vis-à-vis private actors and emerging economies. The European Union is still the world’s biggest economic bloc. In order to harness this economic power, the European Union needs the ability to act in an efficient and coherent manner.
The history of European unification has been a constant quest for the ideal balance of variety and unity. A constant transfer of legislative and regulatory powers to the European level was supported by a renaissance of regional and local self-government. In several Member States, regionalization processes have taken place, which have given new powers to regional authorities. Formerly centralized states as the United Kingdom, Spain and Italy have been transformed into states with strong regional authorities. In several countries, these processes helped to resolve long-term conflicts, such as the Northern Ireland question or the autonomy of Catalonia and South-Tyrol. These relatively new regional actors have sided with traditional federal governments, such as those of Germany and Austria.
Regional authorities can react more flexibly The renaissance of regionalization On the other hand, many of the challenges ahead cannot be managed by centralized powers. The very different geographic, economic and social conditions in Europe can only be matched with an approach that is adjusted to the specificities. A catchall solution is neither promising nor desirable. The European Union has chosen as its motto “United in Diversity”. A diversity of historical, religious and cultural traditions, of geographic and climatic conditions, as well as of entrepreneurial and scientific approaches is one of the main characteristics of the European Union. It is also an important source of creativity and innovation. The European Union should be the connecting belt to unite this variety.
There are a number of advantages to developing strong regional powers. Regional authorities are able to react much more flexibly and efficiently. Their close ties to local citizens enable them to offer tailored solutions. Instead of time-consuming decision-making processes, characteristic for national authorities, decisions on the regional level can be made in a shorter timeframe. Moreover, central planning by national authorities is replaced by regional and local solutions. The success of several European regions such as South-Tyrol, Flanders or Baden-Württemberg shows the advantages of strong regional authorities. While the average youth unemployment rate in the EU in July 2011 was 9.1%, the respective figure of Baden-Württemberg was by 2.9 %. At 34.000 Euro,
Neighbourhood and Regional Policy
the GDP per capita of South-Tyrol is much higher than both the Italian and European averages. Both examples show that a high level of regional autonomy offers the possibility to prepare the right conditions for successful development.
Education, research and development Given the economic challenges Europe currently faces, a stronger role for regional self-government and a more decentralized approach offer a promising perspective. One of the main challenges to Europe will be the transformation to a society of knowledge. A high level of education, as well as of research and development, will be a key factor for economic success. Emerging economies like China and India have already launched high investment into these areas. In the Europe 2020 strategy, two of the four main targets are related to innovation and education. Regional authorities already play an important role today in education policies and in promoting research and development. Instead of presenting centralized solutions and uniform concepts, a competitive quest for different solutions will lead to better results. In particular, regional authorities should be granted more power to develop coherent concepts, starting with the education of small children through higher education and life-long learning programs. Another key factor for success is the existence of strong small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Regions offer the ideal framework to promote the establishment of SMEs and should be able to provide the necessary infrastructure in transport and education. A high level of self-governance, including financial autonomy and legislative powers, will be necessary in order to enable regional authorities to deliver.
The distribution of powers is still open The Lisbon Treaty process has been cumbersome and timeconsuming. The result is a compromise that gives an answer to the question of the institutional architecture. This architecture now has to show whether it offers a good framework for the challenges of the future. The Treaty of Lisbon does not, however, give an answer to the second key question on the future of Europe – that of the future powers at European level as well as at the national and regional levels. Throughout the whole process, starting with the Laeken Declaration and the Constitutional Convention, the question of the distribution of powers has been left open. Many of the currently debated topics and many of the unsolved problems result from the fact that the balance between the European level and the level of the Member States and their subnational entities seems to have been lost. On the one hand, the European Union has to act more coherently and more efficiently when global questions are at stake. The fiscal crisis of several Member States might lead to a stronger role in the general formulation of fiscal and economic policies. On the other hand, central planning has proven its inefficiency. The European
Union intervenes in a wide range of policies, which should be subject to a critical inventory.
The future role of the European Union The European Union provides an instrument for addressing this question. Art. 5 of the Treaty on the European Union states: “Under the principle of subsidiarity, in areas which do not fall within its exclusive competence, the Union shall act only if and insofar as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, either at the central level or at regional and local levels, but can rather, by reason of the scale or effects of the proposed action, be better achieved at Union level.” The principle of subsidiarity in its formulation in the Lisbon Treaty only gives a first impulse for a debate that has to be more much in-depth. Undeniably, there is no quick and simple answer to the question of what can be the concrete meaning of “sufficiently achieved” or “better achieved”. The debate itself nonetheless offers the possibility of clarifying several key questions concerning the future role of the European Union. This debate should involve as many citizens as possible. It will lead to a new vision of Europe where a new balance is found between the European Union, the Member States and the regional and local authorities. The Regions of Europe are a good starting point for this discussion.
News: OPEN DAYS 2011 The ninth edition of the European Week of Regions and Cities, OPEN DAYS 2011 started in Brussels on 10 October. Committee of the Regions President Mercedes Bresso and Commissioner Johannes Hahn together with the chairwoman of the Parliament’s Regional Development Committee Danuta Hübner officially opened the event which brings together over 6000 regional and local partners from over 200 EU regions, and from eight non-EU countries. The event is also the first chance to discuss the Commission’s proposals on a new approach to EU cohesion policy. More information on the EU Cohesion Policy is available at: http://tinyurl.com/63lm7n5
Opening of the European Week of Regions and Cities: Johannes Hahn, Danuta Hübner, Chairperson of the EP’s Committee on Regional Development, Mercedes Bresso, President of the Committee of the Regions, Jerzy Buzek, President of the EP, Elzbieta Bieńkowska, Polish Minister for Regional Development and José Manuel Barroso (from left to right). Photo: European Commission
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
For SMEs, specialized in security, regional cooperation is relevant for progress
The contribution of the Regions to Security A report on regional industrial activities in the field of Security in France by Hartmut Bühl We went to meet one of the founders – now a Vice-President – of the defence cluster European Defense Economic Network (EDEN): Ludovic Ouvry, CEO of Ouvry SAS, specialised in individual CBRN protection. We found Ludovic Ouvry to be a keen advocate of the new textile technologies for the development of defence SMEs and their exports. The Rhône-Alpes region of France, whose capital is Lyons, has witnessed the birth of a single security, safety and defence cluster named EDEN (European Defense Economic Network). This cluster bringing together 45 of the region’s SMEs is a perfect example of the kind of local initiative that contributes actively to building a European security and defence.
A dynamic bottom-up approach The cluster was created in 2008 at the initiative of five local company leaders following a study commissioned by the French procurement authority Délégation Générale pour l’Armement (DGA) with the Lyons Chamber of Commerce and Industry. This initiative, contrary to many others, represents a genuinely bottom-up approach under the leadership of heads of companies. The cluster’s ability to mobilise its members is the key to its dynamism and development. The active participation of its members in implementing and giving real impetus to its different actions is a decisive factor in its success. Its members together represent turnover of some 500 million euros in four main activity sectors: protection, surveillance and detection systems; personal protection equipment; equipment for aircraft, ships and vehicles; and, finally, engineering services.
The Rhône-Alpes Region is a symbiose of nature and industrial power
Develop business and technology synergies This cluster of companies is driven by real solidarity among SMEs. Its prime objective is to encourage and develop business and technological synergies among its members in order to enable them to tackle export markets, while promoting the contacts between them (networking, exchanges of good practices, pooling of know-how and resources, etc.). Thus this group, which combines technological knowhow with a perfect knowledge of defence market requirements, is able to present a more coherent offer from the companies of the region in both the civil and military sectors. “Exports account on average for 50% of the EDEN member companies’ turnover, but there are individual variations ranging from 1% to 90%. Thus, for example, most of the harnesses and headlamps used by special forces the world over are made by one of our members, the company Petzl”, explains Ludovic Ouvry, CEO of Ouvry, whose export business accounts for 65% of its turnover.
Added value for small and medium-sized enterprises The defence, safety and security sectors of industry need considerable R&D resources and excellent subcontractors, as well as these days the ability to operate on international markets in close proximity to ever-more demanding customers. European cooperation among the major prime contractors not being easy, the members of the cluster quickly realised the importance of making themselves known to each of those big European contractors, both commercially and in terms of R&D. This is where the network offers real added value to its smallest
Neighbourhood and Regional Policy
members, which do not have the critical size needed to recruit an R&D Exports Director, let alone to open a sales office abroad or to try and take on Brussels. EDEN contributes directly to the European Defence Agency’s R&T studies. Ludovic Ouvry recalls that his company was the first SME to take the leadership for such a contract in the framework of the Force Protection Joint Investment Programme aimed at improving soldiers’ protection. The company 01 dB Metravib also made its contribution as a partner for the MUSAS (Multi Sensor Anti Sniper System) contract. Certain members were quick to identify common research projects, leading for some to the filing of patents and the launch of new products.
Develop export activities The EDEN members’ prime objective, in view of the current sluggish state of defence markets, is to develop their export activities. Having attended a series of international trade fairs in their sector (Eurosatory, Milipol Qatar, Milipol Paris, IDEX, DSEI etc.), in the framework of Rhône-Alpes regional pavilions organised by the Lyons CCI, the different companies became aware of their closeness and of the need to work together, in particular by pooling sales information and in some cases sales staff. They understood that together they could work faster and raise their international profile: they could, in other words, become more competitive and responsive.
Ludovic Ouvry in his office in Lyon in discussion with Mr Bühl. Photo: Ouvry
Düsseldorf, and the Danish cluster CenSec, based in Karup. “The aim of these activities is to enable the members of our different associations to meet, to establish ties between our countries and to extend our networks”, explains Ludovic Ouvry. The members also benefit from the cluster’s greater clout in terms of its organisation and visibility, and from the joint services it offers during international fairs.
Foster visibility and create a European network Following the signing of a cooperation agreement with Brazilian defence association ABIMDE at Milipol Paris in 2009, the EDEN cluster organised an international day on its stand at MILIPOL 2011, on 19 October 2011. This in turn led to the signing of further agreements with various foreign partners including the German defence association GSW, based in
Becoming stronger in order to go further. During the first half of 2011, EDEN carried the colours of its member SMEs to the export market: it was present at the IDEX in Abu Dhabi in February, LAAD in Brazil and the Counter Terror Expo in London in April 2011. Under the EDEN banner SMEs can exhibit their products in countries that would be inaccessible to them on their own. In just three years of existence, EDEN has become a cluster to be reckoned with!
EDEN: Defence– Safety – Security EDEN members present at Milipol Paris 2011 : 01db-Metravib, Sita Remediation, Sorhea, Survey Copter, Ulis, Bolle Protection, Dimatex Securité, Ouvry SAS, Petzl, PGM Précision, Richard Ponvert, Rostaing, Banc National d’Epreuves des Armes et Munitions, MSA Gallet, Nicomatic. EDEN’s characteristics: - 47 member SMEs - More than 4000 jobs - Some 500 M€ total turnover, of which about 50% for exports EDEN’s objectives - Develop SME activities in the defence, safety and security sectors - Conquer international markets - Work in synergy with European SMEs so as to tackle export markets together - Define comprehensive solutions - Generate R&D projects adapted to the needs of major companies and programmes (partnership with the Carnot Institutes)
The result of remarkable teamwork, this rapid success encourages EDEN’s members to pursue their activities on behalf of SMEs in the defence, safety and security sectors. A growing number of SMEs in other French regions, in particular Burgundy, Auvergne and above all Brittany, are keen to follow their example and are applying to join the cluster. It is in the process of evolving from a regional cluster (Rhône Alpes) to a national one, with ties and partnerships all over Europe. SMEs from other EU countries – Italy, Germany, Spain – are keen to participate in certain projects. EDEN is offering them coordinated action (technology workshops, shared stands at international fairs, etc.) in order to jointly conquer markets and foster development projects. Gradually EDEN is meeting the challenge of generating real symbiosis at Community level among Europe’s SMEs, which are more flexible and responsive than the big multinationals.
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
Defence and Security The deep cuts in defence budgets as a result of the financiel crisis have to be overcome through new methods of cooperation Krzysztof Lisek MEP......................................................................... 24 Georg Nachtsheim ........................................................................... 26 Hartmut Bühl.................................................................................. 28 Dr. Davor Božinovic’ ......................................................................... 34
The European Union risks to loose political power and strategic capabilities
How to secure and defend European security and defence sectors by Krzysztof Lisek MEP, Vice-Chairman of Subcommittee of Security and Defence, Brussels/Strasbourg “If current trends in the decline of European defence capabilities are not halted and reversed, future US political leaders – those for whom the cold war was not the formative experience that it was for me – may not consider the return on America’s investment in NATO worth the cost,” warned Robert Gates, a former U.S. defence secretary and CIA chief. According to Gates, Europe’s failures of political will and the widening gaps in defence funding might encourage American leaders to abandon NATO and stop guaranteeing the security of Europe. He criticises Europe for its complacency over international security and predicts a NATO consigned to “military irrelevance” in a “dim if not dismal” future unless U.S. allies changed their attitude. Many top-level officials in the EU administration agree with the former U.S. Secretary of Defence. Moreover, they are of the opinion that changes should be made not only with respect to EU-NATO cooperation, but also with a view to strengthening
Krzysztof Lisek Since 1988 Krzysztof Lisek has been worked in the Polish underground organisations and then headed the Independent Student Association (1991 – 1993). In 1997 – 2004, he was a member of the National Council for European Integration under the auspices of the Prime Minister of Poland. In 2005 Mr. Lisek became a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the Polish Parliament (Sejm), and later chairman of this committee (2007 – 2009). In June 2009 he was elected as a Member of the European Parliament where he holds the position of Vice-chairman of the Subcommittee on Security and Defence. He also is a member of the Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee and a substitute member of the Committee on Development.
the CDSP. The European Union should search for synergies within the CDSP to optimize the use of its members’ budgets.
The SEDES’s upcoming report It is my intention that the aforementioned concerns be addressed in a report on the impact of the financial crisis on the defence sector in EU Member States. This report is being prepared within the framework of the Security and Defence Subcommittee in the European Parliament (SEDE). The financial crisis is a global phenomenon that has hit all market sectors, including defence. Especially among the EU Member States, there is a tendency to cut defence budgets. It is true that keeping expenditures at a high level during times of austerity is not an easy task. However, the security and defence area must not be neglected in such a turbulent period.
Optimizing expenditures As presented in the report, there are several ways to optimise our expenditure. First, better coordination on defence planning: the EU should conduct systematic security and defence reviews according to common criteria and a common timetable. This will allow Member States to consider the big picture before making key strategic decisions on defence capabilities. At the same time, the European Defence Agency (EDA) should examine how to improve European defence planning coordination in order to harmonize operational needs and improve implementation. A second way to optimise our expenditure is to promote the present-day necessity of pooling and sharing of capabilities. Identifying the most promising projects for pooling and sharing in the fields of strategic capabilities. Focusing on these areas will ensure that no significant dependencies are created and will therefore avoid limiting EU Member States’ sovereignty.
Defence and Security
Pooling and sharing can remedy currently observed capability gaps in areas such as air-to-air refuelling; maritime surveillance; UAVs; CBRN protection; countering IEDs; satellite communication; intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) sensors and platforms, and combat and information systems.
under the Research Framework Programme. In particular, cooperation in education and training for civil and military personnel (the military “Erasmus”, the European Security and Defence College), increasing the budget of the EDA, and a possible extension of the ATHENA mechanism should be treated with importance even in such difficult times.
Research and technological development Another important issue addressed in the report is supporting defence research and technological development. R&T has always been one of the factors that decide de facto how strong a country or its allies are. EU countries with combined defence budgets amounting to some 200 billion euro spend on average only 1 % of their budgets on research and technological development. Sadly, the potential of economies of scale from collaborative projects remains largely unused, with about 85 % of R&T expenditure still spent nationally. Since research is the first phase of any equipment programme, I hope the EDA can use its coordinating and planning ability to change this state of play, so that one day the EU can achieve greater homogeneity and interoperability in the equipment and capabilities of its national armed forces. Because dual-use technologies are increasingly popular, we cannot ignore the importance of growing synergies between European defence and civilian security research programmes. In this regard, we should focus on promoting the best projects and avoiding duplication as our first steps toward financial optimisation. A single European defence market with similar standards Building a European defence technological and industrial base is the next subject that I address in the report. The need to continue to consolidate the European defence technological and industrial base is obvious especially now, when no EU Member State can create a sustainable defence industry on a strictly national basis. Another issue of fundamental importance is the standardisation of defence equipment. Doing so is crucial for establishing a single European defence market, ensuring interoperability, facilitating cooperation on armaments programmes, pooling and sharing, etc. I am of the opinion that the EDA, the Commission, and the European standards organisations (CEN, CENELEC, ETSI), in close cooperation with industry and the NATO Standardisation Agency, should increase the pace of reducing divergence in defence and security industry standards and between civilian and military equipment. This will allow us to use our resources more broadly and effectively.
New possibilities to use EU funding With respect to the adoption of the new Multiannual Financial Framework, there should be new possibilities for Member States to use the EU budget for achieving the goals of the Common Security and Defence Policy in a more cost-efficient way. It is necessary to reinforce and extend security research
Other challenges and priorities We have to address unemployment as a possible consequence of restructuring through abandonment of some non-viable national industrial capacities. I am of the opinion that EU funding, such as the European Social Fund and European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, can be efficiently used to support the aforementioned adaptations. Under no circumstances can the security of supply be put at risk. Furthermore, a level playing field within the European defence equipment market and accounting for the interests of small and medium enterprises are absolute priorities. In the latter part of the report, I focus on establishing a European defence equipment market. Without a doubt, as much as we all are willing to increase the competitiveness of the European defence industry, we also need to guard the interests of taxpayers. Therefore, all EU countries must urgently improve the transparency of their defence markets. The instrument that aims to address these needs, the Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and sensitive security procurement, was to be transposed till 21 August 2011. I hope the report will encourage EU Member States to increase their activities in a field of the highest importance - the fight against corruption in defence procurement. Doing so can save us from inflated costs, acquiring unnecessary or sub-optimal equipment, obstructions to joint procurement and collaborative programmes, and hindrances to market opportunities.
Conclusion My intention in the report was to recognize the most important issues for the defence sector that had arisen because of the recession. I hope it will enable a look at the financial crisis from a new perspective - recognising it as an opportunity and not as a danger. Time will show how quickly and to what extent ideas presented in the report will be adopted. Following prominent European politicians and experts, as well as the former U.S. defence secretary and CIA chief, I respectfully ask the High Representative, the Council, the Commission, and the Parliaments of the EU Member States not to delay in standing together in the name of one of our basic needs - the need for security.
News: Vote on “Lisek-Report” The own-initiative draft report prepared by Mr Lisek MEP has been discussed in the European Parliament's Subcommittee on Security and Defence on 4 October. The Report is scheduled to be voted in the Foreign Affairs Committee on 14 November and in the European Parliament's Plenary Session in December.
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
The Treaty of Lisbon is a chance, but EU Security and Defence need more innovation
Multinationality – Enhancing Europe’s Military Capabilities by Georg Nachtsheim, Major General, Deputy Commander, Rapid Reaction Corps, Lille
Since December 2009 the EU Treaty of Lisbon represents the latest progress in the process of the development of a European Security and Defence cooperation, However, what was started so promisingly encountered a stunning disenchantment of the political establishments and broader publics all over Europe, triggered most notably by the world financial crisis. This is all the more surprising at a moment, in which not less but more European and international solutions and cooperation seem to be the only realistic way out of the imminent danger of a marginalization of the traditional pillars of national power, particularly of the military in Europe.
EU’s security and defence needs more innovation The soaring costs of modern defence procurement programmes, the high operational tempo and associated costs of civilmilitary crisis management, the urgent requirement to invest in additional and new capabilities needed to counter new threats and challenges, result in the imminent need to take innovative decisions. Also, the more and more disproportioned tooth-to-tail ratio of most of the Armed Forces should further encourage decision makers, to come up with new concepts and solutions. This is even the more true, as the budget consolidation and austerity programmes of most of the European governments are also concerning the sector of security and defence. In doing so, Europe is certainly well advised to draw on the broad, long standing and mostly positive experience of NATO, such as its integrated military command structure, common
Georg Nachtsheim Georg Nachtsheim, Major General, at present Deputy Commander Rapid Reaction Corps France in Lille. He has held all command responsabilities up to the level of the Franco-German Brigade, multinational and national staff assignments such as at MOD Germany, SHAPE (Mons), and as Chief of Staff Eurocorps. He has been deployed several times on the Balkans, to include as Chief of Staff MNDSE (Mostar) and HQ-SFOR (Sarajevo). He is a graduate from the Bundeswehr University, Hamburg, the German and French General Staff College as well as from the Royal College Defense Studies in London.
funded capabilities or the well proven expertise of its agencies. However, the continued shortcomings of its members, such as the lack of commonality of equipment, of standardization and or at least of real true interoperability are to be recognized as well.
To end with disparate national solutions But even the European members in NATO do not seem to be challenged sufficiently by their publics, technological and industrial basis, yet. Instead of producing meaningful capabilities, commensurate with Europe’s political ambitions, economical weight and cumulated defence budgets, complacency seems to be frequent when looking at administrative overheads, disparate organization of defence research, technology, and industry. And, often even worse, when confronted with the results of an increasingly inadequate organization of the expression of military operational requirements and resulting logistics and procurement, then one would have to expect a widespread outcry and call for an all encompassing need to act.
Lisbon – a chance for Europe’s security Now, the Lisbon Treaty offers a wide variety of formulas, providing EU members with different possible frameworks for audacious and effective arrangements to frame cooperation, promote synergies, increase efficiency and savings, whilst enhancing the European Union members’ crisis management and reaction capabilities. The possibility, offered by the Lisbon Treaty, to also allow for “coalitions of the willing”, “reinforced cooperation” and “structured permanent cooperation” follow the idea of “variable geometry”. Hence progress in the a.m. sense is possible, even in case that only a part of the EU members wishes or is able to do so.
A flood of proposals and different models The European Parliament has repeatedly expressed its political will to see more cooperation, commonality and integrated capabilities on the way to true Common Defence of Europe. Also, several national governments have recently presented either individually or multilaterally several proposals. May be the most important ones were forwarded by the Weimar Triangle Nations to the EU High Representative, Catherine Ashton and could re-launch the process as well as allow for a fresh momentum for a Common Security and Defence Policy.
Defence and Security
capabilities or the resources needed for the common functioning of the command as such.
Role specialisation and role sharing
NATO has opted early on, for its collective key enablers, for the integrated model. It is certainly the most effective model in terms of manning and common funding, applying a commonly agreed sharing formula. It provides for the best possible transparency and, in principle, also allows access by all members. Probably the most critical aspect of integrated structures and capabilities lies in the possibility that one or several nations can hamper incremental funding requirements or participation, e.g. as it occurred recently, related to operations of the NATO, even though the more general political decisions authorizing NATO’s engagement had all been passed without indicating any of the difficulties.
Role specialisation and role sharing would imply that not all nations would dispose anymore of full spectrum capable armed forces but would rather share high value assets between two or several nations on a commonly resourced basis. On a permanent basis, such solutions could be imagined regarding the use of satellites, military laboratories and training, and research & development (such as the Franco-German technological research institute St. Louis), or in the domain of procurement by a more systematic use of NAMSA, European Defence Agency (EDA) or OCCAR. In a more ambitious area, pooling or sharing arrangements regarding still Photo: wikimedia.org existing capabilities such as strategic sealift, amphibious landing and support vessels, or maritime surveillance could allow to maintain or even develop capabilities which otherwise would exceed nations´ increasingly overstretched individual capabilities. Notably, land forces units were initially not deemed of being appropriate for multinational or common structures below the brigade level. Indeed, particularly the continued lack of common or fully standardized and interoperable equipment represents a serious limitation, at a moment where they became increasingly a constituent characteristic of the NATO and EU led operations. Hence, all those who have closely observed permanent structures, such as the Franco-German Brigade or ad hoc structures such as the EU BGs know that a significant effort in terms of more commonality is inevitable.
Pooling – opportunities and disadvantages
Commonality efforts – non flyers for the moment
Another form of cooperation in a key domain could be pooling. The recent establishment of the European Air Transport Command (EATC) by four EU members is a good example, of how the nations contributing strategic and tactical air lift as well as air to-air refuelling can enjoy assets, logistics, training and other synergies, on an assured basis, even in case their operational requirements exceed their respective contribution. Pooling offers both opportunities but also disadvantages, if different and non standardized assets are being made available for one common structure. More serious limitations could arise though, if a main contributor would not only withdraw in a given operation its personnel, but also its
Commonality of equipment, tactics and procedures clearly are key. Intergovernmental efforts have proven to be ineffective to achieve these, even NATO was not too successful over its long history of respective efforts. A permanent EU C2 structure from the political level down to the tactical level, including related specialized agencies, in conjunction with a limited transfer of authority, responsibilities and funds to the EU might in the end be the only viable solution to overcome the a.m. difficulties and to fully exploit the potential of the Lisbon Treaty. Last but not least, the day will come that serious attention will have to be paid to a common statutory framework for the national soldiers to be deployed under the auspices of the EU
Citadelle de Lille – Headquarter Rapid Reaction Corps (RRC)
The integrated model is effective
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
Before thinking of a European Army we should speak abo or in permanent multinational structures. To this end, the Gert Pöttering´s opt-in model of the Synchronized Armed Forces for Europe, might merit the proper attention (see page 33).
The European Soldier – qu by Hartmut Bühl, Brussels
The Athena EU funding mechanism- a model to improve The critical and expensive key capabilities, will be provided by a limited number of members only. This will continue to require funding arrangements which allow common funding of the incremental costs, if deployed for an operation led by the EU, NATO or the UN. Otherwise, the nations concerned will not offer mission essential enablers, or the EU would have to outsource them to civil or Private Military Companies, similar to what the UN sometimes has to do. Therefore, the EU funding mechanism, the so-called Athena mechanism has to be further developed, to substitute the long standing principle of “the costs lie where they fall”.
EU Common Security and Defence needs solidarity Finally, the most important requirement might be the readiness of EU members, or of at least some of them, to go ahead. Going ahead will require almost as a prerequisite the transfer of sovereign rights, in exchange for a more transparent and effective use of resources, for more streamlined national military and related administration. This is even more true for new and additional capabilities, which otherwise would not be affordable, as well as for a competitive European defence and technological basis, which nationally might no longer be viable. At a minimum, solidarity continuous to be key and national solo efforts must be part of the past, if Europe´s common security and defence is the agreed destiny and to enjoy relevance and credibility.
News: EU Battlegroup with Czechs In September, the Czech Republic announced that it will provide 350 soldiers for the EU’s battlegroup next year. The battlegroup will comprise a total of 2800 troops from six European countries (Czechs, Germans, Austrians, Croats, Macedonians and the Irish). The battlegroup is to be completed in the second half of 2012. The Czech military plans to send a mechanised company plus the necessary logistic equipment to the battlegroup, which will be ready to intervene in a selected area if needed. For now it is not expected to be deployed in areas such as Libya tormented by a civil war. In the past, the Czech Republic formed a similar battlegroup only together with Slovaks. EU battlegroups may perform a wide range of activities from humanitarian aid and a forcible separation of parties to a conflict up to reconstruction tasks. A battlegroup should be capable of rapid deployment in ten days in 6.000 km Radius of Brussels. The Czechs can also offer their military chemical warfare experts as a special support. For years Czech Army has been playing a key role with this capability in NATO.
Since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009, a frequent view heard among political circles in Brussels is that Article 42 of the treaty implies the creation of a European army. What the treaty actually says in fact, in very cautious terms, is that the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) may progressively lead to the framing of a common defence, should the European Council, acting unanimously, so decide. Were that to happen, the member states would have to give up essential national prerogatives with regard to their defence policy and armed forces.
An integrated European army – no more than a vision This would mean that the European Parliament, in addition to the extended powers that it enjoys under the Lisbon Treaty for the budgetary scrutiny of the Brussels institutions, including the European External Action Service (EEAS), would also be responsible for exercising scrutiny over the area of defence. No EU member state is currently willing to see that happen, and even if there were to be a breakthrough that seemed to point in that direction, the United Kingdom would surely block any unanimous decision by the Council. As I see it, the only way the question of an integrated European army could possibly arise at the moment would be if the EU underwent such a major culture shock – for instance an even worse financial crisis bringing with it the threat of a break-up of the Union – that the idea of a federation was seriously mooted. But even then I still find an integrated European army hard to imagine, because even in a federated structure it would take more than a few years to change political goals and social perceptions. The issue of a country’s control over its own armed forces that are tied up in an European army is in my view a decisive and practically insoluble problem, whatever form the European Union takes, not to mention the issue of control over nuclear arsenals.
Europe’s nations are not yet prepared to give up sovereignty in the area of defence There are three weighty arguments to support this view. The first has to do with the internal political role of the military in society, in other words the national armed forces culture. The second concerns the external political role of military power: armed forces as a means of asserting the national interest. The third concerns interests that are bound up with military might, ranging from territorial and economic self-interest to cultural aspects. These are illustrated by the examples of the three big EU member states – France, the United Kingdom and Germany: France’s politics and society are geared to the nation, which
Defence and Security
ut the social situation of men and women doing actually their duty
o vadis ? will always take precedence over the community of states, unless France were to dominate that community, which in turn would serve its national interest. The use of military power is an integral part of its range of political instruments in a context of limited military capabilities. Its independent nuclear capabilities may act as a deterrent, but above all as a guarantee of its status as a world power. The United Kingdom sees military power as a natural means for maintaining its power status and independence. It remains astonishingly constant in its ties to the United States on which – unlike France – it depends for its nuclear capability, which nonetheless secures its position as a world power. Germany has not had the same continuity in its relationship with military power and the armed forces. Moreover, its relations with the military have a strongly pacifist character: military force may only be used as a last resort. From no other capital than Berlin do we so frequently hear that conflicts must be
settled by diplomatic means. Germany’s armed forces serve above all its obligation of solidarity with its Alliance partners. The non-acquisition of nuclear weapons is entrenched in Germany’s Constitution. The differences could hardly be greater. They are reflected in the degree of control that the national parliaments have over the national armed forces: whereas Germany’s is a “parliamentary army” and political decisions on the armed forces are subjected to practically direct parliamentary scrutiny, in France the Prime Minister simply informs both houses of Parliament about external operations: although for some time now there has also been the possibility of debates in order to increase transparency, the people’s elected representatives do not have any direct influence over the decisions of the executive. In Britain the Government is not even obliged to inform Parliament about the deployment of troops. >> see page 30
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
<< continued from page 29
Own experience In the period after the collapse of the Warsaw Pact when for various reasons new forms of military cooperation were being sought, the very armed forces that were now supposed to operate multinationally had still only recently been guided by the principle that a soldier’s job was to obey and the commander’s job to ensure his orders were followed. The soldier must not be subjected to any external influence that might undermine his training as a fighter. And it was a duty to remain silent. The Eurocorps This view of the matter had long since changed at the time of the creation of the Eurocorps, which it was my job as head of the German Delegation to negotiate and jointly organise with my French counterparts. But in many areas of our day-to-day cooperation we still discovered considerable differences among our armed forces in terms of their social
integration and their status under penal and military law. This remains the case today, but we were nonetheless able to work out forms of cooperation that enabled us to build an efficient headquarter. Lowest common denominator It was always important for me during that process not to align on the lowest common denominator. On the contrary, I was intent on safeguarding all the acquired rights of the German contingent in terms of union membership, pastoral care etc. My intentions made my French counterpart uncomfortable, because they contradicted the French understanding of soldiers’ welfare as the responsibility of the French military hierarchy. Words like Ombudsman, Parliamentary Commissioner for the Armed Forces, Armed Forces Association, Innere Führung (leadership development and civic education), regulated
A vision cannot replace realpolitik The vision of a European army may be useful for encouraging efforts and progress in that direction. But it would be misguided to start talking as of now about structures, forms of organisation and equipment. The political concept of a “European army” must be kept open. In reality Europe has barely started creating the necessary common foundations. These must be defined and guaranteed by treaty, for the benefit of the people serving in this new construct who are to come together to form these common standing forces. Above all, this means defining the social and legal status of the servicemen and women concerned; all nations must align on the highest possible level.
To put an end to defamation Indeed, in this area there is still a considerable gap not only between north and south, but also east and west, for many reasons that we will not go into here, but which, if no unified EU provisions apply, can only be overcome by means of a lengthy process of learning and adaptation. Since the EU cannot impose its will on nations in matters of defence, progress will be laborious. I am convinced that unless the social and
working hours or Character Guidance Training were like a red flag to them. After intensive and lengthy discussions we were able to agree on workable solutions for the headquarters and logistics units in all contested areas, and were hence able to establish our headquarters. The subsequent visits by a Protestant military deacon, the Chairman of the German Armed Forces Association and the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Armed Forces were also highlights for the French soldiers. The concession I had to make, since the French had no margin for manoeuvre when it came to separation of the church and state, was to agree to the monthly Character Guidance Training to be held during off-duty hours outside the barracks. The concessions I made essentially concerned the organisation of duty time. When two years later the first Secretary General of EU-
ROMIL paid a visit to the Eurocorps, there wasn’t any longer a discussion on those issues. Spirit of unity In a spirit of unity in spite of our differences, we were rapidly able to agree on hundreds of regulations with a view to establishing our operational readiness. Some of them had to be reversed when other participating states joined the Eurocorps. We had agreed, for example, to standardise our vehicle classes for logistics purposes (lightweight trucks were produced by Germany, medium and heavyweight vehicles by France, and everybody could drive them all). But this solution became untenable with the arrival of our Spanish colleagues, for whom it was unacceptable for the contingent not to use any Spanish vehicles. Today multinational cooperation is a reality in the Eurocorps and this force has proven its worth in a number of international operations.
legal basis is harmonised on the basis of the highest common denominator, it will not be possible to work in a forward-looking way towards the creation of common European armed forces. EUROMIL (European Organisation of Military Associations), which is convinced that common social and legal conditions for the people serving in the armed forces are a prerequisite in order to weld troops together and shape them under a common leadership, has done some very valuable work in this area. It is worth recalling that legal proceedings are currently under way against an Italian NCO because he had intended to create an association, which is prohibited under Italian law. If there is no freedom of association in a respectable longstanding democracy like Italy, what will it be like in other countries? Indeed, the further south one goes in Europe, the more this basic right is lacking. Could it be that military culture is still too firmly entrenched for modernisation or that this issue has simply been overlooked during the armed forces democratisation process? The only association which is monitoring such incidents (in the OSCE framework) is EUROMIL, with its 39 members, and I was told that their efforts in this area have so far not met with the success attended. International
Defence and Security
“The role of the soldier has changed. National armed forces are increasingly called upon to accomplish operations other than war, such as peacekeeping and nation-building. That implies that the soldier is no longer merely a “fighter” in the traditional sense, but rather a mediator and conveyer of certain, often, humanitarian, notions.”
conferences like the one held in Rome next year should help to create better understanding. The European Parliament is also preparing a parliamentary hearing on the issue.
Multinationality is an auspicious solution In this process of development, ongoing participation in multinational military headquarters and forces in peacetime is certainly as valuable as participation in actual operations. Multinationality can take a range of forms, such as the lead nation principle (for which there are no particular legal requirements, as the nation concerned leads on the basis of its national standards) or the framework nation principle (where one nation leads a multinational headquarters) and the integration principle (whereby all participants cooperate on an equal footing). The latter is a real case of multinationality on the ground. Such integrated forms of multinational cooperation enable the participants to learn from each other and to evolve, either by adapting their national rules or even amending them. This most progressive form of multinationality was first developed for the Eurocorps (1992) and its underlying Protocol and rules have served as a model for all subsequent major military formations.
Common forces Multinationality must take account of the specificities of the different partners: their customs and traditions and, also, their military culture. If correctly implemented it will lead them forward, towards forces that can be permanently linked together. Whatever form European forces may one day take, one thing is clear as of now: the European Union has a Sisyphus task ahead of it. At the moment the only body making an effort to create unified European rules and principles so that the servicemen and women of the different countries can live and work together under the same social conditions is EUROMIL.
The role of soldiers has changed Forces are increasingly engaged principally in operational tasks other than combat operations and must adapt accordingly. Soldiers these days are mediators, protectors, helpers and advisers and are engaged in operations to defend human rights. For future international operations this means that they must, as far as possible:
• have the same level of motivation and training; • enjoy, as far as possible, the same legal protection; • have the best possible medical care; • receive psychological support before and after engagement in operations. I would like to emphasise one point in particular: for me it is ethically and morally unacceptable that the men and women from the different nations engaged in common operations should not all have the same level of personal protection. The European Union should make it its business to ensure that its deployable forces, such as the battlegroups, are equipped systematically with the best personal protection equipment adap-
EUROMIL The Voice of European Soldiers The European Organisation of Military Associations (EUROMIL) is an umbrella organisation consisting of 39 national military associations and trade unions in 25 countries. Founded in 1972, EUROMIL promotes the social and professional interests of military personnel of all ranks in Europe, from the Russian Federation to Ireland, and from Finland to Cyprus. EUROMIL is a truly European organisation. EUROMIL is the main Europe-wide forum for co-operation among professional military associations on issues of common concern. Through the international secretariat in Brussels, EUROMIL facilitates the exchange of information, experiences and best practice among member associations. The organisation, moreover, strives to secure and advance the human rights, fundamental freedoms and socio-professional interests of soldiers by monitoring and advocating them at the European level. • EUROMIL is committed to the principle “Citizen in Uniform” and demands equal rights and treatment of soldiers. • EUROMIL advocates particularly the right of servicemen and -women to form and join trade unions and independent staff associations and that these are included in a regular social dialogue by the authorities. • EUROMIL promotes the inclusion of military personnel into EU social and labour legislation. Funded exclusively by membership fees, EUROMIL keeps to strict nondenominational and politically independent policies. Contact: www.euromil.org
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
ted to the operation that Europe has to offer. This is something that the EU could offer the troop-contributing nations as well as providing the funding for it. I would extend the issue of personal protection to include civilian staff, who for the majority work closely with the military forces during an operation and are in most cases not equipped with protection adapted to the risks they face. The comprehensive approach advocated by the Lisbon Treaty, which foresees close interaction between military and civilian crisis-management forces, should provide the basis for the deliberations on that issue. There is a need for action by the European Parliament.
Conclusion The Lisbon Treaty 2009 contains decisive provisions on developing the security and defence capabilities that will allow the Union to become an autonomous player in the field of security and defence and a reliable partner for NATO. The treaty foresees a comprehensive approach to civil security and military defence. As a consequence, civil and military crisis-management forces must work together and adopt a forward-looking approach based on a common understanding of future requirements. This means we must reflect as of now
on stronger integration. All actions and every form of engagement must be based on a common understanding, common planning and common training, as well as a common high standard of equipment. This is the task for European crisis management and for the nations. A European army is not on the agenda for the moment, but it provides us with a vision. Without harmonisation of military law among the EU member states, however, common forces will not be possible. Multinational cooperation can promote such a rapprochement and mutual adaptation. However, there does not seem to be an institutional body in Europe that could help smooth the path towards common forces. Could it be an institute working in cooperation with the European Parliament, which is beyond suspicion because it does not have powers of control over the national armed forces? In that case EUROMIL as the initiator of the idea could be involved as an independent advisory body.
*Jacob, Emmanuel, President EUROMIL in “Security has a social dimension” in The European – Security and Defence Union, 3/2010 , Brussels, page 51ff
Defence and Security
SAFE – an interim solution At the 7th Congress on European Security and Defence – the Berlin Security Conference – and at this time President of the European Parliament, Dr Hans-Gert Pöttering, reflected about the long-term objective of a European army. He said it could one day replace the currently independent national forces and be deployed for common operations. “If we wish to achieve that objective”, he added, “we need to establish a transition between the current situation and the long-term aim of a European army”. The transitional solution he proposes is SAFE, or Synchronized Armed Forces Europe as a voluntary project and leaves the EU member states sufficient margin for manoeuvre, enabling even neutral or sceptical states to participate in SAFE on a one-off basis. SAFE could
start as of now. The latest UN, EU and also NATO operations should be analysed and the lessons learnt transposed into practical action. Mr Pöttering called for common preparation and training at European level in the run-up to joint operations. He called for the establishment of European rules on the model of those already applied to the EU-Battlegroups and the Eurocorps. Operations themselves should be conducted according to common procedures, to ensure equality among the soldiers in terms of level of qualifications, doctrine and freedom of action. “There must be common rights and obligations, rules of engagement and social standards, as well as the same quality of equipment and medical care and the same social protection for soldiers and their depen-
Dr. Hans Pöttering MEP at the Berlin Conference 2009 Photo: Behörden Spiegel-Group
dents in the case of death, injury or disability”, he underpinned. Pöttering also called for career opportunities in the national armed forces to be open to the nationals of all EU member states. He held up Belgium’s armed forces, which are already open to the nationals of all 27 EU member states, as an example.s.
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
The comprehensive approach is the basis of the Alliance’s overarching strategic framework
Achieving long-term stability in Afghanistan – the role of the “Comprehensive Approach” by Dr. Davor Božinović, Defence Minister, Zagreb
Achieving long-term stability of Afghanistan has become one of the most important security challenges facing the TransAtlantic alliance. The International Security Assistance Force mission (ISAF) has become NATO’s top priority and perhaps its most demanding long-term international commitment since its inception. The Alliance is now heavily involved and is making a noticeable difference in Afghanistan. Our aim is to help the Afghan people develop a secure environment so that their country will never again provide a safe haven that enables terrorist and other extremists groups to threaten us. How NATO fares will not only shape global efforts to fight terrorism and security across the region, but will also greatly impact on the alliance’s own credibility, cohesion and future institutional evolution. NATO initially assumed command in 2003 and eventually expanded the ISAF mission to include all of Afghanistan in October 2006. At its 2006 Riga Summit, Allies announced that experiences in Kosovo and Afghanistan led them to conclude that today’s complex operations required a “comprehensive approach.” Frequently referred to within United Nations (UN) and European Union (EU) circles as well, it represented a natural response to today’s practical coordination challenges and capability gaps that are proving pivotal to mission success.
Dynamics of a Comprehensive Approach ISAF’s success will greatly depend on the interaction of a wide range of national and multinational military and civil actors, regional partners and international organizations. A comprehensive approach is widely perceived as an effort that combines or integrates civil and military levers in crisis management and stability operations. It implies a synchronized use of political, military, economic and diplomatic power, which translates into simultaneously tackling a contiguous set of tasks: from counterinsurgency and armed conflict to development assistance, reconstruction, good governance and humanitarian relief. In a wider sense, it also involves partneringup with the EU, UN and other organizations and countries outside the Alliance. Non-allies and partners contribute almost 40,000 troops to ISAF. The conventional wisdom of a comprehensive approach (albeit in its conceptually ideal form) has yet to be genuinely contested. But when applied on the ground in operations, it runs into
Dr. Davor Boz̆inović Davor Boz̆inović, Ph. D., has been Minister of Defence of the Republic of Croatia since December 2010. He was born in 1961 in Pula. He holds a PhD degree in Political Science of the University of Zagreb and graduated from the “Leaders for the 21st Century” Course at George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies in Garmisch-Partenkirchen. In his professional career he held various positions in the Croatian Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, before becoming in 2004 Chief of Staff of the Office of the President of the Republic of Croatia and in October 2005 Ambassador of the Republic of Croatia to the NATO. Before taking up his current position he was appointed Secretary for Political Affairs in Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration and Special Envoy of the Prime Minister for Southeast Europe.
a series of practical challenges. While ISAF is able to integrate much of its military efforts, many of the other civilian actors, agencies and organizations function independently. Even the leading NATO contributors among the 48 nations providing troops have separate civilian and military chains of command. Despite a number of donor nations providing aid and over 800 multinational and private actors operating in the theater, their often competing agendas provide additional obstacles to coordination at all levels. On its own, a comprehensive approach does not look likely to become a simple remedy for stabilizing Afghanistan or any other operation for that matter.
The basis for a strategic framework A comprehensive approach can, nevertheless, prove more worthwhile when used as a basis for an overarching strategic framework. The Alliance has done just that. Its strategy to stabilize Afghanistan is based on two fundamental pillars: the transition to Afghan security responsibility and the establishment of a long-term partnership arrangement with Afghanistan. There is broad agreement on the direction NATO has decided to take. As a result, a comprehensive approach could auspiciously push the Alliance forward. Progress has been recognized by NATO, EU and UN officials, and I think we are closer than ever to reaching an irreversible point towards Afghanistan’s long-term stabilization. But it will not be easy, nor will the outcome be guaranteed.
Defence and Security
Progressive Transition The first pillar is already well underway. It is aimed at transferring security responsibility to the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) across many districts and provinces. This transition strategy is progressive, condition-based and intended to put the Afghan government and the ANSF in a leading role. It will require measured progress and careful coordination with the Afghan government. The ANSF will have to demonstrate an increasing ability to take on additional security tasks with gradually limited assistance from international forces. By the end of 2014, ANSF should assume a lead role throughout the country. But while NATO forces increasingly move into a supporting role, it will be important to send a clear signal that NATO will not abandon Afghanistan. The growth of Afghan security capabilities will be mirrored by a deliberate shift of ISAF efforts more towards building up the ANSF. In fact, almost half of Croatia’s deployed contingent of almost 350 is already aimed at training and mentoring Afghan security forces. Most recently, Croatia took on a lead role with partner countries from Southeast Europe in establishing a military police school in Kabul. And as ANSF’s ranks grow in numbers and quality, it will also allow for a residual withdrawal of NATO troops. A move that is also sure to encourage public support at home. By current estimates, the ANSF are well on schedule to reach an agreed target of 352,000 by November 2012. NATO planners will not stop there. An indepth assessment will try to determine the resources required to sustain the ANSF in the long run. Once Soviet troops left Afghanistan in 1989 and ceased their support a few years later, the then well-established Afghan forces simply fell apart and civil war erupted.
Enduring Partnership The other fundamental pillar involves the establishment of a long-term partnership arrangement between NATO and the Afghan government. This relationship will be sin qua non in providing continued assistance to ANSF’s further development and sustainment. No one is under the illusion that the Afghans will be able to ensure post-transition security without international support. It is likely that NATO will continue to provide training as well as some key capabilities like rapid reaction, command and control, counter-terrorism and tactical air support. It is also now clear that this arrangement will have to include civilian-backed efforts to build-up an Afghan economy that is eventually able to support its own institutions. Furthermore, if unaccompanied and not reinforced by good governance and social development efforts, self-sustained stability will be unlikely. NATO will also be unable to ignore the wider regional context of Afghanistan’s stabilization. In the first place, this implies dealing with the challenge of managing the border with Paki-
stan. Relations between the two countries have varied and future prospects are uncertain. On the other hand, Afghanistan’s other neighbors and key countries in the region could also play an important role in contributing to stabilization. All could be brought in on the premise that a stable Afghanistan could serve their best interests as well.
A “Comprehensive” Way Ahead A comprehensive approach, in one form or another, will be the modus operandi of choice in supporting both pillars. Provided our strategic goals can garner support at home and among the Afghan people, a comprehensive approach can simultaneously facilitate building-up the Afghan security forces, advance good governance and promote economic development. The challenge will be to manage a process where international military forces are gradually being decreased while civilian capabilities begin to dominate the agenda. And if we get it right early enough, at some point in the near future our stabilization efforts will likely become irreversible. But it will not be easy, as many challenges still remain. Long-term funding could well be one of the most critical factors in stabilizing Afghanistan. While the Afghan National Army has improved in terms of quality and professionalization, the Afghan police have made slower progress and still face some daunting challenges. Four to six billion USD will be needed annually over the next five to seven years to develop and sustain the ANSF alone. There is little discussion of where these and other reconstruction funds will come from. The international community and the Afghan government will have to work more closely to coordinate their efforts. While NATO and ISAF troop-contributing nations will continue to provide the military muscle needed to facilitate a successful transition of security responsibility to the Afghans, new partnerships will be sought to sustain the transition and support the growing non-military tasks required. There will be an increased need for civilian capabilities focused on post-conflict development and reconstruction. With already high expectations, the upcoming December Bonn Conference can help by broadening the political agenda.
News: EU positive on Croatia The Progress Report on Croatia is part of the 2011 Enlargement package adopted by the European Commission on 12 October. The package also comprises a favourable opinion on Croatia's accession to the European Union. The Commission concluded that the country has made good overall progress, in particular in the fields of judiciary and fundamental rights, competition as well as justice, freedom and security. Additional efforts are needed in certain areas such as to finalise the restructuring process for the shipyards and to strengthen further the administrative capacity necessary for the proper implementation of the EU legislation, and standards, as well as the absorption of EU funds.
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
Protection Protection for crisis management forces means to optimize the chance to survive through minimizing the impact on the capabilities to fulfil missions Michael Keinert ....................... 36 Peter Liebetrau ........................ 39 Hervé Guillou ........................... 40
Robert Kauth ........................... 44 Ralf Griesbaum ....................... 46
The Lisbon Treaty with its solidarity clause is a chance for the European Union to act
Protection technologies for saving lives Interview with Michael Keinert, Managing Director, BLÜCHER Group, Erkrath The European: Mister Keinert, you are Managing Director of BLÜCHER, a medium-sized group with its head office in the Düsseldorf area. As a producer of protection and crisis-response systems, you must be paying close attention to all the developments in Brussels. Mr Keinert: I have long been an advocate of European crisis management and the development of the European Union’s crisis-prevention, and crisis-response activities are a source of satisfaction and great hope for me. Unfortunately, up to the Lisbon Treaty in 2009, very little was done in this area, in spite of the publication in 2006 of the “ Barnier report”, an excellent document that set out everything needed for a modern crisis-management system. The European: The report led a shadowy existence until 2010, when Commissioners Georgieva and Malmström transposed its content into communications? Mr Keinert: Yes, because now we have the Lisbon Treaty with its solidarity clause, a chance for the European Union to act.
Michael Keinert is Managing Director of the BLÜCHER Group, Erkrath, since 2007. He was born in 1956 in Berlin and studied business economics at the University of Saarbrücken. He became a certified accountant and started his professional career at the accountancy firm Arthur Andersen, in Stuttgart. Thereafter, he became the Financial Director of the Pharmaceutical Group Merz & Co. in Frankfurt/ Main. He also was the Managing Director of two subsidiaries of the Telecom AG before working for Droege & Comp/ DIC Capital in Düsseldorf. Before becoming the Managing Director of the Blücher Group he was acting partner of the consultancy firm ConLead located in Köln.
The European: What makes you so confident? After all, there are 27 nations to consider whose planning and actions until now were conducted almost exclusively at national level. Mr Keinert: Hence the Lisbon Treaty: now the different nations must adapt and make available capabilities that can be called upon by the EU: it is time for them to put together their solidarity packages. The European: Do you think that there is a risk that national requirements might take second place to EU-requirements? Mr Keinert: That would be fatal: solidarity cannot be taken so far that it would mean neglecting national requirements. As I see it, solidarity would apply above all in the event of major disasters in Europe or elsewhere that go beyond national borders or exceed the capabilities of individual states. I am thinking of catastrophes like Fukushima or the devastating bush and forest fires in Russia and Australia. For disasters within a state it is first and foremost the national capabilities that must come into play, and these need to be able to cover the full spectrum of crisis prevention and management. The European: What does this mean for your business strategy? You are already active all over the world, supplying armed forces – including those of the US – and civil protection personnel with state-of-the-art personal protection equipment. Mr Keinert: With our SARATOGA technology we are market leaders for CBRN protection. More than 10 million of our protection suits and systems are currently being fielded in some 40 countries. The European: Then you are also ready for Europe. Mr Keinert: BLÜCHER is a market leader for the integration of personal protection systems. It is the only systems supplier that develops – and in the majority of cases also manufactures – all the major components itself.
The European: What is your sales strategy? Mr Keinert: As a medium-sized company, we have to work together with potential users to develop tailor-made technological solutions and to make them available to the respective administrations at life-cycle cost. This means that practically every order is different and must be treated accordingly. The European: Where do you start? The equipment requirements of military and civilian personnel are so divergent. Mr Keinert: Yes and no. The basic approach is common – the equipment must be mission-oriented – and it must be possible for users to assemble the systems we supply in an optimum fashion, without any reduction of protection performance. Therefore there absolutely are areas of overlap. The European: And how do you achieve that? Mr Keinert: Our starting point is always a modular and highly integrable system. The way we see it, it is necessary above all to optimise the performance of the system as a whole, and not only that of its individual components. We are guided in our approach by the human factor: in other words, we look at the particular operational requirements in a given situation and consider those factors that could impinge upon the performance of the rescue worker or soldier. The European: Which factors? Could you give an example? Mr Keinert: An example is over-heating or fluid loss. We analyse the different climatic and other factors that may prevail during an operation, and we address each factor – heat, cold, damp, fire or possible contact with pathogenic substances – always considering the worst-case scenario. The European: So if we understand correctly, yours is a functional approach. Could you give us a practical example of that functionality from your own experience? Mr Keinert: Take the example of protection against chemical, biological, radiological and explosive weapons, or CBRNE. For that purpose we develop functional clothing systems that are suitable for operations in areas ranging from the Arctic to desert areas or the tropics, and which can be equipped as necessary with integrated cooling or drinking water systems.
The objective is to minimise the impact on the wearer’s mobility and sustainability. The European: So the result is modular equipment that can be configured to match the mission? Mr Keinert: Yes, the result is integrated equipment systems to match the user’s requirements, with inbuilt ballistic protection and/or protection against CBRN weapons, camouflage and protection against damp, flames, overheating and cold. All that while endeavouring to obtain the best possible balance between protection performance, wearer physiology, ergonomics, weight and suitability for the mission. The European: Compatible components among themselves? Mr Keinert: All major components are developed by us and are therefore to a large extent compatible, while many of the most important components are also manufactured by companies from the group. The European: That entails a considerable investment in research and development and the use of cutting-edge production processes. How does BLÜCHER manage that? Mr Keinert: Clearly this is due on the one hand to our success, which as well as being a driving factor also demands ongoing product development. We work for that purpose together with international partners from industry and the research world in those high-tech areas in which BLÜCHER has the technological leadership. The European: You are referring to your undisputed expertise in the area of high-performance adsorbers and sorptive composite materials? Mr Keinert: Precisely. Our expertise as regards the filtration of highly toxic substances from gases and liquids provides the essential technological base for our group, decisive for our economic success. Consolidating and straigthening that base is both an obligation and a driving element. The European: Would it be possible for our readers to know what your current development plans are, or is that a secret? Mr Keinert: Of course the development work is closely con-
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
nected with our core competences in the areas of “protection”, “water” and “air”. We have already talked about protection; in addition there are projects in the areas of water processing and air purification and also, but to a lesser extent, in the field of specific medical applications.
Mr Keinert: One avenue is the enrichment and later the extraction of valuable materials in highly concentrated form. I’m not only talking about gold or platinum, but also about specific rare earths. Another is the efficient binding of radioactive particles and above all their safe interim storage.
The European: May we suggest taking those areas in turn and looking at the R&D for each? Mr Keinert: OK, let’s begin with water. With our spherical adsorbers we are successful even in cases in which activated carbon or ion exchange filters no longer work. For example, for the production of ultra-pure water we can effectively eliminate organic trace elements that traditional methods cannot eliminate at all, or only at great expense.
The European: Does all that also apply to air? Mr Keinert: Yes and no. The particular characteristics of our adsorbers also come into play here, but the mode of action in the liquid and gaseous phases is generally very different. This means that to achieve a performance that we can get for liquids using method A, we have to develop a method B for the gaseous phase.
The European: How could one describe your high-performance adsorbers, without getting too technical? Mr Keinert: Well that’s quite a challenge; I hope I am up to it! They are characterised by very high mechanical stability, making them very suitable for use in dynamic processes under high pressure loads. That same stability also gives them good resistance to abrasion, enabling dust contamination to be avoided in highly sensitive processes. We can give them a capacity that lies close to the theoretical maximum, which means filters with a longer service life, or else smaller and therefore lighter filters. We can install a high degree of selectivity, enabling us to target and bind specific contaminants, while other substances that we don’t want to adsorb remain in the medium. There are other important features, such as an adaptable pore structure, which taken on their own or in combination with other characteristics enable us to “design” an optimum performance for a specific application. Finally: the raw materials and our production processes are such that we can reproduce such a “designed” adsorber with 100% success, even on an industrial scale. The European: And what avenues are you following in the field of research and development?
Some examples of BLÜCHER’s capabilities
The European: In which direction are you working in R&D? Mr Keinert: One focus is to considerably broaden the adsorption spectrum; essentially this is about safely binding toxic industrial chemicals (TICs). This is highly relevant for certain industrial processes, for example in the semi-conductor industry, but above all in the field of respiratory protection. We are working specifically on considerably improved respiratory protection for civilian and military staff during crisis operations. An example that comes to mind is that of terrorist attacks using improvised explosive devices (IEDs) which in some cases may be laden with TICs. We haven’t quite got there yet, but we have had some encouraging interim results that make us very confident of achieving our objectives soon. The European: Just to round off the picture of BLÜCHER: Please tell the readers something about your production philosophy? Mr Keinert: We cover the whole supply chain ourselves, from the raw materials and the different composite materials or filter systems that form the system components through to complex system solutions. We do this through the different companies in the BLÜCHER group or in cooperation with strategic partners. The European: So, alongside your innovative powers perhaps this “everything in one pair of hands” approach is the secret of your success! Thank you, Mr. Keinert for the interview.
photos: BLÜCHER Group
Crisis management forces need all kind of protection from smallest to large applications
Military packaging solutions – durable protection for all types of weather by Peter Liebetrau, Managing Director, MAIBACH Industrie-Plastic GmbH, Eislingen/Fils
Long-standing experience in manufacturing reusable packaging, based on the latest technologies, designed for the toughest applications on land, sea and in the air, for both the military and civilian organizations in Germany and abroad. This is MAIBACH Industrie-Plastic GmbH, a German specialist thanks to both its advanced technology and innovation. These are the strengths of the company’s success in the packaging industry.
Tradition and innovation Established over 60 years ago, MAIBACH offers a comprehensive program with complete solutions for specific needs - from developing a prototype to final production. All MAIBACH containers are compliant with military specifications, federal standards, and NATO packaging requirements. The containers are outfitted with a host of standard features that make them the perfect solution for transporting delicate and sensitive military equipment. Each container is climatically and physically tested in on-site testing chambers and external simulation laboratories. This testing ensures the containers can withstand the stresses often incurred during air and ground transport, such as drops, impacts, vibrations, rough handling and all types of weather. Through this method, MAIBACH proves that its containers are capable of protecting material from the effects of direct exposure to extremes of climate, terrain, operation and transportation. MAIBACH is ISO 9001-2008 certified, and our products are listed with NATO stock numbers for government procurement.
Meeting military standards Transportation and storage containers (TSC), made from glassfiber reinforced plastic containers, are designed to maximize protection of sensitive equipment with a minimum of weight while providing the longest possible lifecycle. TSC are water vapor-proof and pressure-tight due to a permanent elastic seal in the parting line of the lid. They are impactproof and virtually indestructible in accordance with the requirements of the German military specification VG 95613. The containers are suitable for versatile application under extreme climatic conditions per STANAG 4280. The can be used in ambient temperatures ranging from -51°C to +71°C. MAIBACH containers are built from glass-fiber reinforced plastic in a modular sandwich construction. They are combat tested by armed forces and approved in compliance with STANAG 4340.
All containers are outfitted with a pressure relief valve set at 80mbar (1.2 psi), special corrosion-proof recoil spring lever fasteners, and snap-back grip handles.
Strength and flexibility All functional items like closure fasteners, valves and eyes are recessed in the container structure. This feature means your hardware is fully protected from damage and your storage space is maximized. All containers are stackable for heavy loads and large dimensions. From storing large modules and engines to transporting complex weapon systems, these containers ensure the safety and integrity of the transported items. Transportable solid containers function as tactical containers for manual transport in the field. The sandwich-constructed material provides high strength while being lightweight. When compared to metal containers, our containers are 40 – 50% less heavy.
Customer specifications 40 standard sizes are available in stock, colored in NATO olive drab RAL 6031, or any other color required by the customer. Special sizes are designed in response to customers’ individual requirements to meet the most demanding expectations. The customer can choose among different holding systems, and foam cushioning or shock mounts are available upon request. MAIBACH offers customized retaining systems for protecting all kinds of equipment, from small electronic devices to large military applications. Customers may choose from cushioning made with closed-cell polyethylene foam or other materials with excellent damping properties, or they may opt for support fixtures with rubber-shock mounts or wire-rope isolators. Whatever industrial or military transportation and storage needs may be, the MAIBACH design team will create a custom container to best meet individual needs. MAIBACH closely controls all aspects of the process: design, engineering, testing and production. We are always available to guide customers through the evolving life cycle of the container development, from concept to production. Peter Liebetrau was born in 1956 in Blaubeuren and after graduation from high school he studied Business Administration at the University of Stuttgart and received a degree level qualification in Technological Business Administration and Management. In 1982 he started working at MAIBACH Industrie-Plastic GmbH.
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
We have to stand up to this common enemy by joining forces and creating trusted partnerships
Cyber: The Role of Industries by Hervé Guillou – CEO of Cassidian Cyber Security, Paris Over the past few years, the world has witnessed the alarming evolution of a new battlefield: cyber crime. Cyber crime has built its force on the common use of, and growing dependence on, communications and information systems technology by governments, industries, services and the general public.
their needs and thus ensures operational and business continuity for organizations and individuals. On the other hand, industry can enable better cooperation among all actors (private and public) since only real partnerships, information sharing and joint actions will enable us all to confront this challenging situation.
Cyber crime is a key threat to our daily life Ten years ago, nearly no one spoke about hackers, computer intrusion, or identity theft, although these threats already existed. Today we deal with fast-growing sophisticated organized crime, either perpetrated by ‘corsairs’ led or at least sponsored by governments and motivated by political aims, or ‘pirates’ led predominantly by economic motives and more rarely by ideological ones. An example of the latter is the cyber attack perpetrated in 2008 against the Church of Scientology. By its new dimensions and quick evolution, cyber crime is and will remain a key threat to everyone‘s daily life. No one can change this reality; it is now a matter of dealing with it, while keeping in mind that there is no such thing as a complete defense. Nations, organizations, individuals, and industries all have a role to play in order to stand up to this common enemy. The role of industry in this regard is dual. On the one hand, industry provides customers with products and solutions adapted to
The cyber battle space Every day, cyber attackers take advantage of flaws in information systems or security procedures to steal sensitive data or intellectual property, disrupt information systems, or commit cyber crimes. Current cyber attacks are highly sophisticated, effective and frequent. The consequences of these Advanced Persistent Threats1 are massive in terms of financial costs, loss of image, recovery costs and security issues. Growing in the web, the cyber battle space is indeed operating across borders and security systems to include national populations and critical national infrastructure. The targets Cyber attacks often target government information systems. As an example, the UK Department of Defense presently comes under cyber attack every eight hours from foreign spies, organized criminals and hackers2. U.S. federal networks received an
Documentation The European Union’s action in the field of cyber security Given the development of cyber crime in recent years, the European Commission started to design a coordinated policy in close cooperation with EU States and the other EU institutions. In 2007, the Commission communication Towards a general policy on the fight against cyber crime set out the main elements of this policy: increased law enforcement cooperation, public-private partnership and international cooperation. In 2010, to deal more efficiently with the growing number of large-scale and highly sophisticated cyber attacks, the Commission put forward a Proposal for a Directive on attacks against information systems. The main novelty of the proposal is the criminalisation of the use, production and sale of tools (now mostly known as “botnets”) to commit
attacks against information systems. The proposal is now being discussed in the European Parliament and the Council. In line with the recent Internal Security Strategy, the Commission is working on establishing a European Cybercrime Center by 2013. This Center will be aimed to strengthen cybercrime capabilities, provide investigative support and foster cooperation between law and non-law enforcement partners. An important task of the Center will be the pooling of reports on cybercrimes committed in different EU States by linking national and European police IT systems. It will also be responsible for training. In April 2011, the European Commission has called upon European Member States to do more to prepare for cyber-attacks, in particular urging the construction of an efficient
network of Computer Emergency Response Teams (CERTs) by next year. In June 2011, the Commission announced the setting up of a Computer Emergency Response pre-configuration Team (CERT). The team is made up of IT security experts from the EU institutions. At the end of one year’s preparatory work by the team, an assessment will be made leading to a decision on the conditions for establishing a full-scale CERT for the EU institutions. The CERT Preconfiguration Team will comprise ten members of staff from participating EU institutions, including five from the European Commission and others from the European Parliament, the Council, the Committee of the Regions and Economic and Social Committee and ENISA. The team will operate under the strategic oversight of an inter-institutional Steering Board.
average of 15,000 cyber attacks per day in 2010, which represents a 39% increase from 20093. Cyber attacks also target critical national infrastructure such as banks, utilities, transport networks, and industrial plants. The most infamous examples are the LSE4, which was hacked on New Year’s Eve in 2010, and the IMF5, which was hit by a sophisticated cyber attack at the end of the same year that caused a major breach and extensive damage. Finally, cyber attacks target private companies. Lockheed Martin, Citigroup, and Sony are only examples of industries that face cyber threats on a daily basis. The average cost of a cyber attack for a company has been estimated at € 2,2 million in France, where 70% of companies have experienced at least one cyber attack in 20116. Sony reported a $172 million loss due to repeated cyber attacks causing the shutdown of its PlayStation Network service in May 2011, not to mention the theft of personal information belonging to over 100 million users. The security firm RSA will probably not survive the cyber attack it endured last April. The first thing to point out, therefore, is the growing power of cyber criminals and their ability to target and harm everyone, including those reputed to be the strongest. With global financial damage evaluated at $100 billion in 20107, cyber crime is about to outperform the illegal drugs market as the most lucrative criminal business worldwide.
The resilience of nations is at stake With cyber threats to critical sectors of the economy and national wealth, nations’ resilience is at stake. Security requirements are therefore higher. As this is truly a global problem, collaboration among international stakeholders is essential to maintaining a comprehensive intelligence sharing network to enable preventive strategies as well as timely and effective solutions. In this regard, industry cannot ignore the necessity for more transparency. The situation is widely acknowledged today by governments, international organizations, and parts of the private sector. Awareness is thus improving, but still too slowly. Some urgent matters have to be considered, including information sharing and regulation.
Cooperation Many leading countries, including the United States, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom, are setting up policies and deploying resources to counter this threat. Public funds and human resources are now entirely dedicated to this issue8. At the international level, cooperation among allies has marked a significant change in the field of cyber security. Action taken at the NATO level as of 20089 illustrates a new willingness to work together in the field of cyber defence. At the EU level, ENISA10 promotes an EU-wide approach to reinforce cyber security and encourages nations to share awareness on cyber threats. Last November, ENISA also organized the first-ever pan-European cyber exercise.
Hervé Guillou Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Cassidian Cyber Security. Hervé Guillou was born on 24 March 1955. A former Ingénieur Général de l’Armement, he studied at the École Polytechnique and is a graduate of the ENSTA and INSTN. 1978: Project Manager for the nuclear propulsion at the naval shipbuilder DCN Indret. 1989 to 1993: Chief of Staff of the French National Armament Director. 1993 to 1996: Programme Manager of the tripartite anti-aircraft frigate programme Horizon and head of the Joint Project Office in London. 1996: COO of the nuclear engineering company Technicatome. 2003: CEO of EADS Launch Vehicles and Space Transportation. 2005 : CEO of Defence and Communications Systems (then Cassidian Systems) 2011 : CEO Cassidian Cyber Security.
Legal framework One of the most obvious problems today remains the complete lack of a convergent international legal framework. What is cybercrime and what is not? Is the expression “cyber crime” even appropriate and commonly accepted? In the USA, for example, the Pentagon plans to treat cyber-attacks as acts of war. In other countries, cyber attacks are not even considered a crime. This legal uncertainty is a true liability for government agencies as well as a significant risk for companies. Harmonizing policies A harmonization of policies in the cyber field is critical to meeting the needs of the market. Indeed, the cyber security market is still highly fragmented. This hampers both competitiveness and the ability to efficiently address technological objectives. It is in the interest of all actors to support the creation of a normative framework with common standards and rules, and to expand public structures dedicated to cyber issues, at both national and international levels. Awareness and transparency Another problem is the lack of transparency and resulting awareness that comes from the reluctance of executives to disclose the effects of cyber attacks (probably less than 20% of financial losses were reported in 2010). This can do nothing but hamper our ability to assess the cyber risk and adapt our strategy. The private sector awakens Something has changed, however, and this is good news. The private sector is increasingly open to the idea of deeper cooperation, whether among companies or between companies and government bodies. EOS11 promotes a similar strategy, issued in its September 2010 White Paper, “Towards a concerted EU approach to cyber security”.
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
Some key players of the cyber security market (Symantec, McAfee, Northrop Grumman, and others) publicly urge for more regulation and information sharing and reporting in order to better protect critical infrastructures from cyber attacks. For obvious reasons, companies and public institutions are traditionally reluctant to announce that they have been under cyber attacks, let alone to describe publicly the nature or severity of attacks on their computer systems. Nevertheless, it is urgent to share our needs and vulnerabilities if we want to succeed in providing a strong and real-time answer to the problem. Beyond international strategies and official statements on cooperation, concrete solutions to tackle the cyber threat must now be implemented. This is the responsibility of industry.
Cymerius Through our security cockpit Cymerius, we provide comprehensive support to decision making by providing real-time, 24-hour surveillance, detection, and management of security incidents. Cymerius can be operated either by our experts or by our customers themselves. Our experience in Public Key Infrastructure enables customers to implement secure identity management, access rights management, and digital signatures.
Adaptation to real-time of cyber war and mobility
Other capabilities We also provide a secure exchange gateway solution that allows operators to monitor incoming and outgoing information on their IT networks. Last, we offer assessments of clients’ security systems as well as personnel training at all levels and we adapt the best solutions, practices, and know-how to support citizens, private and public organizations, and nations to meet their requirements, adapt to their current security arrangements, and provide the best level of cyber security.
Industry’s newest and foremost challenge is to adapt itself to the “real time” of cyber war. The “Line Maginot” concept12 will no longer be enough to protect anyone against such an agile and sophisticated enemy: a real-time dimension is necessary. We must satisfy this broad demand, offering expertise, consulting, forensics, and other services, as well as security operation hardware and infrastructure. A second critical challenge for industry is mobility. Transportability is crucial in light of the growing demand for voice/data applications to be available “on the move” and the constant evolution of the physical boundaries of IT infrastructure.
CASSIDIAN develops its offer towards a full cyber security shield All that is what Cassidian, an EADS company, has been working on for several years now. Coming from the world of defence and security, we have enjoyed a strong advantage with our experience in systems architecture and secured infrastructure. And we have built on this experience. Our current offer aims to support operators and users in developing the ‘full cyber security shield’, which is based not only on technologies, but also on processes and people. Given that threats quickly multiply, we recognize that agility and adaptability are two key concepts to efficiently secure communication networks. We devise protective technical solutions against attacks and also advise and train customers on how to establish effective security policies.
The European Cyber Security Center Our Cyber Security Center is staffed by a team of over 300 experts at locations in France, Germany and the UK. Combining our expertise in forensics, penetration tests, simulation capabilities, architecture, and threat analysis, the Center implements the solutions needed to detect and combat new threats. In order to better anticipate future attacks, our elite teams collaborate closely with government authorities in numerous countries to intercept threats. They represent key elements of international cooperation in the fight against cyber crime.
MOSEO and Ectocryp To protect voice and data communications, we provide mobile security systems through our MOSEO solution, as well as highgrade encryption with the Ectocryp solution.
Joining forces Being all victims of cyber attacks, our interests are hence complementary and convergent. We all have the same imperative: governments, the public sector, and private companies must accelerate the deployment of cyber security solutions and related strategies. The only way we can efficiently respond to this new situation is by joining forces and creating trusted partnerships. Trust is indeed the key enabler between government authorities, our company, and our customers.
1 Advanced Persistent Threat (APT): though quite controversial, this term is commonly used to define a group with both the capability and the intent to persistently and effectively target a specific entity. 2 Source : UK DoD, June 2011. 3 Source : Department of Homeland Security, May 2011. 4 LSE : London Stock Exchange. 5 IMF : International Monetary Fund. 6 Source: Symantec study about IT security in France for the year 2011. 7 Source : estimation made by the UK strategic defence and security review (Oct.2010). NB : this assessment remains impossible to prove (to some, it is underestimated, to others overestimated), 8 ANSSI in France, BSI in Germany, CESG in the UK, Office of Cybersecurity and Communications in the USA… 9 Creation of a governance entity [Cyber Defence Management Authority], development of the Cyber Defence Center of Excellence. 10 ENISA = European Network Information Security Agency. 11 EOS: European Organisation for Security, which gathers 31 important members of the European private sector. 12 “Line Maginot” concept i.e. static defensive measures or infrastructures such as firewall-type protection.
News: EU activities in the field of CBRN Debate on CBRN On 4 October 2011, the European Security Round Table (ESRT) hosted a luncheon on European Policies and Structures in CBRN protection. The Round Table was chaired by Ana Gomes MEP, who stressed that the importance of the challenges and risks CBRN incidents hold has not been fully conceived yet. The expert briefing given by Hans-H. Kühl, Col. (ret.) German Armed Forces, Former Commandant German NBC Defence School, focused on the needs regarding the equipment of first responders which should balance an effective and mission capable personal protection and a “perfectly” safe protection. This argument was incorporated by experts of Blücher Group challenging the existing differentiation between military and civilian equipment and pointing out the advantages of a common basis and standards for a European market-also in reference to creating incentives for the research environment.
Commission and EDA agreed to harmonize research activities in CBRN field On 15 September, the European Defence Agency (EDA) and the European Commission signed a European Framework Cooperation (EFC) coordination letter aimed at harmonising their research activities in the field of Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear protection. The European Space Agency (ESA) is expected to join this EFC coordination scheme later. This signature took place at the Workshop on the Joint Investment Programme Chemical, Biological,
Radiological and Nuclear protection (JIP CBRN), co-organised by EDA, the Commission and ESA, at the Université Catholique de Louvain, in Brussels.
EU Joint declaration on September 11 attacks in the US (14. September 2011) (excerpts:) “(…) These tragic events oblige us to take urgent decisions on how the European Union should respond to these challenges: The European Union must commit itself tirelessly to defend justice and democracy at a global level, to promote an international framework of security and prosperity for all countries, and to contribute towards the emergence of a strong, sustained and global action against terrorism. We shall continue to develop the Common Foreign and Security Policy with a view to ensuring that the Union is genuinely capable of speaking out clearly and doing so with one voice. We shall make the European Security and Defence Policy operational as soon as possible. We will make every effort to strengthen our intelligence efforts against terrorism. The European Union will accelerate the implementation of a genuine European judicial area, which will entail, among other things, the creation of a European warrant for arrest and extradition, in accordance with the Tampere conclusions, and the mutual recognition of legal decisions and verdicts.”
Active Protection for Military Vehicles In asymmetric scenarios, such as those occuring in Afghanistan, shelling of military vehicles with Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPGs), particularly the RPG-7 type, poses a large threat which cannot be mastered by passive protection. Protection of crews and vehicles meeting this new threat is urgently required. With its research and technology activities, Diehl Defence has been focusing on the development of so called stand-off active vehicle protection systems for years. Today´s launcher-based AVePS (Active Vehicle Protection System) includes radar- and infrared sensors, a battle management computer, a multilauncher featuring a blast effector ruling out fragmentation as well as safety electronics. The sensors enable threat detection and tracking at distances of several hundred meters. Simultaneously they are capable of localizing the adversary´s firing position. In 2006, an operating demonstrator of the first-generation AWiSS system successfully defeated an attacking MILAN 2 antitank missile. Last year two AVePS prototypes integrated into M113 and FUCHS Armoured Personnel Carriers proved their effectiveness in two test campaigns by defeating different kinds of anti-tank weapons. AVePS is capable of engaging the entire threat spectrum ranging from Rocket Propelled Grenades, such as RPG 7, to modern anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs). The system is also
The illustration shows AVePS integrated into a FUCHS Armoured Personnel Carrier Photo: DIEHL
effective against advanced warheads with tandem hollow charges. Moreover, the impact of large-calibre KE penetrators can be significantly reduced. With its 360° hemispherical coverage, the launcher-based system offers utmost protection. No protective gaps occur, even if the same part of the vehicle is hit repeatedly. By employing “fragementation-free” blast effectors, collateral damage is largely ruled out. A unique safety concept offers high reliability as well as optimum protection against erroneous launching. Due to its weight advantages, the modular AVePS system is also suited for integration in lighter vehicles. Today AVePS demonstrates the performance potential of advanced vehicle protection systems. It offers effective 360° protection for launch vehicles as well as vehicles in its vicinity.
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
Today’s highly mobile crisis management forces require advanced bridging technology
Military bridges – the highest standards for protecting forces by Robert Kauth, CEO, GDELS, Germany, Kaiserslaurtern
“The crossing of rivers in the presence of the enemy is one of the most difficult operations in war.” This quote by Frederic the Great given during the Seven years war (1756 -1963) is remaining true until today.
Crossing Obstacles is a Challenge Today’s highly mobile crisis management forces require advanced bridging technology to be able to cope with the requirements of divers engagements worldwide from military armed actions to humanitarian help in natural disasters.
Product Portfolio Today GDELS,Germany is a system provider for the development and production of various mobile military bridge systems for light, medium and heavy forces. In addition to that the company is also a worldwide renowned specialist for the production of highly stressable and complex aluminium structures. This technical know-how is normally in use for trains or aircrafts, thus making GDELS-Germany quite unique among the defence contractors in Germany. The company operates facilities in Kaiserslautern and nearby Sembach as well as water and cross-country test sites. Today GDELS-Germany employs a
highly qualified workforce of more than 500 people. The GILLOIS-EWK amphibious vehicle marked the beginning of many successful developments of military dry-gap and floating bridge systems. In the 1960s the amphibious bridge and ferry system M2 followed for the German, British and Singapore military engineers, now being replaced by the M3.
Amphibious Systems Today the M3 is the only amphibious bridge and ferry system of its kind with a payload capacity of MLC85 for tracked and MLC135 for wheeled vehicles. M3 is currently in service with the German, British, Taiwan and Singapore land forces and has seen a wide range of operations from field exercises, to civil defence rescue missions and combat operations in Iraq. Powered by a modern EURO III Diesel engine and equipped with two water pump jets M3 provides superior water crossing capability for mobile mechanized forces. State-of-the-art technology, automated handling and high reliability allow the building of a 100 m floating bridge with eight vehicles and only 24 soldiers in approximately 15 minutes. A double-bay ferry for MLC85 loads is built in about three minutes. Its 4-wheel drive and tire-pressure adjustment system provide a climbing
The Amphybian M3 (left) and the Infantry Assault Bridge (right) are two examples of advanced bridging.
capability of 60%. Using a standardized main body M3 can be configurated to meet customer specifications such as e.g. NBC protection, tropical kit, winter kit, protected driver’s cabin and radio communication equipment.
Floating Bridges The Foldable Support Bridge (FSB), developed in the 1970s is today in service with ten countries worldwide. This floating bridge underwent a major redesign in 2000 to meet the increased operational requirements of modern armed forces and is now being built as Improved Ribbon Bridge IRB. The IRB provides wet-gap crossing capability for MLC80 tracked and MLC96 wheeled loads. The IRB consists of so-called Interior Bays and Ramps Bays which are transported on and launched from a 10 ton PLS truck. When launched into the water the bridge bays unfold automatically and are then moved together to form a floating bridge or a ferry by bridge erection boats. The IRB is fully interoperable with the in-service Standard Ribbon Bridge SRB and the FSB. IRB is in use in the US Army and in the German Army. A 100 m floating bridge consisting of 13 Interior Bays and 2 Ramp Bays can be built in approximately 30 minutes.
Dry-Gap Bridges The Infantry Assault Bridge IAB is a light, airtransportable footbridge for light infantry and airborne forces. It can cross dry-gaps of up to 30 m and wet gaps with the support of adaptable floats. Each 4.43 m module has a weight of 55 kg and the bridge can be assembled without mechanical support by an infantry team within a few minutes. The REBS Rapidly Emplaced Bridge System was originally designed for the US Army Stryker Brigades for MLC50 loads and for an effective length of 13 m. The bridge is transported on and launched from a special pallet which is loaded on a 10 tons PLS truck. The same bridge
Robert Kauth Robert Kauth is Vice-President Bridge Systems and Managing Director of General Dynamics European Land Systems-Germany GmbH (GDELS Germany). He was born in 1949, and he entered the German Army in 1969. He was trained at the German Army Officers Academy, Hannover, in 1971-1972 before studying Automechanical Engineering and Weapon Technology. In 1981 he started working for EWK Eisenwerke Kaiserslautern GmbH (which later became GDELS Germany). Before taking up his current post in 2002, he has been Managing Director for Engineering and Production of GDELS Germany.
is used for the Adaptable Bridge Launching Kit ABLK which provides temporary bridging capability for mechanized forces. The ABLK is simply mounted on an armoured combat vehicle thus enabling it to pick up and launch a REBS bridge under armour protection. After the crossing the ABLK is dropped and the combat vehicle is again free to continue its actual mission.
Manoeuvrability Protects Highly manoeuvrable forces are able to bypass potential risk areas or areas which have been identified as enemy controlled. Theatres of operation like e.g. Afghanistan provide for limited infrastructure of roads and crossable road bridges, thus forcing troops to use the same beaten tracks repeatedly. It is therefore just a matter of time until enemy forces or insurgents place roadside bombs or launch ambushes at precisely chosen locations since it can be predicted in advance that the targeted troops will have to drive by right there. If equipped with mobile bridge systems patrols, convoys or combat troops re-gain the manoeuvrability, the flexibility and the initiative they need to maintain the momentum of their movement and to detour these critical locations, thus providing superiority over the enemy and actively protecting its soldiers.
GDELS-Germany – from forging steel to high technology brigdes General Dynamics European Land Systems-Germany GmbH (GDELSGermany) was known as EWK (Eisenwerke Kaiserslautern) until it was taken over by General Dynamics. The company’s history dates back to 1864 when the Ironworks
Kaiserslautern (that’s what Eisenwerke means in German) were founded by local businessmen. Until the end of World War II mainly iron and steel structures for the construction industry, bridges and road construction, breeze ovens and heating
systems were manufactured. In the early 1950’s the company specialized in the design and production of mobile military bridge systems. Being part of a large construction enterprise the company also did business in the field of construction cranes and indus-
trial air cleaners. The main focus however was in military bridge systems and through that the company was involved in the development of the first aluminium welding standards and became one of the leading manufacturers of large-scale aluminium bodies.
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
Mobile shelters are the systems military and civil crisis management forces are asking for
Medical container solutions for the protection of crisis management forces Interview with Ralf Griesbaum, Managing Director, Zeppelin Mobile Systems (ZMS), Meckenbeuren
The European: Mr. Griesbaum, you are the Managing Director of Zeppelin Mobile Systems (ZMS), which offers a broad palette of solutions to crisis management forces all over the world. The name reminds me of the Zeppelin airship? Mr Griesbaum: ZMS is a direct successor of the famous Zeppelin airships, which means that we draw upon a history and company tradition of more than 100 years. The European: Are you still at the famous site at Lake Constance? Mr Griesbaum: We are still based at the original place of the airships at Lake Constance. However, two years ago we built, 10 km from the lake, a new factory purely dedicated shelter systems. The European: What are the main characteristics of your products? Mr Griesbaum: Today, we are producing all kinds of mobile field systems, from quickly deployable emergency and mobile hospital systems to highly functional communication shelters and command posts. In the shelter business, we have a proven track-record of more than 30 years. The European: Do these have a common technical basis? Mr Griesbaum: The technical basis of our products is an aluminium, lightweight, air-transportable shelter. The material used, as well as the air-transportability, close the circle to the old days of the airships. The European: Your products should seem to be “in vogue” in light of the disasters in the world during the last year. Even aside from that, civil and military crisis management forces are engaged around the world in peace keeping or humanitarian operations. Mr Griesbaum: Our products offer the highest level of quality currently available on the global market. This can be verified by over 40 different armed forces around the world and many more civilian customers. Our shelters have a proven lifetime of 30 years, which has been demonstrated in numerous military and humanitarian missions over the last three decades. The European: Is the full production line located at the new site that you mentioned?
Ralf Griesbaum Ralf Dieter Griesbaum has been Managing Director of Zeppelin Mobile Systeme since 2007. He was born in 1964 in Lahr, Germany. He studied engineering at Offenburg Technical University, graduating in 1989 with a mechanical engineering degree and an MBA in export economics. From 1989-1991 he studied Business Management and International Marketing at the Reutlingen Export Academy. Ralf Griesbaum started his career at Zeppelin Systemtechnik GmbH, Offenburg. He subsequently occupied the following posts: 1992 – 1994 Sales Manager Shelter Western Europe. 1996 – 1999 Deputy Head of Sales, Shelter Systems. 1999 Head of Sales, and since 2007 Managing Director, Zeppelin Mobile Systeme GmbH, Friedrichshafen. Ralf Griebach is a minority shareholder in the company.
Mr Griesbaum: Yes, we conduct complete in-house production, which guarantees that our shelters meet the full German quality standard. The European: Why do you rely on German quality standards? Mr Griesbaum: These standards are a prerequisite for us as a technology leader. The high quality of our products guarantees usage under the most difficult conditions. This makes the Zeppelin Shelter the ideal product for any kind of disaster mission, whether of a military nature, or whether facing natural disasters such as earthquakes, floods, fires, or hurricanes. The European: What are the capacities of your deployable field hospitals? Mr Griesbaum: We offer different kinds of mobile field hospitals adapted to the special requirements of their application. As you know, the military prescribes different steps of medical treatment in the field depending on the distance from the front line or disaster area, how quickly the hospital can be deployed, how long it will remain on site, and the extent of the medical treatment needed. The European: You therefore offer products for Roles 1 through 3, since Role 4 is a permanent hospital. What is the range of these products?
Outpatient Clinic-air transportable
Photos : Zeppelin
Mr Griesbaum: ZMS offer suitable products for all of these functions. These range from quickly transportable and deployable tent systems, to emergency structures based on expandable 10ft shelters, up to the complete mobile field hospital (Role 3). The latter provides the essential capacity of a stationary hospital in the field. The European: Which is the time frame for deploying your systems? Mr Griesbaum: The timeframe for deployment mainly depends on the userâ€™s availability of skilled staff and logistics to move the system to the requisite location, which may need to include air transport. The European: Which products in your portfolio are especially adapted for rapid-response military forces? Mr Griesbaum: Our shelters are all built to fulfil military requirements. Whether they are also used in civilian applications is not the issue. What is important is that they are applicable all kinds of missions under any environmental conditions. Indeed, this is what disaster management is all about. The European: You mean to be ready to each situation. Mr Griesbaum: Yes, being prepared for the unknown. A disaster will not tell you whether it will happen to be -20Â°C
Complete Field Hospital
Photos : Zeppelin
today and +50Â°C tomorrow. Our military shelters cover the entire range of possible situations. This applies to command & control systems as well as to medical applications. The European: Where do you see deficiencies in the field of disaster management? Mr Griesbaum: Despite the fact that field hospitals are our best-selling product at the moment, we observe that medical services are unfortunately still not getting the attention they deserve. We observe this situation both inside the military and in national budget appropriations. The European: How has your experience with supplying engaged military forces informed your business? Mr Griesbaum: We have vast experience with supplying military forces. More than 20,000 of our shelters have been delivered to armed forces in the last 25 years. Unfortunately, due to the classified environment, we do not get much feedback from the missions. Normally, we only come to know where a product is being used in case of any needed repairs, maintenance, or spare parts deliveries. The European: But how can you develop without having feedback? Mr Griesbaum: There are only a few exceptions to this rule. The field hospital of the Chilean Armed Forces, for example, which we delivered ten years ago, has been used in disaster missions three to four times per year over the last decade. Apart from that, we can certainly tell that our products have served in many missions since we get a lot of shelters back for refurbishment. These include shelters delivered ten, twenty, or even more years ago to the German Armed Forces, and which have been used for missions in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Somalia. The European: This is surely a remarkable humanitarian achievement. Could you define which Zeppelin products are most suitable in the field of crisis prevention?
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
Mr Griesbaum: It would only be logical for there to be a joint entity in the EU responsible for disaster management, something like the future CMC but not a “toothless tiger”. It should be able to oblige Member States to procure assets, pay for them, and delegate their operation to one or two nations, thus making them immediately functional. The European: But how would the EU stock national material and train personnel, and what would be the nature of such an entity? Mr Griesbaum: The role of such an EU entity could never be more than a coordinative one. The responsibility for acquisition, storage and management of disaster material such as field hospitals should be with the individual countries. However, the crucial element is that the obligation to do so has to be negotiated between the EU and its leading members. Mr. Griesbaum and Mr. Bühl at the DSIe 2011 in London
Photos : Zeppelin
Mr Griesbaum: The question of which product is most suitable for a mission is defined by several factors. First of all, it is a question of the available logistic support. Although the shelters are built with a lightweight material, they still require machinery to be moved. This kind of machinery is normally available to military forces, but relief organisations often do not have access to such equipment. The European: Which one of your products would you highlight? Mr Griesbaum: If I had to pick just one of our products, it would clearly be the double-side expandable 20ft shelter. This product can expand to almost triple its size between its transport to operation modes. It offers the same operational capacity as permanent building while at the same time being highly mobile. The European: And what does this mean in the medical context? Mr Griesbaum: This means for example that our operating room is equipped to the same standards as an operating room in a permanent hospital. It provides the same level of sterilization, the same level of air filtration, and the same supply of medical gases. The European: Let me come to crisis prevention in the EU after Lisbon. Members are asked to provide nationally owned and operated assets to the EU. Mr Griesbaum: This was surely a positive initiative. However, the term ‘initiative’ already implies its weak point. It is not yet mandatory for states to provide such assistance, nor to maintain ready stocks of disaster management assets. The European: And what is your proposal?
The European: Could such a network be operated by industry? Mr Griesbaum: This question would first of all require a clear definition of the term ‘network’. What material for disaster management does it involve (field hospitals, water purification, field kitchens, etc.)? Should industry should only be responsible for the provision and storage of the products, or should it also manage missions? The European: Industry managing a mission. This is an interesting concept, but how would you imagine the funding? Mr Griesbaum: Indeed, funding is the core of the issue. Industry will never be able to assume such a responsibility out of its own funds, as we are talking about investments of several million euro. Not even a leasing system is feasible: in the first place, it would not solve the problem of financing production, and secondly, depreciation of the goods after a mission can hardly be valued. The European: Are nations doing enough to procure deployable assets? Mr Griesbaum: The clear answer to this question is no: they are not doing nearly enough. If we look for example at what has happened in Japan this year – a major disaster resulting from a combination of an earthquake, tsunami and nuclear catastrophe – we simply must admit that neither any individual Member State, nor Europe as a whole, would even be close to prepared for anything of a similar extent. The European: Does this mean business as usual and no lessons learned? Mr Griesbaum: The situation is as it has always been. We are in a reactive status, waiting for something to happen before any adequate countermeasures are even taken into consideration. The European: Mr Griesbaum, I thank you for the interview.
C4 ISR Command and control Systems have to be highly secured but need to be most flexible Klaus-Peter Treche................................................................. 51 Mike Burford......................................................................... 53 Mathias Knops....................................................................... 54 Joseph E.L. Souren................................................................. 56
AFCEA Europe focus on NATO’s reconstruction effort and the resulting challenges
Supporting NATO into the next decade by Major General (ret) Peter Treche, General Secretary, AFCEA Europe, Brussels NATO is completing plans for the most significant restructuring in its history. The headquarters staff will be reduced in strength by as much as 40 percent. NATO agencies will be consolidated from 13 to three. Force strength will be increased and the force structure will be streamlined to simplify and improve command and control.
AFCEA’s vision to be discussed To discuss in depth these crucial subjects, AFCEA has partnered this year with the NATO C3 Agency (NC3A) to present their Industry Conference in conjunction with TechNet International. Two important conferences – the NC3A Industry Conference (October 19-20) followed by TechNet International (October 20-21) at Heidelberg, will bring together the senior leadership from the NATO headquarters staff, the NATO C3 Agency, the NATO CIS Services Agency (NCSA), Allied Command Transformation (ACT), and the NATO Maintenance and Supply Agency (NAMSA), with industry and academia. Thus, TechNet International 2011 represents AFCEA’s vision to be the premier information technology, communications and electronics association for professionals in government, industry and academia worldwide.
A strong and stringent organization AFCEA with about 35.000 individual members and more than 2.000 corporate members is structured in 140 Chapters and Subchapters in 34 democratic countries around the world. AFCEA International, which was established in the US in 1946, is a non-profit membership association serving the military, government, industry, and academia as an ethical forum for advancing professional knowledge and relationships in the fields of communications, IT, intelligence, and global security. AFCEA Europe, the European office of AFCEA International, was established in Brussels, Belgium, in 1982 to represent the European chapters and to strengthen European influence in
Peter Treche Peter Treche, Major General (GAF) ret, General Manager AFCEA, Europe, Brussels since 2011. He was born 1946 in Hannover and graduated 1973 from the University Aachen as an Air and Spacecraft Engineer. 1978 – 1980 General Staff College Hamburg. He held positions as: 1990 – 1993 Deputy Director and Chief of Staff of German Armed Forces Command in Washington, 1998 – 2001 Director Air Force Material Command , Cologne 2005 – 2008 Deputy Commander, Joint Support Command , Cologne. Before taking over his new function Peter Treche was from 1999 to 2010 Vice-President and Chapter President AFCEA, Bonn e.V.
AFCEA International. There are currently 38 chapters and subchapters within 7 separate AFCEA regions in 21 countries, communicating in 19 different languages under the umbrella of AFCEA Europe.
AFCEA members are well connected AFCEA members are in key positions throughout government, industry and academia. They know about AFCEA´s potential, they know the key players in the different functional areas and they know the state of the art industrial solutions for the need of NATO war fighters in the field and NATO staff personnel in the the alliance’s command structure. That makes AFCEA wellplaced to make a valued contribution to the work of NATO.
AFCEA – partner to contribute to decisions AFCEA has run numerous events at the request of NATO Commands and NATO Agencies in the past and the trusted relationship which has been developed over the time will be usefully expanded over the coming years. Not only many of the Chapter programs, which are the key elements of AFCEA´s reach out to
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
AFCEA with about 35.000 individual members and more than 2.000 corporate members is structured in 140 Chapters and Subchapters in 34 democratic countries around the world.
AFCEA regions in Europe Photo: AFCEA, Brussels
their constituency in government, industry and academia, focus on NATO’s transformation and the way ahead to meet the manifold challenges the alliance has to face today. AFCEA Europe’s program scheme for 2012 is focusing on related issues and comprises two main events to be held , • CIO/CTO Conference in May 2012, Brussels and • Intelligence Conference in September 2011, Brussels. • TechNet International 2012 will carry on with a related theme and will be held in October in Rome.
The AFCEA Educational Foundation, in the European Environment through the AFCEA Europe Office, along with assigned Chapter donations, also sponsor an annual European Scholarship Award Program and an award for Excellence in a Scientific Project related to communications, intelligence or information systems. Nominations are solicited each year from European Chapters and their members. The grants to be allocated to the different programs of AFCEA Headquartes and all Chapters amount up to some millions Euro per year.
AFCEA’s wide range services
AFCEA accompanies NATO’s way ahead
Besides hosting and conducting conferences and exhibitions AFCEA provides a wide range of additional service offerings, including tailored forums to focus on a particular issue or subject in the form of roundtable discussions or seminars representing any desired cross-section of industry, government, and/or academia and can be held at any appropriate classification level. AFCEA is increasingly employing web 2.0 and 3.0 technologies to extend services more broadly and to serve geographically dispersed audiences. Webinars, podcasts, virtual conferences, collaborative environments, wikis, virtual exhibits and distributed training and education are examples of services that can be provided.
The 2011 and 2012 program of AFCEA International and AFCEA Europe focus on NATO´s reconstruction effort and the resulting challenges which have to be met by the alliance. AFCEA accompanies NATO´s way ahead and creates ethical forums for discussion of related topics between government, industry and academia.
Professional Training and scholarship A wide variety of professional development training is conducted by the AFCEA Educational Foundation. This training is generally related to our mission and in areas that are not readily available through other sources. We also conduct or sponsor special training and education in dedicated C4ISR areas.
AFCEA Europe’s participation in exhibitions AFCEA stand at the 10th Berlin Security Conference on Security and Defence from November 8. – 9, 2011 at Andels Hotel www.euro-defence.eu AFCEA stand at the world’s premier IT exhibition, the CeBIT in Hannover, Germany on March 6 – 10, 2012.
Crisis management forces need GPS, adapted to harsh environment, as a question of survival
Vehicle-based GPS receivers for harsh environments by Mike Burford, Principal Program Manager, Rockwell Collins, Deutschland GmbH, Heidelberg
Rockwell Collins Deutschland has introduced a new family of GPS receivers and an intelligent display to specifically address the harsh environmental conditions under which military vehicles are required to operate under in “out of area operations”.
Explosion Resistance Whilst the product names, ERGR (Explosion Resistant GPS Receiver) and ERDE (Explosion Resistant Display Equipment) highlight the capability of the equipment to withstand mine and IED explosions and remain fixed in the vehicle and operational, the equipment also represents significant improvements in such fields as EMI /EMC, shock, vibration, galvanic isolation of input / output signals, size and system integration support over its predecessors, which were adaptations of handheld devices. Although only in production since April 2009, the ERGR has already proven itself in combat in Afghanistan.
Proven Technologies for crisis management forces GPS sensor technology has established itself as an essential geo-position and orientation tool in many walks of life. Whilst applications for harsh environments are emerging in the nonmilitary sector, such as the tracking of railway rolling stock assets, it is in the military field where the harsh environmental requirements have driven the development and resultant products. The GPS receiver has proved itself to be indispensible in “out of area operations”, especially in the case of the
dismounted soldier. Until recently, the needs of military platforms such as vehicles and ships were met by adapting thesuch as the Rockwell Collins Precision Lightweight GPS Receiver (PLGR). As the challenging and diverging requirements of the dismounted soldier and vehicles have evolved, so has the need for a “Fit for Purpose” solution for vehicles emerged. Dismounted personal In the case of the dismounted soldier, the key requirements are minimum weight, minimum size and volume with minimum power requirements. To meet this challenge, Rockwell Collins has developed and is in the process of introducing the microDAGR, a wrist worn GPS military receiver. Vehicle solution In the case of vehicles, as opposed to the dismounted soldier, the ERGR was required to demonstrate a greater tolerance of a wider band and larger amplitude of vibra-
tion, greater shock resilience, stricter levels of EMI and EMC, galvanic isolation of signals and to provide a greater degree of integration support. Whilst size, weight and power requirements are still important parameters for vehicles, the key requirements are dominated by other considerations.
A new approach In order to achieve an optimum solution, the vehicle and the dismounted soldier applications should be viewed as a system
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
of systems as opposed to trying to address both sets of requirements with a single solution that fits all. In the past, great emphasis was placed on the capability to remove various pieces of equipment from the vehicle, in particular the GPS, to support dismounted soldier tasks. This had, however, the disadvantage that the vehicle was left without a key sensor, in the best case for a fixed period of time in a high stress situation, or in the worse case permanent loss of that sensor. The system of systems solution Due to a change in the paradigm, the emphasis on the ability to remove the equipment from the vehicle has migrated from one of supporting the task of the dismounted soldier to that of optimising vehicle availability in operational conditions by enabling the ease of reallocating the equipment assets from one vehicle to another, particular in an “out of area” scenario. The challenge in the mechanical design of the ERGR was to find a solution that addressed the seemingly conflicting requirements of ruggedness of mounting and fixing to withstand the defined shocks, vibrations and explosions whilst providing a solution that supports the rapid removal, replacement and reallocation from one vehicle to another.
Successful re-thinking of removable equipment The advent of asymmetrical warfare and the use of mines and IEDs have underlined the need to rethink the whole issue of removable equipment. Whilst Mine Resistant Vehicles have largely addressed the problem of preventing the blast penetration, secondary injuries and deaths are still being experienced due to “flying equipment” within the crew compartment and may pose a possible “duty of care” problem in the future. The relocation of such equipment into the engine bay, as suggested by some potential users, in order to circumvent the above mentioned problems, can not, unfortunately, be recommended as this introduces a whole new set of environment and operational requirements. These range from a significant elevation of the ambient operating temperature to the problems associated with deleting the loaded crypto code under operational conditions.
display for platforms such as logistic vehicles and RIBS. The product is scheduled to enter service with the German Army in 2011. Towards a vehicle crew information system Finally to complete the set of building blocks, an intelligent rugged display, designed to complement the ERGR and the ERGR Lite, has been developed. The unit is IP67 compliant and meets the same harsh requirements for vibration, shock and explosion as the two GPS receivers, thereby not compromising the integrity of the complete solution. Whilst these characteristics alone set it aside in a category of its own, it is further enhanced by the integration of an Intel Atom processor, an LED back lit high resolution display to provide an ideal platform for a vehicle crew information system.
Open architecture Both hardware and software fully support open architecture concepts and solutions. The operating system is based upon Windows XP embedded and its successor, Windows Embedded Standard 2009 and as such will support any Windows compatible user software. In addition, Rockwell Collins is able to provide software which supports maps, 2D and 3D, Situation Awareness and Blue Force Tracking.
A product family to enable tailored orientation systems In conclusion, to meet the harsh environmental and operational conditions, which military vehicles are expected to meet in “out of area” operations now and in the future, Rockwell Collins has designed and developed a family of harsh environment products suitable for ships as well as vehicles. The various building blocks, GPS receivers, augmented sensors and intelligent displays provide the system designer, and where appropriate augmented with other Open Architecture non-Rockwell Collins products, that will enable an optimum tailored Vehicle Orientation System to be realised.
Development: The ERGR GPS Sensor The ERGR was developed and qualified in co-operation with the German Forces.It has become the standard GPS sensor for vehicles in the German Army, selected for the German Navy and has already been successfully evaluated by other overseas customers, which in turn will be converted into orders not just for the military PPS receiver but also for the harsh environment SPS receiver. The complement version ERGRT Lite A smaller and lighter version, ERGR Lite with same functionality but limited interfaces, has been designed to meet the needs of systems that only require a GPS receiver and an associated
News: EU will get new IT-Agency Following a decision by the Council on 12 September 2011, the EU will soon have a new agency based in Tallinn (Estonia), which will manage its large-scale information technology (IT) systems. Initially, the agency will be responsible for the Schengen Information System (SIS), the Visa Information System (VIS) and Eurodac. In future it may manage other systems in this area too. The agency’s main duty will be the operational management of the systems, keeping them functioning 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Furthermore, the agency will have related duties, such as adopting security measures, reporting, publishing, monitoring and providing information, as well as organising specific training.
Administrators have to secure information and to provide privileges at the same time
Security versus Flexibility – Information security fights Wikileaks and Facebook by Mathias Knops, Business Development Manager at DeviceLock Europe GmbH, Ratingen
Progressing usage of both communication and navigation technology is an every-day-challenge to all people managing various tasks. Keeping track of discussions via email, holding important documents at ones fingertips or booking plane/train-tickets online – smartphones and tablet-PCs are omnipresent and with increasing reception-coverage even more convenient.
Blurring borders between work and « life » Furthermore the borders between work- and personal-life are blurring and once a certain level of technical equipment is reached, people tend to find it hard to stepping down of it for work. One of the most plausible examples is the development of internet-bandwidth over the last few years. Not even 10 years ago it was possible to download around 30 megabytes within one hour; today it is widely more than 60 megabytes a minute. Given the actual technologies and regarding common workflow-processes, only a few could get along without the latter scenario. Personal smartphones and tablet-PCs are an incredible help in organizing things, preserving important data and connecting with colleagues, friends and family. This means that those devices will evidently be used during working-hours; no matter if accepted or prohibited by the employer.
Preserving flexibility The same situation goes for the usage of web-applications like webmail, social networking sites and online-sync-tools. Apparently some of these services are even vital for today’s business, customer- and investor-relations as well as additional marketing purposes. Keeping employees flexible therefore requires a different approach than to simply block ports, websites or protocols. Pure device- and service-management is outdated due to the complexity of the actual working-environment. A more differentiated approach is necessary. One that preserves the flexibility of using devices, services, protocols and software which fits to the most efficient work-flows and at the same time protecting sensitive corporate data from leaking out of the protected environment. The only way to ensure this reliably is a sophisticated content filtering solution that provides both content analysis as well as
A smart phone menu – flexible but secure?
digital file labeling (fingerprinting) and applies a blacklistingapproach to enforce the corporate security policy. This blacklisting-method provides the liberty to copy, upload and/or post everything except the predefined classified information.
Requirements This requires that all important data communication channels are covered. These include physical ports for removable storage devices, document printing (local, network and virtual printers), local smartphone synchronization as well as network protocol and application filtering. The importance becomes obvious as soon as it is pointed out that a port-management solution is meaningless without the network protocol control. In summary it can be stated that security does not necessarily have to be enforced on the expense of flexibility. The above described scenario will enable administrators to secure sensitive information and provide a wide range of privileges to the users at the same time.
Mathias Knops (32), studied business administrations with logistics and ebusiness and specializes in interdisciplinary technological partnerships as well as comprehensive security strategies.
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
GPS and intelligent displays to adress harsh environment c
Documentation ENISA published new guide on IT security In October, the European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA) published a new Guide with 36 recommendations on building effective Public and Private Partnerships (PPP) for resilient IT security. Across the EU, the critical infrastructure of most Member States is in the hands of the private sector. The critical information infrastructures (CII) in Europe are fragmented, both geographically and because of competition among telecom operators. ENISA’s new guide with 36 recommendations on how to successfully build a PPP underlines the need for a common understanding across Europe. This is of particular importance for the European Public Private Partnership for Resilience (EP3R), a European Union initiative, which is liaising with national PPPs on Critical Information Infrastructure Protection (CIIP) issues. The Executive Director of ENISA, Professor Udo Helmbrecht, commented: “There is a need for a truly international, global approach to cyber security and Critical Information Infrastructure Protection. No country can create a CIIP strategy in isolation, as there are no national boundaries in cyber-space. PPPs are consequently one of the agenda items for the special EU-US Working Group on Cyber-Security and Cyber-Crime.” ENISA’s mission is helping to achieve a high and effective level of Network and Information Security within the European Union. Together with the EU-institutions and the Member States, ENISA seeks to develop a culture of Network and Information Security for the benefit of citizens, consumers, business and public sector organisations in the European Union. ENISA is helping the European Commission, the Member States and the business community to address, respond and especially to prevent Network and Information Security problems. The Agency is as a body of expertise, set up by the EU to carry out very specific technical, scientific tasks in the field of Information Security, working as a “European Community Agency“. The Agency also assists the European Commission in the technical preparatory work for updating and developing Community legislation in the field of Network and Information Security.
The Guide is available through the ENISA website: http://www.enisa.europa.eu
A Paradigm shift in IT sec and encryption by Joseph E. L. Souren, Wave, CEO, EMEA, Lee, MA
Businesses and organizations have long since ceased to be impregnable castles; rather, their boundaries have become quite fluid due to the potentials of ubiquitous computing. ITsecurity concepts must adapt to this new situation or risk compromising confidential data, because many business processes that involve sensitive data and documents now go beyond the firewall. Traditional instruments to create security for networks and applications are not designed for the comprehensively decentralized business networks that have become commonplace today, because these instruments primarily rely on software that’s based on each specific operating system and that consequently leaves the door wide open for attackers. This is especially true of authentication systems that rely on user names and passwords, and it also applies to systems based on smartcards or tokens, as can be seen in the wake of the successful break-in to the network of Lockheed Martin, the American defense-industry manufacturer, which operates a network equipped with SecurID tokens.
Device-Centered Authentication Whether it’s purely a software solution or a software solution based on smartcards or hardware tokens, traditional user-centered IT-security strategies are scarcely suitable for safeguarding business processes that go beyond a business’s boundaries. From the perspective of rigorous security management, little is ultimately achieved when information security vendors, in response to the abovementioned security breach, replace forty million SecurID tokens – because the deployed security technology itself is the vulnerability, and the next successful criminal attack is only a matter of time. A promising solution does not lie in repairing outmoded technologies, but in a paradigm shift away from user-centered methods and toward hardware-based identification of secure devices, whether these be computers or components of the periphery or the network. This paradigm shift above all demands organizational rethinking. The stronger technology for a security solution embedded in each specific device has fortunately been available for a long time. Now it is up to the organization to realize and take advantage of its potential.
Trust Platform Moduled -Oriented Security The Management Solution for Trust Platform Moduled -Oriented Security is on its way. The basic idea of device-centered
conditions is what crisis management forces require
urity – Hardware-based authentication
security is the cryptographic hardening of devices which are authorized to access the network. The technology for this exists in a hardware security chip called the Trusted Platform Module (TPM) defined and developed by the Trusted Computing Group. The TPM is already built into the motherboards of most business-class computers. Some peripheral devices (e.g. printers) likewise contain similar crypto-chips, which, like the TPM, allow devices to be reliably identified by the network before being granted access. With TPMs, authentication keys can be generated, signed and stored within a device. This defines the identity of the specific device in a way that’s indubitable and impossible to manipulate. By knowing which devices are on a network enables administrators to deliver a higher level of assurance that only authorized users are granted access to sensitive information and confidential resources. This application of the TPM also ensures the integrity of the network by eliminating the ability for rogue, unknown devices to access the network or introduce malicious software.
Plead for central administration
Joseph E. L. Souren Joseph E.R. Souren leads Wave’s operations in Europe, Middle-East and Asia (EMEA).He holds a Master’s degree in Business Administration and degrees in Commercial Economics and Marketing Management, which he completed after attending the Royal Military School. With nearly 20 years of experience, Souren has a strong track record for managing sales, marketing, channel and geo –operations. Most recently, he served as VP of CA Technologies’ Internet Security Business Unit.
identification of devices and thus to assure that a communication cannot be manipulated. For example, the EMBASSY product series from Wave Systems Corp. makes the management of TPM-oriented, hardware-based authentication and encryption solutions comprehensible. Wave Systems serves numerous major clients for whom it has established TPMbased security solutions and accordingly has at its disposal a wide spectrum of experience and best practices.
The central administration of encryption and authorization mechanisms is necessary to guarantee a hardware-based
News: Recent NATO activities “Smart Defence”: The new slogan of NATO – adapted to the reality “I know that in an age of austerity, we cannot spend more. But neither should we spend less. So the answer is to spend better. And to get better value for money. To help nations to preserve capabilities and to deliver new ones. This means we must prioritise, we must specialise, and we must seek multinational solutions. Taken together, this is what I call Smart NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen 30 September 2011 Defence.”
Ministers reaffirm commitment to operations On 5 October, NATO Defence Ministers met in Brussels to review current operations for Libya, in Kosovo, and off the Horn of Africa. Ministers concluded that Operation Unified Protector to protect civilians in Libya has been a great success. They reiterated their commitment to continue the mission under the United Nations mandate and their determination to bring it to an end as soon as possible. Ministers also highlighted KFOR as a success story, and
stressed their continued commitment to a safe and secure environment in Kosovo. On the challenge of piracy, Ministers renewed their commitment to tackling this threat and to provide the capabilities needed to do so. New Chairman of the Military Committee elected On 17 September, General Knud Bartels, Chief of the Danish Defence, has been elected new Chairman of the Military Committee (CMC) by NATO’s 28 Chiefs of Defense. His term of office, normally three years, is expected to
begin in June 2012, when he will succeed the current Chairman, Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola. General Bartels has served NATO for many years, including as Danish Military Representative to NATO’s Military Committee. NATO launches procurement process for cyber defence On 20 September, NATO formally launched the procurement process for the full operational capability of NATO’s cyber defences, which should be running by the end of 2012. The new cyber defence capability is one of 11 priority projects agreed at NATO’s Lisbon Summit in November last year. At a cost of over 28 million Euro, it represents nearly a tripling of the Alliance’s investment in protecting its networks, as well as a strengthened ability to support NATO member countries. Industry is now being invited to submit their best-value offers for the project.
MBDA Deutschland – Excellence, Innovation, Cooperation MBDA Deutschland is a partner and supplier to the Army, Navy and Air Force. MBDA Deutschland consists of LFK-Lenkflugkörpersysteme GmbH with its subsidiaries TDW GmbH and Bayern-Chemie GmbH, as well as a range of joint ventures. The missile systems house, MBDA Deutschland possesses capabilities on all levels – design, development, production and logistical support of subsystems and key components (e.g. propulsion and warhead systems) for guided-missile systems and even complete integrated weapon systems. This applies for air defence systems (MEADS, PATRIOT und SysFla/LFK NG) as well as for guided-missile systems for arming aircraft (TAURUS KEPD 350, METEOR), helicopters (PARS 3 LR), and naval vessels (RAM, ESSM). Thanks to its full-spectrum capabilities in the areas of design, simulation, development, proof, integration, testing, production and logistics, MBDA Deutschland can ensure support for these systems over their entire product life cycle. The company is constantly working to further develop its technological competencies so that it can offer the armed forces the capabilities they need to fulfil their missions. Close cooperation with the German armed forces and research institutes (e.g. the Fraunhofer Gesellschaft) and universities (e.g. the Federal Armed Forces University Neubiberg) is standard practice. MBDA Deutschland employs around 1300 persons at its Schrobenhausen (650), Unterschleißheim (420), Aschau (140) and Ulm (70) facilities. Its annual sales total approximately € 500 million. Consolidation of the European guided-missile industry: In March 2006 MBDA Deutschland became a part of the MBDA Group in the course of the consolidation of Europe’s guidedmissile industry. With industrial facilities in four European countries and the USA, MBDA has an annual turnover of € 2.8 billion and an order book of over €10,8 billion. MBDA is a global leader in missiles and missile systems, with more than 90 customers in the world. This created one of the main prerequisites for maintaining Germany’s core capabilities in the area of guided-missile systems on the European level over the medium and long term. With the support of MBDA, over € 60 million has been invested in a new, ultramodern infrastructure at MBDA Deutschland’s headquarters at the Schrobenhausen site. This makes the facility one of the most advanced defence technology locations in Europe. Thanks to its integration in MBDA, MBDA Deutschland has access to self-financed technologies and study results from the entire company.
Air defence programmes such as MEADS underscore MBDA Deutschland’s systems and equipment solution capabilities. Photos: MBDA
MBDA Deutschland’s customers benefit from many years of experience in international cooperation projects. The national, European and transatlantic cooperation undertakings underscore MBDA Deutschland’s systems and equipment solution capabilities in the areas of guided-missile systems and guided missiles for land, air and naval forces.
Contact: LFK – Lenkflugkörpersysteme GmbH Hagenauer Forst 27 86529 Schrobenhausen, Germany Telephone: +49 (0)8252 99 0 Telefax: +49 (0)8252 99 3871 firstname.lastname@example.org www.mbda-systems.com
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
Maritime Security The pirat business is still attractive: low cost – low risk-high profit Dr. Michael Stehr ................................................................... 58 Stefan Katzenbeisser ............................................................. 60 Photo: EuNavFor ATALANTA
Pirate attack areas are continuously extending – and pirates are going strong
ATALANTA – Successful operations for the freedom of the seas continue by Dr. Michael Stehr, Barrister, Troisdorf
The waters around the Horn of Africa again proved to be the world’s piracy hotspot, closely followed by Southeast-Asian waters, with the most remarkable rise in attacks since 2005. “Waters around the Horn of Africa” describes it very euphemistically. Pirate attack areas are now extending from the Malabar Coast to the Southern Red Sea, from Karachi to the center of the Mozambique Channel. The International Maritime Bureau (IMB) in London, with its Piracy Reporting Center (PRC) in Kuala Lumpur, reported 219 attacks, including 49 hijackings, in 2010. 16 additional incidents occurred when pirates captured ships while the crew sheltered in a panic room, waiting until a warship arrived from one of the 20 some navies operating in the area on the basis of the UN Anti-Piracy Resolutions. 8 crewmen were killed and 13 injured.
2010/2011: The pirates are still going strong The IMB reported 163 attacks in the first half of 2011 (there were 100 in the first half of 2010). But pirates were less successful in 2011, with only 21 hijacks (versus 27 in first half of 2010). Naval officers experienced in the operations estimate four times as many unreported cases. The decrease in hijacks resulted from more situational awareness and increased effectiveness in civil ship defence measures. Since autumn 2010, a rising number of merchants and fishing vessels are protected by armed security guards. Additionally, the navies’ hard work in the Internationally Recommended Transit Corridor (IRTC) from Aden to a point north of Socotra proved to be very useful. In the IRTC, several variations of naval protection are available: (unescorted) Group Transits, Escorted Group Transits and regular “national” convoys (protected by warships from Russia, China, Japan, South Korea and others, and in most cases used by merchant vessels flying different flags). Additionally, “man-to-man marking”, the
Dr. Michael Stehr Barrister Dr. Michael Stehr was born in Hannover, Germany, on September 13, 1966. He is a lawyer with experiences as staff member of the scientific branch of the administration of German Bundestag. Dr. Stehr is editor Law of the Sea for the German periodical MARINE FORUM since February 2000, www.marineforum.info ), dealing with Piracy and seaborne terrorisme, European Security and Defence Policy, International Law and Law of the Sea. Dr. Michael Stehr is board member of Euro Defense Germany.
basis for protection and seaborne anti-piracy reconnaissance, is provided by some warships otherwise providing “zone marking” around the IRTC. This is important to unescorted Group Transits and ships transiting the IRTC on their own. The continuing extension of the hunting grounds of the pirate gangs, which now include not only Somalis but also Eritreans and Yemenis, still causes much concern. In mid-summer 2011, two pirate attacks occurred off Trivandrum, only 15 miles from the Malabar Coast. On several occasions, the Indian Coast Guard caught suspicious persons of Somali origin between the Indian subcontinent and the Maldives and Laccadives Islands. And there is another worrying development: hijacked merchant ships are repeatedly used as mother ships. While slow-moving, these vessels can stay on the high seas for weeks or even months, providing shelter to the attack skiffs in the typically stormy summer conditions and enabling them to attack merchant shipping in the entire Indian Ocean when the weather calms down for a day or two. An example was the hijack of the small tanker MT JUBBA XX in July 2011. The pirate business is still attractive: low cost – low risk – high profit. Basically, pirate gangs work like mob-gangs in drug
smuggling and other illegal “business”: greed for more money causes more violence. As in recent years, the “high-season” of piracy lasts from September to the end of the year; the last four month of the year are the most dangerous for the shipping industry. In 2011, even more than in previous years, the gangs were less successful in conducting hijackings in the “spring season”.
Merchant ships’ self-defence The International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Best Management Practices (BMP3) still prove to be effective in providing sufficient self-defence – on the condition that one’s vessel can sail at least 20 knots and/or has a high freeboard. Effective means of defence are: pressurized or heated water, ballast overflow, electric fences, razor wire and other improvised techniques if the captain and crew are prepared for a coordinated response. But one has to take into consideration that the ship if attacked by more than two skiffs, these measures are no longer sufficient. Last but not least, the panic room, even after the disaster of MV BELUGA NOMINATION, still provides a last line of defence against hijacking – but only if a navy unit is near enough to intervene within a few hours. Since January 2011, pirates have learned to break open even hardened compartments using welding torches from the ship’s own equipment stores. Meanwhile, it is advisable to fit panic rooms with oxygen, food, water and energy for lighting and communications to last for two days. Armed security teams comprising of four to six men equipped with state of the art weaponry, communications, night vision goggles and much more have become the defence method of choice for a rising number of ship owners and operators. According to a study by PricewaterhouseCoopers Germany, around a quarter of German shipowners decided to hire armed guards. More attacks than ever before have been repelled by armed guards, in most cases with warning shots only – for now pirates are avoiding firefights and prefer looking for easier prey. As of the early autumn 2011, no ship carrying armed guards was hijacked.
EuNavFor ATALANTA in 2010 and 2011 No less than six warships, and up to ten at a time, are serving under the flag of the European Union in Operation ATALANTA, along with some Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA) for sea surveillance. From early 2009 to summer 2011, European units escorted about 100 transits for the World Food Programme and AMISOM, thwarted at least 80 pirate attacks against fishing vessels and merchant ships, and detained at least 80 pirate action groups (PAGs). The German Navy will deploy two Frigates from September 2011 to the end of the year.
The political significance for naval security Until 1990, NATO defined security on the sea as naval security. Since then, the safety aspect of naval traffic, followed by
Documentation Piracy: Very real dangers – an example from the IMB’s Live Piracy Reports: “06.08.2011: 1505 UTC: Posn: 13:07.2N - 043:04.9E, Around 20nm ENE of Assab, Eritrea, Red Sea. Twelve skiffs with five to eight pirates in each skiff approached a bulk carrier underway. As the skiff closed in, guns and ladders were noticed. Warning flares were deployed by the onboard security team. The skiffs continued to approach the vessel at 17 knots. At a distance of around 300 meters, on the command of the captain, the onboard security team fired warning shots resulting in most of the skiffs falling back and circling the vessel. Two skiffs continued to chase the vessel and returned fire. The skiffs and the security team exchanged fire and after 30 minutes and numerous approaches the skiffs aborted and moved away.”
ecological and social aspects, dominated political thinking and planning within the EU and especially of German protagonists. Naval security has played a minor role since then: capabilities of European navies were reduced without consideration of strategic necessities and planned missions. Now, the Lisbon Treaty, in Articles 42 and 222, opens the door for the European Commission to grasp the subject of “defence”. In spite of the 2003 Solana Paper, “A Secure Europe in a Better World”, the European Commission is hesitating to make use of its new powers. The Solana Paper does not contain any hint of naval security. Only a 2008 report on the implementation of the Solana Strategy refers to the sea surveillance mission and the threat to the freedom of the seas by pirate activities. EuNavFor ATALANTA is not only the first mission under the colours of the European Union. It is well-planned and well-executed by several European navies. European naval forces proved to be capable of providing naval security far away from European coastal waters. But a well-drafted European Naval Security Strategy is yet to be submitted. A “Maritime Solana Paper” is still missing.
Restrictive rules of engagement and lack of criminal prosecution The rules of engagement (RoE) of deployed European naval units are still restrictive. The legal framework options of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and UN Security Council Resolutions are much wider than these RoE. Criminal prosecution still follows the principal of chance, even though the percentage of repatriated pirates after detention by warships dropped from 90% in 2009 to 40% in the early spring of 2011, according to official press releases. Criminal prosecution remains an option for willing nations – or for those that are paid for it. There is a great need for an international criminal court to prosecute pirates – not only a few, but a great number of them.
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
As most of attacks to ships are in the direct vicinity, there is very little time to react
A surveillance system for the immediate and nearby vicinity of maritime platforms by Stefan Katzenbeisser, Diehl BGT Defence, Überlingen
Maritime platforms can be effectively protected against assaults by using technologies that ward off even threats posed by forces that work in a tactically asymmetrical manner. Surprisingly, most of the asymmetrical assaults originate from the civil environment, whereby the assaulter is already in the direct vicinity of the ships. As a result, there is very little time on hands for an effective reaction to the threat.
network of the ship. The intensive use concept for F125 makes high demands on the overall surveillance system with respect to reliability and maintenance (should be maintenance-free). If we consider particularly the detection of asymmetrical threats, we realise that the detection range of the system is not the only decisive factor. In fact, the reaction time available for the person in charge after the detection of the threat by the surveillance system, plays the most important role.
Motivation This kind of threat calls for continuous and consistent surveillance in the immediate and nearby vicinity of maritime platforms ex side plate. By this means, peculiar features of even smaller objects can be detected without fail and notified promptly. The available personnel and material resources as well as the marginal conditions and the directives for the use of these resources should be taken into account for the fulfilment of this task. According to the current state of technology, a system that includes electro-optical sensors and features effective signal processing offers the possibility of meeting these demands to a large extent. The system SIMONE selected for the German frigate of class 125 (F125) is presented below.
Requirements For detecting the asymmetrical threats, the user requires an all-round surveillance system for the immediate and nearby vicinity, which can be particularly used in situations where the ship is in the harbour, in the roads or in the estuary. Objects in the surroundings of the platform should be detected, tracked down and evaluated independently. The system should be usable at day, in the night and practically in all weather conditions. The system must get actively integrated in the data
Diagram 1 – cover range F125
Derivation of the system approach The SIMONE system was designed on the basis of the requirement’s documents for the F125. SIMONE is made up of two core components. Firstly, there are sensor modules that are distributed over the platform, each with an individual number of infrared cameras, which function in the spectral range 7-14 µm. For the F125, two sensor modules with one sensor each are used with a total monitoring range of 80° in the front and back. For athwart directions, two sensor modules with 5 sensors each, having a monitoring range of 180°, are employed. The sensor modules with 5 sensors each are integrated on the starboard and port side in the area of the helicopter hangar. The sensor modules with 1 sensor each are on-deck modules, which are integrated at the back on the SATCOM Salingen or in the front on the bridge roof. Together, the fourteen infrared cameras complement one another in six sensor modules for the monitoring range shown in diagram 1 (covering range F125). The coverage is extended over the entire surface of water starting from the ship’s side and over a part of the airspace. By adjusting the configuration slightly, the immediate and nearby vicinity can be covered, e.g. to cover a task force supply vessel as shown in diagram 2 (cover-
Diagram 2 – cover range EGV
age range EGV). The high spatial resolution of the sensors ensures that smaller objects around the platform are also detected; and the high image refresh rate of 20 Hz. enables a spatially precise and timely recording as well as tracking of fast moving objects (as far as possible). The second important component of the SIMONE system is the Processing Cabinet, which includes more than 19’’ PC modules based on a multi-core architecture. The computer unit, which is shown, signal processing and network, is linked to the sensor modules via the in-built ship network of the F125. The raw data images delivered by the sensors are analysed by the signal processing unit in a number of steps and in real time on the basis of their special characteristics. The objects thus determined are analysed in a further step with respect to their kinematic behaviour so as to finally arrive at an evaluation of the threat. The SIMONE Processing Cabinet is connected to the FüWES via the in-built ship network. Alarms, i.e. tracks that are evaluated as a threat, as well as HMI commands are transferred to the FüWES for the bi-directional F125. Here, it is important to note that SIMONE does not make any classification, but a typifica-
tion (e.g. small boat, aircraft etc.). Alarms transferred to the FüWES include a threat evaluation, specifications about the object type and the bearing. The estimated distance and the speed derived from it are also reported for objects on the surface of the water. The classification is made in the in-line function chain with a higher resolutive sensor (verifier). The image helps the person in charge to determine the object type and evaluate the behaviour of the object and of any persons on board, and thereby contributes largely towards the creation of Situational Awareness. The images of an infrared camera are compiled to create a panorama image, see diagram 3 (HMI). The inertial rolling and pitching values of the ship’s platform are taken into account for an electronic horizontal stabilisation of the panorama. An optimum use of the multicore computer hardware is achieved by reducing the required package selection of the used Linux system to a minimum and by factoring in a low-latency kernel.
Innovation A complete coverage of the surroundings is essential for creating a panorama image. Usually, most of the infrared surveillance systems are based on scanning systems using line detec>> see page 62
THE EUROPEAN – SECURITY AND DEFENCE UNION
<< continued from page 61
Diagram 3 – HMI
tors or on matrix detectors with gradual switchover of the visual fields. Both the variants demand a close coordination between the optical components that are moved mechanically to one another and the detector. In such processes, the number of detectors are kept to a minimum whereby it should be possible to record high angle ranges with a single detector while maintaining a high spatial resolution. The rigid arrangement of the distributed sensors in SIMONE for covering the monitoring area is possible because of the availability of cost-effective microbolometer detectors. Here, the shadowing problem does not occur as in other central systems. This innovative detector technology features low maintenance expenses, long life of the components and thereby low costs; thus, offering major advantages for the application in uninterrupted operation. As against quantum detectors, the operation of these thermal detectors does not require cryogenic temperatures, thereby simplifying the application. Microbolometer detectors are well-suited for monitoring the immediate and nearby vicinity with the required video image rates. The development of the microbolometer detectors is mainly fostered by the automobile industry, where they are used in driver assistance systems for improving the vision at night and under adverse weather conditions. The rapid further development in these civil areas promotes the improvement of these detectors towards higher formats and higher thermal sensitivity. The SIMONE signal processing unit processes a continuous data flow of nearly 200 MByte/s in real time at a frame rate of 20 Hz. The processing method is assisted by COTS components (commercial-off-the-shelf) of state-of-the-art processor technologies. Apart from the adapted operating system, an adaptive multi-thread software architecture of the operational algorithms makes an optimum use of the hardware. The signal processing architecture is organised in a parallel manner and is therefore available as multi-thread or for multi-tasks. This
Diagram 4 – individual sensor
software structure allows an optimum adaptation to the future computer architectures at a minimum adaptation expenditure.
Prospects Since 2005, the SIMONE system was tested in several field experiments and has been developed further gradually. Tracking procedures for different target types, stabilisation of the panorama image and links to the FüWES could be tested intensively. Apart from the functions for the detection and tracking of asymmetrical threats that result from the requirements, further applications for the overall surveillance system SIMONE are also possible. Depending upon the sea condition, persons swimming on the surface of the water can be detected some hundred meters away, which also supports SAR (Search and Rescue) missions. Since the system continuously monitors the ship surroundings from the ship’s side, it notices even a person falling overboard. The SIMONE system can offer navigation support at night and under adverse weather conditions. The modular structure of the system offers the required flexibility if any adjustments have to be made to the ship platforms that are already in service. This is also supported by standardised procedures, such as the Ethernet connection between sensor modules and the Processing Cabinet. The distribution of the sensor modules on the platform can be adapted with respect to the individual assembly as well as the place of integration (in a platform-specific manner). On ships without FüWES, SIMONE can be operated with a separate HMI. If a FüWES is available, SIMONE can be integrated in it. This facilitates retrofitting of old as well as civil ships. Additional sensor modules can be installed on land and teleguided for extending the monitoring range covered by SIMONE, e.g. for the inspection of areas in the harbour that are not visible; see diagram 4 (individual module).