a product message image
{' '} {' '}
Limited time offer
SAVE % on your upgrade

Page 1

ISSN 2192-6921

Independent Review on European Security and Defence − A product of ProPress Publishing Group

Volume N° 32

Saving the European Union The final stretch before the European elections

The next elections are of utmost importance for the EU

Disaster Management: the Union Civil Protection Mechanism

Antonio Tajani MEP, President of the European Parliament

Monique Pariat, Director-General of DG ECHO, European Commission

www.magazine-the-european.com A magazine of the Behörden Spiegel Group

Edition 1/2019


Why are populist movements in Europe currently getting stronger and more influential? Will the European institutions survive if, after the elections to the new European Parliament, there is a widespread presence of Eurosceptic members intentionally criticising the work of the Parliament? Must we fear that the achievements of the Union over the last 60 years – liberty, wealth, and peace – will end? Is the European Union really in danger? For me, the European Union is provoked like never before in very real terms. Its enemies, who want to destroy it, are present in its Member States themselves, while others outside the EU like Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump have great geostrategic and economic interests in degrading its power. The European Union has survived all crises in the last two decades, but today we can observe fracture lines between the south and the north, between the west and the east. It is not only the migration problem dividing the continent, it is a problem of political culture. Liberty, democracy, and peace in a sane world were the driving elements for the founding fathers of the Union, starting modestly with six countries, the former enemies well integrated. Today with 28 and soon 27 countries, interests diverge so much that to obtain a European-­ minded solution, the lowest denominator prevails. This

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 Phone: +49/172 3282 319, Fax: +33/684806655 E-Mail: hartmut.buehl@orange.fr Bonn Office: Friedrich-Ebert-Allee 57, D-53113 Bonn Phone: +49/228/970 97-0, Fax: +49/228/970 97-75 Executive Media & Content: Andy Francis Stirnal Phone: +49/176 6686 1543 E-Mail: andy.stirnal@magazine-the-european.com

must not be the solution for the future, and it might be worthwhile discussing the decision-making process of the EU in gene­ral, giving more power to the Parliament.

Photo: private, LISphoto.com

Help citizens understand Europe

The EU has nevertheless proved over the Hartmut Bühl last few years in the Brexit negotiations that the EU Member States are able to act together and demonstrate consent. Now it is time to actively help British people resolve their internal societal crisis by bringing Brexit to a “reasonable” end and not let the UK lead the EU by the nose any longer. Getting ready for the future, Europe needs leaders like Macron, daring to design a vision of Europe, but it also needs Merkel’s pragmatic policy approach. Europe doesn’t need the Orbans and Kaczyńskis, the Salvinis and the Le Pens. To save the European Union from its crisis, all nations have to do their best at their job for cohesion. I do hope – and this affects me as a German – that my nation, which has benefited the most from the EU from its first modest steps up to now, as the fore-runner in the Eurozone, will be more open to good ideas from others…

Publisher and Editor-in-Chief: Hartmut Bühl, Brussels Deputy Editor-in-Chief: Nannette Cazaubon, Paris; E-Mail: nannette.cazaubon@magazine-the-european.com Editor: Alexa Keinert, Berlin; E-mail: editor.esdu@gmail.com Translator: Miriam Newman-Tancredi Publishing House: ProPress Verlagsgesellschaft mbH President ProPress Publishing Group: R. Uwe Proll Layout: Beate Dach, SpreeService- und Beratungsgesellschaft mbH, Berlin Print: WIRmachenDRUCK GmbH, Backnang The European − Security and Defence Union Magazine is published by the ProPress Publishing Group. The ProPress Publishing Group is the organiser 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.magazine-the-european.com Subscription: 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) © 2019 by ProPress Publishing Group Bonn/Berlin A magazine of the Behörden Spiegel Group






Vol. No. 32

Saving the European Union

Content 3 Editorial, Hartmut Bühl 6 News, Nannette Cazaubon

8–14 In the Spotlight “Parting is such sweet sorrow...”

The final stretch before the European elections

Elections / Future of Europe 16


23 8



George Ciamba, Bucharest The Romanian Presidency objectives in 2019 A safer Europe of common values Federico Fabbrini, Dublin Ad Kalendas Graecas? The future of Brexit Interview with Sir Richard Lawson Barrons, London What does Brexit mean for the British Armed Forces? There will be no divorce of security interests

14 Hartmut Bühl, Brussels Climate – will our youth be able to change the world? Commentary



Ioan Mircea Paşcu MEP, Brussels/Strasbourg The time is ripe for a Commissioner for Security and Defence Adapting the EU institutions Jean-Dominique Giuliani, Paris European evidences The EU is still an example of success Manfred Weber MEP, Brussels Europe needs to face the threats of the 21st century Joining our forces in a European army Reinhard Bütikofer MEP, Brussels/Strasbourg Security Union: Getting the defence industrial pillar right A regulatory power for the defence sector

Populism / Migration and Refugees 27

29 Cover picture:

Interview with Antonio Tajani MEP, Brussels/Strasbourg The next European elections will be of utmost importance for the EU Voting for Europe!

The statue of Winston Churchill in front of Big


Ben in London

Giulia Tilenni, Paris Why do we give a chance to populist movements? How to avoid the decline of the Union Ana Gomes MEP, Brussels/Strasbourg The way ahead: more Europe to uphold human rights Fighting populism and fascism Documentation Walls are not eternal

Photos (cover): © ArTo, stock.adobe.com; © European Union, 2019, Source: EP/Michel Christen (Tajani); European Union, 2015, source: EC-Audiovisual Service (Pariat)


page 4: ©ptyphoto, stock.adobe.com (left);


47–60 Security and Defence Disaster management, CBRNe protection, and development


Documentation The European Parliament

Economy 34



Nicola Beer MdB, Berlin New liberal dynamics in a reformed EU A more liberal EU to unite societies

Dr Werner Hoyer, Luxembourg The new European Union Make Europe more competitive


Tonino Picula MEP, Brussels/Strasbourg Consolidation of the Western Balkans is crucial for European security Preventing outbreaks of violence

41 Michael Gahler MEP, Brussels/Strasbourg Transatlantic relations: shared history and common values The EU has to define its ambitions 42



Laurent Berger, Paris How to build a European industrial policy that respects social demands Social dialogue is prevailing

External relations/Security and defence 39





Monique Pariat, Brussels Managing disasters: the role of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism A culture of prevention Interview with Hasso von Blücher, Erkrath 50 years of CBRN protection A whole life for the protection of lives Interview with Henriette Geiger, Brussels Effective development aid through coherent and concrete projects Promoting democracy and human rights CONFERENCE REPORT “Realising and Financing Africa’s Energy Revolution” 13th German-African Energy Forum Sebastian Meyer-Plath, Leipzig Networking on CBRNe detectors Preparing for the worst

Thomas Popp, Schwaikheim Decontamination solutions for all kind of scenarios Responding fast and efficiently


Authors 2018

Frédéric Mauro and Olivier Jehin, Paris/Brussels A European army: a vital debate Thinking about it in a realistic way Jacques Favin Lévêque, Versailles European Army or Permanent Structured Coalition? Using existing instruments

© tanaonte, stock.adobe.com (right)

“The European − Security and Defence Union” is the winner of the 2011 European Award for Citizenship, Security and Defence

page 5: © Pierre Prakash, Audiovisual Service, European Union (right)





Aachen Treaty

Appeal to the future MEPs

On 22 January 2019, French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor

On 15th April the European sea rescue organisation SOS MEDITERRANEE started a European wide action aimed at “stopping progressive erosion of maritime and international law in the Mediterranean region”. The organisation calls on all candidates of the future European Parliament to insist on compliance with maritime law in the new legislative period. Sophie Beau, Executive Director of SOS MEDITERRANEE said: “European values are also at stake in the EU elections. We call for a clear mandate for the future Members of the European Parliament: to stand up for the compliance of the law at sea and not to let people in distress simply drown in the Mediterranean or be returned to Libya.” SOS MEDITERRANEE asks the European citizens to take a close look at the upcoming elections at the end of May to see whether the members of their constituency are committed to the compliance of international law and the protection of human lives in the Mediterranean. Frédéric Penard, operational director of SOS MEDITERRANEE, underlines that “in the legislative period of the EU Parliament, which is now coming to an end, sea rescue on the Mediterranean Sea was more and more suppressed, although it is the heart of the law of the sea. (…) If rescue operations can still take place at all, they will be made more difficult by the dysfunctional Libyan coastguard. They also intercept these people on the move and bring them back to the camps they fled from – with the paid contribution of the European citizens.” The call consists of a series of four different short videos produced by filmmaker Benoit Musereau and exclusive illustrations by cartoonist Rodho. The videos show the development of the last five years on the Mediterranean Sea.


Angela Merkel signed the “Treaty on Franco-German Cooperation and Integration” in the town hall of Aachen in the presence of the President of the European Commission, JeanClaude Junker, the President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, and the President of Romania, Klaus Johannis. The new Franco-German treaty, reinforcing the Elysée Treaty, signed on 22nd January 1963 between Konrad Adenauer and Charles de Gaulle, aims at strengthening cultural cooperation and is aligning the security interests of both countries. The treaty contains six main chapters: • European Affairs, Security, Peace and Development;   • Culture and Education; • Research and Mobility; • Regional and Transnational Cooperation; • Sustainable Development; • Climate, Environment and Economic Affairs. France and Germany will launch the implementation of the Aachen treaty with joint projects, which will be subject to oversight by the Franco-German Council of Ministers. > Web: The Treaty (French): https://bit.ly/2RPBuWk

Ceremony in the town hall of Aachen. From left to right: Jean-Claude Juncker, Klaus ­Johannis, Emmanuel Macron, Angela Merkel, Donald Tusk, 22.01.2019 

photo: © European Union, 2019, source: EC – Audiovisual Service/Etienne Ansotte


Provisional agreement On 18th April, the European Parliament endorsed a provisional agreement on the European Defence Fund (EDF) for the next budget period of 2021 to 2027. MEPs advocated for a budget of €11.5 billion. The EDF is designed to strengthen European cooperation by encouraging joint investments and technological innovation in the defence sector. Elżbieta Bieńkowska, Commissioner for the Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, said: ”The European Defence Fund marks a big step forward in European defence matters. It will strengthen European cooperation by encouraging joint investments and technological innovation in the defence sector. (…) The Fund will build on defence priorities agreed by Member States within the framework of the Common Foreign and Security Policy and ensure synergies with the Permanent European Structured Cooperation.” The preliminary political agreement reached by the European Parliament, Council and

© Rodho

Commission in the so-called trilogue negotiations is now subject to formal approval by the European Parliament and Council. The budgetary aspects and some related horizontal provisions of the future European Defence Fund are subject to the overall agreement on the EU’s next long-term budget.

> Web: Videos and more information: www.sosmediterranee.com/respectlawofthesea/




Seat projections for the next Parliament The last seat projections for the next European Parliament, which will be elected on 23-26th May 2019, were published by the Parliament on 18th April. Based on a national survey undertaken in the 28 Member States, the forecast was updated with data on the UK in view of the possible British participation in the election. Of the 751 seats, the projection allocates 180 seats to the EPP group (right), and 149 to the S&D group (left). It foresees 76 seats for ALDE (libe­rals), 66 for ECR (conservatives), 62 for ENF (far right), 46 for GUE/NGL (radical left), 57 for Greens/EFA and 45 EFDD (Eurosceptics). 62 were ranked in ”other” parties or new political movements. The 9th Parliament’s term will start on 2 July when MEPs will meet for its constituent session in Strasbourg. MEPs will elect the President, the 14 Vice-Presidents and the

graphik: © European Parliament

five Quaestors of the Parliament and decide on the number and composition of Parliament’s standing committees. > See also the documentation pp. 32-33

Who could succeed Juncker? In July 2019, the new European Parliament will vote on a new Commission President and, in autumn, on a new Commission. The Spitzenkandidaten (lead candidate) process, first used in the 2014 European elections, gives European citizens a say on candidates for the Commission Presidency since the results of the May European elections will be taken into account. The party with the most votes in the elections will then, in theory, have its candidate confirmed. The process started in autumn 2018 with the nomination of the Spitzenkandidaten by the European political parties. On 15th May the lead candidates will participate in the “Presidential Debate – EU elections 2019” which will be organised by the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) and will be hosted by Parliament in the Brussels plenary chamber.

The final stretch before the European elections…

The lead candidates: European People’s Party (EPP) – EPP Group Manfred Weber (CSU, Germany) Party of European Socialists (PES)– S&D Group Frans Timmermans, (PvdA, Netherlands) Reformists Alliance of Europe (ACRE) – ECR Group Jan Zahradil (ODS, Czech Republic) Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE): ALDE Group Seven candidates (Team Europe) • Margrethe Vestager (Radikale Venstre, Denmark) • Nicola Beer (FDP, Germany) • Emma Bonino (Più Europa, Italy) • Violeta Bulc (SMC, Slovenia) • Katalin Cseh (Momentum Mozgalom, Hungary) • Luis Garicano (Ciudadanos, Spain) • Guy Verhofstadt (Open VLD, Belgium)

© Peter Slama

European Green Party – Greens/EFA Group Ska Keller (Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, Germany) and Bas Eickhout (GroenLinks, Netherlands) The Party of the European Left – GUE/NGL Group Nico Cué and Violeta Tomič



In the Spotlight

+++ EU Presidency +++

Cohesion, a common European value

The Romanian Presidency objectives in 2019 by George Ciamba, Minister Delegate for European Affairs, Bucharest


olding the rotating presidency of the EU Council for the first time is a great honor for my country, and simultaneously, an immense responsibility. Europe is currently facing different kinds of challenges. We could say that we are in a 360 degrees circle of problems and threats requiring a robust approach. I am sure that it is the right time to have a comprehensive debate on the future of the European Union, based on the principle of cohesion. It is not by chance that the motto of the Romania Presidency to the EU Council is “Cohesion, a common European value”. I strongly believe that strengthening the values that ​​ keep us together in the great European family is essential. Undoubtedly, we may have our differences, but we must not forget our common goals: to create trust among our citizens and bring them prosperity, safety, freedom of movement, access to new technologies and so on.

sults of the negotiations on the future multiannual budget are well balanced and calibrated to the realities that the European citizens perceive day to day. Setting a clear deadline, the autumn of 2019, for obtaining the political agreement on this file provides an important impetus for the negotiation process that Romania is coordinating during these six months. We will focus on the negotiating box with the goal of formulating realistic and balanced choices, leading to a constructive advancement of the process. Special efforts will also be made, particularly in the first months of the Presidency, to advance negotiations on sectoral proposals.

A safer Europe Our second pillar, “A safer Europe”, aims at consolidating a safer Europe through increased cohesion among EU Member States, dealing with the new security challenges that threaten citizens’ safety and supporting the cooperation initiatives in Four priorities for the Presidency’s action the field. Over the last two years, we have witnessed significant We have structured our priorities for this six-month mandate on progress in the area of Common and Security Defence Policy four pillars: (CSDP), both at conceptual and practical levels, within the framework of the EU Global Strategy. This provides a strategic Europe of convergences momentum to consolidate the European profile in the area of The first pillar, “Europe of convergences”, in some simple security and defence. Until now, words, it is about being fair towards the major achievements are the our citizens. At large, the Romanian launch of the Permanent Structured Presidency is committed to stimulating Cooperation (PESCO), the Coordientrepreneurship and strengthening George Ciamba nated Annual Review on Defence industrial policy, closing development has been Minister Delegate for European Affairs (CARD) and the European Defense gaps, enhancing competitiveness, of Romania since November 2018. He graduated Fund (EDF), the updating of the supporting progress on digitalization. from the Polytechnic Institute in Bucharest (1989) framework for a more ambitious We are dedicated to advanced dossiers and holds a post-graduate degree in Internationrole of the EU in civilian crisis that could help bring to life objectives al Relations from the University of Bucharest/ management with the adoption of traditional policies, such as the Romanian MFA. During his diplomatic career Mr of the Civilian Compact (CC) and Cohesion Policy, and the Multiannual Ciamba was Ambassador to the Republic of Turkey increased civilian-military synergy. Financial Framework (MFF) plays a ma(1999-2003) and to the Hellenic Republic (2005Romania’s priorities in this area will jor role in providing the proper means 2012). He also was Deputy Head and Head of the focus on consolidating the functionfor these. MFF 2021-2027 will certainly North America Directorate (1997-1999) and served al profile of the CSDP, optimizing be one of the key files of the Romanian as Secretary of State for EU Affairs (November the EU’s operational engagement, EU Council Presidency. The European 2012-January 2017) before becoming Secretary and enhancing the CSDP partbudget is about more than money, it of State for Bilateral Affairs in the Euro-Atlantic nership and cooperation agenda, implies a reflection of how we see the area (January 2017-November 2018). including the transatlantic bond. It European Union in the future. That is is also important to strengthen the why we need to make sure that the re-


+++ EU Presidency +++

believe that strengthening “Ithestrongly values t​​ hat keep us together in the great European family is essential.” George Ciamba

photo: © European Union, 2019

EU-NATO strategic partnership, with a view to increasing the coherence between their respective initiatives and processes, and focusing on cyber defence, increasing resilience and countering hybrid threats, fighting terrorism, improving strategic communication and military mobility.

and cohesion of the EU by promoting policies on combating discrimination, ensuring equal opportunities and equal treatment for men and women, as well as by increasing the citizens’ involvement, in particular of the youth, in European debates.

Romania will be an honest broker Europe, as a stronger global actor Regarding the third pillar, “Europe, as a stronger global actor”, the Romanian Presidency will aim to further consolidate the global role of the EU through promoting the enlargement policy, the European action in its neighbourhood, further implementing the Global Strategy, ensuring the necessary resources for the EU, and implementing all of the EU’s global commitments. We consider the European perspective a cohesion factor at a European level, motivating reforms in the region and helping to overpass outstanding bilateral issues. The power of this incentive was recently illustrated by the historic positive example set by the Republic of North Macedonia and Greece. Given the common history the Western Balkans region shares, regional cooperation and mutual support should be seen as an essential prerequisite towards this goal. Candidates and potential candidate countries are facing the same challenges. Working together, sharing experiences and looking for the most effective solutions in light of the regional specificities have the potential to capitalize and enhance the outcome of our efforts, as we are definitely stronger together. Romania strongly supports the enlargement process in the Western Balkans, on a merit-based approach. Europe of common values Last but not least, through the fourth pillar, “Europe of common values”, our Presidency aims at stimulating the solidarity

I would like to assure you that the Romanian EU Council Presidency will act impartially, as an honest broker, encouraging positive and constructive dialogue in achieving all the goals mentioned. Taking into consideration all those four pillars, I am confident that we can deliver the right platform for advancing discussions on the future of the European Union. As a Member State committed to the consolidation of the Union, we will act whilst bearing in mind the fact that the very complex challenges faced by the entire continent can only be addressed together, through common solutions, built on the idea of ​​unity, cohesion and efficiency at a European level. It is important that citizens better perceive the tangible results and the benefits of our project. As Presidency, we will also focus on securing free and fair European elections that are fundamental in determining the future of the Union. We consider this essential process in terms of the citizens’ role in defining leadership at European level. In February, the Council adopted conclusions meant to protect the electoral process and combat misinformation. As I said at that time, a core element of the democratic nature of the EU is that citizens should be able to vote in a well-informed and safe manner.

> Web Romanian EU Presidency: www.romania2019.eu



In the Spotlight

+++ Brexit +++

The future of Brexit and its consequences for the EU

Ad Kalendas Graecas? by Federico Fabbrini, Full Professor of EU Law at Dublin City University (DCU) and Founding Director of the DCU Brexit Institute, Dublin


n 11 April 2019 the European Council unanimously accepted a second request by Prime Minister Theresa May to further postpone the United Kingdom (UK) withdrawal date from the European Union (EU). Almost three years since the 2016 referendum, and over two years after the formal notification by the UK of its intention to leave the EU pursuant to Article 50 TEU, Brexit has not yet happened. And questions remain whether it will happen any time soon. As the European Council decided at the special summit, the date for withdrawal is now postponed to 31 October 2019. And while a measure of flexibility has been foreseen – which would allow the UK to withdraw before October if it approves earlier the withdrawal agreement – the now ever more likely prospect of British participation to the 2019 European Parliament elections in May suggests that the UK will remained tied to the EU for at least another while.

Federico Fabbrini is Full Professor of European law at the School of Law & Government of the Dublin City University and the Principal of the Brexit Institute. He holds a PhD in Law from the Photo:© AGENZIA 3P

European University Institute and previously had academic positions

in the Netherlands and Denmark. He regularly engages with EU institutions and national governments and is the author, among others of “Economic Governance in Europe” (Oxford University Press 2016) as well as the editor of “The Law & Politics of Brexit” (Oxford University Press 2017).

Lessons on the European integration project The ongoing permanence of the UK within the EU provides important lessons on the nature of the European integration project – but also raises new challenges for its future. Resilience of the European idea On the one hand, the obvious difficulties that the UK is facing in leaving the EU are a confirmation, a contrario, of the resilience of the European idea. The fact that the UK Government and Parliament are unable to properly follow up to the outcome of the June 2016 referendum, is a blow to the Eurosceptic dream of a “promised Jerusalem” outside the EU. Indeed, two subsequent requests to postpone the exit date by Prime Minister May demonstrate the impossibility of finding a meaningful way

to take back control from the EU without destroying a state’s economy and unsettling its politics. This ironically strengthens the case in favor of Europe, by revealing that the project of creating an “ever closer Union among the peoples of Europe” is indeed meant to be irreversible – a feature well reflected in the fact that the EU treaties are concluded for an indefinite duration. The EU is not a prison On the other hand, however, the inability of the UK to detach itself from the EU also raises important challenges for the future of Europe. After all, the EU is not a prison, and the codification of Article 50 TEU at the time of the Constitutional Convention was meant to reaffirm the high principle that the EU is a free Union of free states – all of which have willingly decided to share their sovereignty on a reciprocal basis to federate into a supranational organization. If a state where to feel caged into the EU against its will, this may challenge the constitutional compact on which the Union is based, and such state could become a nuisance in the functioning of the EU itself. Federico Fabbrini In fact, this risk quite quickly revealed itself in Brexit, as immediately following

is not going to happen anytime soon, “IftheBrexit EU must inevitably engage in a new round of

constitutional engineering to make sure that the ongoing EU membership of the UK doesn’t turn into a boomerang.” 


+++ Brexit +++

continue to believe we “Ineed to leave the EU, with

a deal, as soon as possible. (…) So we must now press on at pace with our efforts to reach a consensus on a deal that is in the national interest.” UK Prime Minister Theresa May after the Brexit special summit, 11.04.2019

the second UK request for extending Article 50, leading Eurosceptic politicians called for the UK to become “as difficult as possible”, using the veto and other tricks to obstruct and oppose the EU from within. In fact, it is precisely to avert this threat that the European Council – besides accepting the second extension – also requested the UK government to act in a constructive and responsible manner throughout the extension period in compliance with the Treaty-based duty of sincere cooperation.

UK Prime Minister Theresa May smiling during her arrival at the Brexit special meeting in Brussels, 10.04.2019

The question of a treaty reform Yet, it is not clear this can be expected, and much less enforced – which raises the important question whether the EU should in fact start thinking about more structural institutional solutions to accommodate different tiers of membership within its ranks. Reorganise the EU’s constitutional setup In fact, if 2 years of Brexit talks have proved the difficulties of leaving the EU, the 2016 Brexit referendum unearthed uneasiness with the EU that the Union would ignore at its own peril. And if the UK is due to remain the EU for a while more, with Brexit postponed ad Kalendas Graecas, it is certainly in the EU interest to reorganize its constitutional setup in such a way that states who are laggards in the process of integration do not interfere with the ambitions of others. In other words, the EU itself should promote constitutionally entrenched mechanisms of institutional differentiation where states with diverse visions of integration can coexist without undermining each other. The European Council conclusions of 11 April 2019 seem

photo: © European Union 2019

to potentially point in this direction when they stress that “the 27 Member States and the Commission, where appropriate together with the other institutions ... of the Union, will continue to meet separately at all levels to discuss matters related to the [future] situation” (§8). Avoid a boomerang effect However, leaving aside the question whether the future of the EU can really be at 27, it seems clear that a simple paragraph in a European Council conclusion won’t suffice. If Brexit is not going to happen anytime soon, the EU must inevitably engage in a new round of constitutional engineering to make sure that the ongoing EU membership of the UK doesn’t turn into a boomerang. If the second Brexit postponement is a boost for the irreversibility of the project of European integration, it is also a challenge for a free Union of free states. In this context, a treaty reform to differentiate tiers of membership and levels of commitments between Member States must emerge as an indispensable way forward.



In the Spotlight

+++ Brexit +++

Brexit does not mean that the UK’s security interests are divorced from those of the rest of Europe

What does Brexit mean for the British Armed Forces? Interview with Sir Richard Lawson Barrons, General (ret), London


he European: General Barrons, before your retirement, you were one of the most important military leaders of the UK because of your strategic thinking and your leadership capabilities, and I am very pleased to have this conversation on Brexit with you. In the discussion on Great Britain’s future political and strategic role in the world, Brexiteers apply terms such as “global power” or “maritime supremacy”, true in former glorious times, to today and even to the future. So, I would like to start our dialogue by asking you whether the UK is still a global power? Richard Barrons: Great Britain in 2019 is a middle ranking power in terms of its economy and its armed forces. It retains, however, exceptional influence around the world as a result of history, language, and the pervasiveness of soft power such as innovation, trade, sport, entertainment, literature, the BBC, and all the advantages of access to UK’s free, tolerant and well-ordered society. The UK also relies upon a functioning rules-based international order, as this is how its vital access to resources, trade and finance are maintained. In support of its place in the world, the UK maintains highly effective, if small, armed forces and a substantial investment (0.7% of GDP) in overseas development.

in order to maintain peace and stability is likely to grow rather than recede.

The European: How would you describe the role the UK expects to play in the future? Richard Barrons: The UK expects to play a responsible, active part in global affairs in concert with its partners and allies, as much out of self-interest as altruism. The key point for the future, as the world adjusts to the Asian century and the sweeping effects of challenges such as climate change, is that the need to engage, act and if necessary intervene with allies

The European: What role will the UK play in the modernisation of NATO? Richard Barrons: The UK will want to play a leading part in the modernisation of the Alliance, regardless of what happens with its relationship with the EU. And as the US expects the UK to pull its weight, so must all other European partners recognise that the days of securing themselves on the shirttails of the US taxpayer are passing. In particular, the vital part that can only

The European: It is also my understanding that British forces are modern forces, motivated and able – in coalition with allies – to play an important role for security and peace in the world. For me there is no question regarding London’s role in NATO. Should the institutional footprint of the EU one day fade away, will London’s role in NATO be reinforced by the notion of being the natural “European” leader in the alliance? Richard Barrons: There is no doubt about the UK’s commitment and prominence in NATO. It is the cornerstone of UK security. We must also recognise that the post-Cold War era is closing and the Alliance must be refreshed and modernised to meet the challenges such as Russia behaving consistently disagreeably and the risks appearing on NATO’s southern border. It is also important that NATO recognises how military technology has already changed so much that large elements of the current standing conventional force inventory are becoming obsolescent. For example, the precision long-range missile is trumping the primacy of large manned sea, land and air platforms and undefended critical infrastructure.

is my belief that Britain has its greatest opportunity in 50 years to “Itredefine our role. (…) We should be the nation that people turn to when the world needs leadership.”


UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson, 11.02.2019

+++ Brexit+++

be played by Germany is now just as important to consider as the UK contribution. I hope we will also see the UK demanding much better alignment of the hard power of a modernised NATO with the soft or ‘hybrid’ power latent in the EU. These two aspects in well-integrated combination would allow Europe to make its way through more troubling strategic waters. On the other hand, nothing lasts forever in international affairs, so if either NATO or the EU do not stand up to the challenges they must face, then no doubt we would see new arrangements arise!

Sir Richard Lawson Barrons, General (ret), KCB, CBE was the Commander of the UK Joint Forces Command from April 2013 until his retirement in April 2016. He was born in 1959 and his early career was spent in various staff and field posts in the UK, across Europe, and in the Far East. In 2003, he served as a brigade commander in Northern Ireland. As a Major General, he deployed to Iraq in 2008 with the responsibility for Photo:© Harland Quarrington/ MoD

The European: Over the last decades, but especially since the Lisbon Treaty, the British governments have refused any formal European defence structure. How do you see future British involvement in the security and defence of the EU and the European solidarity with the UK? Richard Barrons: The UK has always stood against any development of European military capability that seemed to dilute or duplicate the power of NATO. I don’t see that position changing, but without the UK in the EU there is going to be a more rapid, concrete expression of a European defence identity. I think this is usefully more about greater genuine independence rather than autonomy from a US-led NATO. There will be value in it if it reduces waste and duplication (not least in acquisition), adds new capability, or finds the will to engage and if necessary to intervene in pursuit of vital interests. But there is also great potential peril if it leads to any uncoupling of the US from NATO. There is not the most remote prospect of Europe investing in the strategic capabilities that only the US now possesses, and I wonder how many politicians know enough about defence at the highest levels to grasp this? The European: I feel that you have certain fears for the future? Richard Barrons: I fear that many leaders and officials in Europe today only have the experience of the relatively calm waters of the post-Cold War era, and they may have persuaded themselves that Europe can somehow declare eternal immunity from war at home and abroad. Given that Europe relies on global conditions it does not monopolise for its security and prosperity, and in a world which is becoming a much more challenging and uncertain place, I think it is more likely than not that the coming generation will require military intervention somewhere at a greater scale and ferocity then we have seen in recent times. So were a European defence identity limited to peacekeeping, for example, that may well match all the lessons from the Balkans since 1992 and yet take no account of how much things are changing and so rapidly.

joint operations. Before being sent to Afghanistan, he served with the NATO Allied Rapid Reaction Corps in Germany. Later in 2011, he became Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff (Operations).

The European: I see your point but when we look at what is in the pipeline, I think that the Macron “European Intervention Initiative” (EI2), located outside of the institutions, will be not the last word in the efforts to bind the United Kingdom and the continent together in the area of security and defence. What is your reflection on that? Richard Barrons: Just because the UK exits the EU does not mean that the UK’s security interests are divorced from those of the rest of Europe. Today’s challenges from Russia, terrorism, and mass migration, and in due course the need to establish a clear and mature relationship with China will demand continuity of purpose and cooperation. As one of the few states with armed forces that are capable of rapid overseas intervention, the UK will remain natural partners of countries such as France, the Netherlands, Denmark, Estonia and others that understand that an unavoidable need to act will arise from time to time. The European: What is the prerequisite to do this in an efficient way? Richard Barrons: To do this effectively requires all of us to commit to, first, modernising our armed forces by harnessing the potential of the digital age, secondly, to become far more competitive in the business of collective and constant hybrid confrontation, and third to restore resilience in the face of risks to the homeland. We should also recognise that global circumstances in the future may well mean that public opinion in Europe demands action, perhaps out of fear or rage, rather than wait for governments to explain the need to act. Readiness will have to be at a higher level than what we have needed for 30 or so years. The European: Thank you, General, for your openness. Let us hope that our political leaders take their responsibility seriously. The interview was conducted by Editor-in-Chief Hartmut Bühl



In the Spotlight

+++ Climate +++


Climate – will our youth be able to change the world? by Hartmut Bühl, Publisher and Editor-in-Chief, Brussels/Paris


ll over the world, young people have started to demonstrate for more action to be taken in relation to climate change. They request a reaction from politicians to save our climate. This initiative, smiled at in the beginning, is now putting pressure on decision makers. As there is no collective common sense in the field of climate protection, all over the world nations act differently: some do a bit of wangling, others apply doubtful methods to advantage their industries, others, such as the American President, refute all scientific finding and claim it does not involve their country. Altogether, politicians mostly find nice words in communiqués, lay down the achievements of long-lasting objectives in a far future, giving them time to postpone decisions or the implementation of rapid measures, as there is – without exception in the European Union – no immediate penalisation. The objective of the climate summit in Paris (COP21) in 2015 to keep C02 emissions under 2% is still valid, but the difficulty of achieving this was showed at the following climate conferences in Marrakech and Bonn, and at the 2018 Kato­wice conference (COP24), with the meagre progress achieved. It became evident that without the participation of the US and other important initiatives around the world, there will be no chance of achieving the Paris climate objectives. The hot summer in 2018 with disasters worldwide provoked scientific warning reports and appeals calling politicians out on their responsibility. Young people gave up their lessons at school to show up on the streets, following an appeal of the young Swedish girl, Greta Thunberg. At the beginning of the demonstrations, most of them were relatively non-political and the participants not so well informed, but they were rapidly joined by thousands of scientists assembled in the movement “Scientist for Future” (23,000 signatories) using the youth as a platform to spread their insight to the public and also, I feel, their frustration at not being heard or taken seriously.


But we might need to discuss the role of scientists. They must certainly be motivated in their work and looking for goals so that they can advise decision makers in politics and civil society. But do scientists have their place on the street? Couldn’t their participation in manifestations be interpreted as an ideological motivation and thus reduce their influence? We should, this time, concede that the scientists’ engagement for saving the climate makes sense! Whether young people will create a “change of climate” is not yet predictable. But politicians in all regions of the world, and even in the United States of America, would be well advised to take them seriously. Politicians should also be aware of every abuse of the younger generation’s engagement. Youth are not political subjects as such, but they are worthy subjects for the future. Their wishes and hopes are not yet hierarchised. That is why they have earned the right to be respected, but they must also be protected.

Youth walk for the climate leaded by Greta Thunberg, 21.2.2019 © European Union, Audiovisual Service


photo: © Stocksnapper, stock.adobe.com

Saving the European Union MAIN TOPIC


“What really binds us together is our shared European identity” The next European elections will be of utmost importance for the EU

Interview with Antonio Tajani, President of the European Parliament, Brussels/Strasbourg


he European: President Tajani, you have served within the European Union for a long time. From 1994 to 2008, you were a Member of the European Parliament (EP). You became Commissioner for Transport in 2008 and, in 2010, Commissioner for Industry and Entrepreneurship and one of the four Vice-Presidents of the Commission. Re-elected as a Member of the EP in 2014 you became Vice-President of the Parliament in 2015 and you have been its President since 17 January 2017. This impressing career leads me to my first question: when you remember your vision of Europe as a student, some decades ago, and you compare your ideas with the current status of Europe, what is the result? Antonio Tajani: I do not see many differences; there is always room for improvement in a large project involving so many countries such as this one and it is why I will continue to fight for a stronger and better Europe. It is the same enthusiasm that


I felt for Europe when I was younger that is pushing me now to run again for President of the European Parliament at such a delicate time. The European: You mentioned a stronger and better Europe. With regard to challenges such as Brexit, trade wars, citizens’ protests and the emergence of nationalist movements: does a strong Europe mean that we have to review the course to be taken? Antonio Tajani: A strong Europe is a united Europe, able to enact change in reasonable time, delivering concrete responses to our citizens’ concerns. The European: If I understand you correctly, the real strength consists in the antithesis of violence and national egoism. Would you like to comment on my understanding? Antonio Tajani: The European Union’s strength is enshrined in the Treaties. We must defend our values and the unique characteristics of the Member States that decided to come together at all costs. A sound economy and effective diplomacy are essential, but what really binds us together is our shared European identity. 

MAIN TOPIC: Saving the EU

Antonio Tajani MEP has been President of the European Parliament (EP) since 17 January 2017. Born in Rome in 1953, he holds a degree in law from La Sapienza University in Rome. Mr Tajani was a professional journalist for more than twenty years. A co-founder of Forza Italia, in 1994, he was elected to the EP for the first time. He was appointed European Commissioner for Transport in 2008 and became Commissioner for Industry and Entrepreneurship in 2010. Mr Tajani was re-elected to the EP and as one of its vice-presidents in 2014.

photo: © European Union 2019, Source: EP

has chosen the motto “Cohesion, a common European value” for their programme. My feeling is that the lack of cohesion and the incapability of the EU to find a solution to the challenge of migration and refugees was detrimental to the EU and promoted populism in some European Member States. Couldn’t the Parliament be the appropriate institution to push for a solution to such issues by harmonising the differences between Member States? Antonio Tajani: The European Parliament has shown that it is capable of delivering solutions. The lack of cohesion today manifests itself mainly in the European Council, where leaders of individual Member States often have the last word. An example of this is the delicate issue of asylum system reform on which Parliament has long since reached an agreement. 

The European: Let me turn to the Parliament and its influence on EU policies. In the triangle of the Brussels institutions, since the Parliament was directly elected for the first time in 1979, it has become stronger and stronger. We can mention for example the control over the EU budget obtained in 1977 and, in our days, the European Defence Fund. Do you see other fields in which the Parliament as the representation of the political will of the European citizens might be strengthened? Antonio Tajani: I believe that the next great achievement for the European Parliament will be to obtain true power of legislative initiative. Laws drafted by those elected to represent our Union’s 500 million citizens is one of the only ways to truly bring the EU closer to the people. It will not be easy, but it will have to be done if we want to hand over a more effective, accountable and democratic Europe to younger generations.

The European: The consequences of anti-European populism in the Union are evident. What people don’t understand is that parties campaigning for the dissolution of the European Parliament are allowed to participate in the election of the European Parliament next May. What is your position on this problem?

believe that the next great achievement for the “IEuropean Parliament will be to obtain true power of legislative initiative.” Antonio Tajani

The European: Let us come back to the current situation and the challenges Europe is facing. The Romanian EU Presidency

Antonio Tajani: This is not a problem, I am proud to be the President of a truly democratic Parliament that faithfully represents every one of our five hundred million citizens, from the most passionate pro-European to the most ardent sovereigntist. I believe that our aim must be to convince even the most sceptical citizens, that the only real sovereignty is ‘European sovereignty’. We have no alternative, in order to be able to make our voices heard loudly and clearly with other major



The European Parliament hemicycle in Strasbourg photo: European Union, 2018, source: EP

powers, such as the United States, China and Russia. We must be united and put the common good before national interests. The European: Our democratic system seems more and more threatened by disinformation and fake news. Do you fear the interference of such disinformation or cyberattacks on the upcoming European elections? What actions have been taken to avoid such interference? Antonio Tajani: The threat is real, and we must learn from what happened in the United States, from the Cambridge Analytica scandal and perhaps even from the Brexit referendum. The European Parliament already has a dedicated task force and website, but more will be done shortly. We have the most advanced data protection system in the world, GDPR, and as soon as it is adopted by the Member States, the Copyright Directive will also help to combat fake news and encourage quality journalism. In September, the European Commission proposed a package of measures to combat disinformation campaigns and defend the democratic legitimacy of elections. The aim, once again, is to create a network that connects the authorities of all Member States to be more effective in this difficult battle.

The European: What, then, is your appeal to the voters in May? Antonio Tajani: My main call is for everyone to vote. We can agree or disagree, but our democracy is based upon our most sacred right and civic duty: voting. Without it, our democracy will wither and die like a flower. This cannot happen. The European: President Tajani, thank you for this conversation and I wish the European Parliament every success for the next period. The interview was led by Hartmut Bühl and Nannette Cazaubon

call is for everyone to vote. “MyWe main can agree or disagree, but our

democracy is based upon our most sacred right and civic duty: voting.”  Antonio Tajani

History of the European Parliament

Precursors to the Parliament Creation of the European Parliamentary Assembly with the Paris Treaty. Members are appointed by national parliaments and can dismiss the High Authority. Meetings were held in Strasbourg, in the plenary chamber of the Council of Europe.

1951 18

The Treaty of Rome contains a provision for members to be directly elected. It increases the number of members of the Assembly to 142.


The Treaties of Luxembourg and Brussels increase the budgetary powers of the Assembly.


Direct electio The first direct election of the Assembly, increasing its legitimacy as the representative organ of EU citizens. The Assembly is elected every five years.


The As renam Parliam Europe cooper increa


MAIN TOPIC: Saving the EU

Special Eurobarometer “Democracy and Elections” (Ed/nc, Paris) A special Eurobarometer survey on “Democracy

fair elections, freedom of speech and respect for fundamental

and Elections” was published in November 2018. Commissioned

rights. However, only a minority thought that political parties

by the EC’s Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers and

take the interests of people like them into account. And only a

coordinated by the Directorate-General for Communication, the

minority were satisfied with the fight against disinformation in

report explores citizens’ opinions and concerns about voting

the media or the fight against corruption. Being better informed

and elections, as well as their satisfaction with various aspects

about the EU’s impact on daily life is the factor most likely to

of democracy in the EU. The results of the survey show that cit-

increase motivation to vote in the European Parliament elections

izens’ satisfaction with democracy in the EU is generally high.

(see figure below).

Large majorities were satisfied with key tenets such as free and

> Web: https://bit.ly/2VOsJcX

The next European Parliament elections will be held in May 2019. Which of the following would make you more inclined to vote in these elections? (MAX. 3 ANSWERS)  (% – EU) Being better informed about the EU and its impact on your daily life

43 %

Having more young people standing as candidates

20 %

Having more women candidates Having more candidates from other under-represented groups

12 %

Having more candidates who are nationals of other EU countries

8% 3%


12 %

None, will vote anyway (SPONTANEOUS)


None, will not vote anyway (SPONTANEOUS) None, voting is compulsory in (OUR COUNTRY) (SPONTANEOUS)

2% 6%

Don‘t know







source: EC/Special Eurobarometer 477; graphic: ESDU

31 %

The EU’s action against fake news and disinformation In view of the 2019 European elections as well as a number of

the Action Plan is setting out concrete measures to tackle disinfor-

national and local elections that will be held in Member States by

mation, including the creation of a Rapid Alert System (RAS). The

2020, the European Commission and the High Representative of

RAS which was launched on 18 March 2019 is set up among the EU

the Union presented on 5 December 2018 a joint Communication

institutions and Member States to facilitate the sharing of insights

on an Action Plan to step up efforts to counter disinformation in

related to disinformation campaigns and coordinate responses.

Europe and beyond. Following up on the call made by the European

> Web: Action Plan: https://bit.ly/2HLkQ3N

Council in June 2018 to protect the Union’s democratic systems,

> Web: More information: https://bit.ly/2DNgeYV


ssembly is officially med the European ment. The Single ean Act introduces the ration procedure which ases its powers.


Treaties strengthening the Parliament’s powers The Treaty on European Union intro­ duces the co-decision procedure and extends the cooperation procedure. The EP now has the right to invite the European Commission (EC) to present a legislative proposal. Strasbourg officially becomes the venue for most plenary sessions, while committee meetings are held in Brussels.


The Amsterdam Treaty and Treaty of Nice further strengthen the legislative and supervisory powers of the EP.

The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, amongst others, is signed by the President of the EP.

1997-2001 2000

The Lisbon Treaty fully recognises the EP as co-legislator, grants complete budgetary sovereignty and establishes a key role for the EP in the election of the EC.

2009 19


The EU’s security and defence effort cannot substitute the efforts of the nations

The time is ripe for a Commissioner for Security and Defence by Ioan Mircea Pașcu, Vice-President, European Parliament, Brussels /Strasbourg


he deterioration of the security situation around Europe has accompanied the international financial and economic crisis of 2008. The EU has become inward looking, being gradually absorbed by internal problems (the sovereign debt, the euro etc.) The result has been the neglect of the conflicts around us and of their potential for spilling over into our house. And, indeed, terrorist attacks and the refugee crisis soon followed. This situation has inevitably increased the public’s awareness, who has become very concerned and demanded that European leaders focus their attention on security and defence, an area that was largely depleted of resources until then.

Paradigm change Consequently, the EU has responded to these calls from both the public and industry and started to pay proper attention: the December 2013 EU Council, the adoption of the Global Strategy and the Bratislava summit (both in 2016) launched – in rapid succession – the Preparatory Action on Defence Research (PARD), the European Defence Industrial Development Programme (EDIDP) and the European Defence Fund (EDF). A new paradigm – spending EU common money for security and defence, a national remit of the Member States – has been thus initiated, without, of course, replacing national efforts, which

it only accompanies. In fact, the idea was to spark cooperation between the defence industries of the Member States by incentivising common projects, an effort meant to accompany the successful activation of the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) clause in the Lisbon Treaty at the state level (25 states and 34 projects). However, for reasons of expediency, the entire effort has inevitably been marked by improvisation, located mainly in the remit of industry (Growth, Investment and Competitiveness/Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and Small and Medium Enterprises), since there was no specified place for defence. For that reason, the European Parliament had to improvise too, by entrusting the mission of monitoring the spending of common money through these initiatives to the ITRE Committee, with the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Security and Defence Sub-Committee simply offering their opinion.

New geopolitical situation One should not ignore that, apart from the crises and conflicts on our continent, terrorism and the refugee crisis, the statements during the last US Presidential elections questioning the very core of NATO – the activation of Article V, and thus the validity of the Alliance as such – were followed by a shift in emphasis within the transatlantic relationship from political and military cooperation to economic and commercial competition. This has played a role too.

Dr Ioan Mircea Paşcu MEP is Vice-President of the European Parliament. He is member of the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Subcommittee on Security & Defence. He is also CSDP coordinator for the S&D Groupe in the European Parliament. Born in 1949 in Satu Mare, Romania, he obtained a Ph.D. in Political Science from the Institute of Political Science in Bucharest in 1980. From 1990 to 1992, Mr Pascu was presidential councilor and afterwards became State Secretary in the Ministry of Defence in Bucharest (1993). He then became Member of Parliament in 1996 and Minister of Defence in 2004. In 2007 he joined the EP as a member photo: European Union, source EP


of the Social Democratic Party (PSD).

MAIN TOPIC: Saving the EU

With the US increasing its focus on competition with China, one can wonder what is the relevance of NATO for the US in this context and whether the Alliance will not come to be seen as a distraction and a waste of resources otherwise needed for the competition with China. Of course, Russia’s aggressiveness and the weight of transatlantic relations within the international system remain pillars in preserving NATO’s value to any American administration, including the present one, determining the EU to fully cooperate with the Alliance. However, the recent withdrawal of the INF Treaty – a cornerstone in the absence of the nuclear arms race in Europe since 1987 – has placed the continent in a vulnerable position in that respect again, adding to the other security concerns. Moreover, the proximity of Africa as a source of negative developments, an area where, for historical reasons among others, the US is not as interested, makes Europe and primarily the EU the main actor when it comes to conflict prevention and crisis management, a role we should be prepared to exercise mostly alone…

Creating a new Directorate General For all these reasons, the time has come to centralise security and defence efforts at the level of the Commission by establishing an separate General Directorate with a proper Com-

missioner in charge. That would bring together all the existing institutional arrangements under one budget, avoiding both duplication and inevitable bureaucratic turf wars. Naturally, DG Defence would inevitably have to cooperate with the other DGs, primarily industry, research and development, and space, and be in close contact with the office of the HR/VP for political guidance. The future relationship with the Member State level – PESCO – would inevitably have to go through the EDA, a body that has accumulated an invaluable expertise in the field of defence cooperation.

A proper EP committee on security and defence On the side of the European Parliament, defence and security will have to come to their proper locus, namely the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Security and Defence Sub-Committee, which would inevitably become in time a proper Committee in its own sense. And, to conclude, as the EU security and defence effort could not substitute the national efforts of the Member States according to the Treaties, although it might appear paradoxical, the more EU common money is spent in these fields, the more the EP would have to cooperate with national Parliaments, ensuring the efficacy and effciency of the entire EU effort in this respect.


Emmanuel Macron’s letter to Europe (Ed/nc, Paris) On 4th March 2019 the President of France, Emmanuel Macron, addressed the European citizens in an open letter, calling for “European renaissance”. Excerpt of Macron’s letter: Citizens of Europe,

the European institutions and the Member

If I am taking the liberty of addressing you

States, a Conference for Europe in order

directly, it is not only in the name of the

to propose all the changes our political

history and values that unite us. It is because

project needs, with an open mind, even photo: European Union 2018, source: EP/Christian Creutz



time is of the essence. In a few weeks’ time, the European elections will be decisive for the future of our continent. Never, since the Second World War, has Europe been as essential. Yet never has Europe been in so much danger. Brexit stands as the symbol of that. It symbolises the crisis of Europe, which has failed to respond to its peoples’ needs for protection from the major shocks of the modern world. (…)

to amending the treaties. This conference will need to engage with citizens’ panels and hear academics, business and labour representatives, and religious and spiritual leaders. It will define a roadmap for the European Union that translates these key priorities into concrete actions. (…) Citizens of Europe, the Brexit impasse is a lesson for us all. We need to escape this trap

We need to build European renewal on these

and make the upcoming elections and our

We are at a pivotal moment for our conti-

pillars. We cannot let nationalists without

project meaningful. It is for you to decide

nent, a moment when together we need to

solutions exploit the people’s anger. We

whether Europe and the values of progress

politically and culturally reinvent the shape

cannot sleepwalk through a diminished

that it embodies are to be more than just

of our civilisation in a changing world. It is

Europe. We cannot become ensconced in

a passing episode in history. This is the

the moment for European renewal. Hence,

business as usual and wishful thinking.

choice I propose: to chart together the road

resisting the temptation of isolation and

European humanism demands action. And

to European renewal.

divisions, I propose we build this renewal

everywhere, the people are standing up to

together around three ambitions: freedom,

be part of that change. So by the end of the

protection and progress. (…)

year, let’s set up, with the representatives of

Emmanuel Macron > Web: https://bit.ly/2Hls0vx

Donald Tusk reported on Brexit to the European Parliament (Ed/nc, Paris) On 16th April Donald Tusk, President of the European Council, reported to the European Parliament on the special meeting on Brexit when the 27 European leaders granted a flexible extension of the Article 50 period until 31st October this year. President Tusk said:


“Last week, the European Council of 27

that the UK will hold European elections next

leaders, in agreement with the government

month. We should approach this seriously, as

of the UK, granted a flexible extension of the

UK Members of the European Parliament will

Article 50 period until the 31st of October

be there for several months, maybe longer.

this year. (…)

They will be full Members of the Parliament,

Donald Tusk adressing the European

The European Council will be awaiting a clear

with all their rights and obligations. (…)

Parliament, Brussels, 19.04.2019

message from the UK on a way forward. If

I know that, on both sides of the Channel,

the Withdrawal Agreement were to be rati-

everyone, including myself, is exhausted with

fied, the extension period will automatically

Brexit, which is completely understandable.

Because whatever happens, we are bound

end on the first day of the following month,

However, this is not an excuse to say: ”let’s

by common fate, and we want to remain

meaning that the UK would leave the Union

get it over with”, just because we’re tired.

friends and close partners in the future.”

on that day. (…)

We must continue to deal with Brexit with

One of the consequences of our decision is

an open mind, and in a civilised manner.

photo: European Union 2019, source: EP

> Web: Full remarks: https://bit.ly/2ZuKq3r

MAIN TOPIC: Saving the EU

Europe’s strength is in its wealth, its law, its freedoms, its culture

European evidences by Jean-Dominique Giuliani, President of the Robert Schuman Foundation, Paris


uropeans must always be reminded of its self-evident realities. First, they are demographic, as 83% of the world’s population does not live in Europe, and this proportion will only increase to our disadvantage. Second, they are geographic: the European Union is the smallest continent in the world, with an area of 4,2 million km2 when the smallest State-continent, Australia, counts 7,6 and the biggest, Russia, 17 million. Lastly, they are democratic as only 60 States are truly democracies, and totalitarian or “illiberal” regimes constantly assert their effectiveness in the face of regimes of freedom. The world has changed dimension and size counts more than ever. We can call this the great shift.

Jean-Dominique Giuliani is the President of the Robert Schuman Foundation, established in Paris and Brussels. He has also been the President of the ILERI (School of international relations) since January 2019. Mr Giuliani was Special Advisor to the European Commission (2008-2010) and was previously Director of the Cabinet of President of the French Senate, Mr René Monory (1992-1998), and Director within the General Management of Taylor Nelson Sofres (1998-2001). In 2001, he founded his own international consulting business: J-DG. Com International Consultants of which he is the Chair.

Europe must strengthen its forces… Europe must now understand that it has rivals, perhaps even enemies. Built against empires and nationalism, its strength military and security ones, credible means to resist the rise of resides in its wealth, law, freedoms and culture. This must not nationalism and egoism. Its aim should not be to protect itself, exonerate it from building up its forces, which is a matter of as we hear too often, but to project itself in the world, which is its security. To matter, it must relearn how to prepare itself for its close neighbour, and help to shape in the future. Given what every hypothesis so that it does not have to use coercion. It it has already accomplished, this is a goal within its reach. It must do so autonomously, aiming for independence, no longer must do it for itself and for humanity. A world without Europe relying on others – even its allies, whose interests can differ would be much too cruel! from ours. NATO remains our alliance but our true security depends and will depend on us. Finally, evident among all the lessons learned are those on its own experience. La grande bascule European integration has succeeded beyond In his new book La grande bascule (“The great shift”), Jean-Dominique the hope of its founding fathers. Who could Giuliani shows that there is a real difference between innovation have predicted that it would pick itself up from success and bouncing back after failure. He tells us that Europe after two world wars? It remains the main has succeeded beyond the hopes of its founding fathers and that place of creation of wealth and the first comit could still claim its place, at the end of the century, among the mercial power. It continues to head the race 3 leading world powers. for innovation, even if it does not always > Available in print and e-book: https://bit.ly/2ZAhyXC manage to give it an industrial dimension This work will also soon be published in English. like the other big powers do. It has created the most comfortable place of freedom and culture where solidarity is practiced and real 2019 Schuman Report on Europe social policies are developed. This 13th edition analyses the challenges that Europe faces today. With contributions from experts, commentaries on original maps

… and stop doubting

and statistics, the 2019 Schuman Report on the state of the Union

Europe must now decide to promote this, not as a model, but as an example of success. For this, it must cease questioning its accomplishments and make of its assets peaceful weapons, and of its capacities, including

offers a complete view of the European Union. It is available in bookshops and on the website of the Foundation: > https://www.robert-schuman.eu/fr/librairie An English version will soon be available online.



We need a European army to assure our security in the future

Europe needs to face the threats of the 21st century by Manfred Weber MEP, Chairman of the EEP Group, European Parliament, Brussels/ Strasbourg

Manfred Weber MEP has been the Chairman of the EPP Group in the European Parliament (EP) since 2014. Born in 1972 in Germany, he graduated in


ur freedom and democracy is facing the biggest threat since the end of the Cold War. On the one hand, Russia is destabilising our societies through disinformation, fake news and the massive financing of extremist parties. Russian troops have invaded parts of our neighbouring countries. Russian hackers have attacked newspapers, broadcasters and parliaments in Estonia, Germany and many other countries. Russian missiles are pointing at our cities, in clear violation of international treaties. On the other hand, at the same time, the current US Administration is questioning the transatlantic unity and withdrawing from arms controls agreements that had been the foundation of our European security for the last decades. In light of these threats, we must not only reinforce our European commitment to NATO but take appropriate measures to foster European security and defence capabilities.

Build up common capabilities As a first step, we should establish a European Cyber Brigade until 2021, fighting against cyber-attacks all over Europe. Otherwise, European countries on their own will be too small for the effective protection of their public life and critical infrastructures against the wars of tomorrow. We must also develop the weapons of the future together. Only if we join our resources and research capacities will we be able to develop a European drone and a next generation fighter plane to maintain an effective air defence. And only together will we be able to face the increasing missile threat: if Russia continues deploying those very middle range nuclear missiles that are explicitly forbidden by the INF treaty at our borders, we should not exclude building up our own European missile defence, in close partnership with our American friends and NATO allies. That would also ensure our central and eastern European countries the full solidarity of the whole European Union on security. Indeed, effective defence is also a question of an established common culture and a strong sense of belonging. This is why we must establish a true European Military Academy, similar

1996 with an Engineer diploma from the Munich University of Applied Science. He photo: © Nikky Maier photo


Chairman of the Youth Organisation of the

Bavarian CSU party in 2003 before becoming a member of the Regional Assembly of Bavaria (2002-2004), and a Member of the EP in 2004. In November 2018, Mr Weber was nominated by his group as “Spitzenkandidat” of the European Commission Presidency.

to West Point in the US. In this academy, which would be best located in one of the new EU Member States, we could train a new generation of officers completely used to working together in European teams and entirely ready for the common defence of our continent.

Time to join our forces As a strong long-term vision, we must have the courage to pool all EU Member States’ military capacities and put an end to all those inefficiencies and parallel structures that are dramatically weakening each country’s individual security. This is why we must create a European army by 2030, not to replace national armed forces, but to unite them under a common European roof. Of course, the deployment of contingents of national forces under the European army shall require the consent of the responsible national institutions. But no government and no Parliament unwilling to act shall be able to stop other EU countries from deploying their own troops to protect our common European security within the European army. The time of selfish defence vetoes must finally be over in Europe. If we stand together now, Europe’s countries combined will no longer be just the world’s second largest defence spenders with an effective security far below this position. If we stand together now, Europe can truly become the world’s second strongest defence power, just after the US, that no-one will dare attack any more. Together, we can guarantee a previously unknown degree of security to the people everywhere in Europe and to all our proud nations. Together, we can empower our soldiers to protect us against the threats of the 21st Manfred Weber century. It is time to join our forces.

must create a European army by 2030, not to “Wereplace national armed forces, but to unite them under a common European roof.” 

started his political career as Regional

MAIN TOPIC: Saving the EU

We need a regulatory regime implemented by a strong European Commission

Security Union: Getting the defence industrial pillar right by Reinhard Bütikofer MEP, Co-Chair of the European Green Party (EGP), European Parliament, Brussels/Strasbourg


mong European Union (EU) politicians with different political affiliations, there is a widely shared conviction that it is necessary to build a European Defence Union to deepen cooperation on defence. The EU has many good policies in place to prevent conflict and further peace. But in addition, we believe that a Security Union needs a reliable military pillar to enforce or defend peace where necessary and support crisis management. Greens support deeper and permanent cooperation in the field of defence. We want the EU and its Member States to carry their share of responsibility for international peace, stability and security as laid down in the UN Charter and to deploy military operations in that respect. However, in view of the changed security environment and the lack of cooperation between defence industry actors and national defence administrations, we believe that the current approach by the Juncker Commission to the defence industrial pillar of the Security Union and particularly to military equipment is wrong.

The need for regulatory power… The Commission has correctly analysed the problems of the European defence sector: far too much duplication, fragmentation, inefficiency and industrial overcapacity, combined with a very low level of European collaboration on research, development and procurement. As a result, European countries

Reinhard Bütikofer MEP is a Member of the European Parliament (Greens/EFA) since 2009. He is the CoChair of the European Green Party (EGP) and serves as 1st Vice-Chair of the EP Delegation for relations with China. He sits photo: © European Union 2019, Source: EP

on the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) and is a substitute member of the Committee on Foreign

Affairs (AFET) as well as the Sub-Committees on Security and Defence (SEDE) and Human Rights (DROI).

produce six times as many weapons systems as the US and waste a lot of money. This analysis can only lead to two conclusions. Firstly, there is already a huge amount of public money invested in the sector and therefore there is no need to extract more money from the EU budget. Secondly, what is needed is a regulatory regime, which sets norms and standards for cooperation, technology compatibility, interoperability and certification procedures for military products. Under the current European Defence Industrial Development Programme (EDIDP) and the European Defence Fund (EDF) the Commission will only subsidise existing structures, which have already wasted huge amounts of taxpayers’ money without any guarantee that a modest European defence market abiding by internal market rules will eventually emerge. We are convinced that only a regulatory approach implemented by a strong Commission will strengthen the defence industrial pillar of the Security Union, because only the application of internal market rules to the defence sector will generate what is most needed: reliable, highly interoperable and high-quality technology.

… and a common approach to arms export control The other defect of the Juncker Commission’s current defence industrial policy is that defence industrial cooperation at European level is not formally and legally linked to another policy, that is highly relevant for peace, stability, human rights, democracy, and security in our neighbourhood and beyond: the existing legally binding EU criteria for arms exports (Common Position 944/2008/CFSP). In the discussions of the draft EDIDP and EDF regulations, the Commission made a timid attempt to introduce an EU level arms control mechanism by proposing that it should have the power to refuse export licences for EU funded technology to third countries if such transfers contravene the objectives of the regulations or the security interests of the Union. Conservatives, liberals and the Council did not support this approach. An effective Security Union will only emerge if there is not only a greater European dimension to defence industrial cooperation, but also export control of arms. The issue of arms sales to Saudi Arabia and disputes between France, the UK and Germany are telling in this respect and underline the need for an EU authority with powers to sanction non-compliant Member States. While there is certainly the need for EU Member States to do more together to enhance common security, the approach chosen with the EDF falls far short of the reforms necessary.




Europe’s enemies on the rise (Ed/hb, Brussels/Paris) The populist forces

the populists are not totally successful in

The ongoing wave of populism was of profit

in Europe have a common objective: to

their coordination as the different parties

for two other parties – one is the extremist

cause the European Union to be forgotten.

and their objectives are still too divergent

party Vox in Spain, the other the Euros-

They are currently in power in Italy, Hungary,

for the creation of their own group in the

ceptic party Forum for Democracy in The

Poland, the Czech Republic and Austria (see

next European Parliament.

Netherlands. From nothing, they will almost

below), and other leaders of movements

Matteo Salvini, Italy’s Minister of the Interior

occupy an important number of seats in

and parties stand ready to take over the

from the League party wants to change

the Cortes and The Netherland’s Senate

command in their countries.

this. With support from Hungary’s Prime

respectively. The latest elections in Finland

In the European Parliament, Europe’s far-

Minister Victor Orbán (Fidesz-MPSZ) in

saw the nationalist party The Finns and

right populist parties currently mainly sit

summer 2018, he proposed in January

its leader Jussi Halla-aho nearly winning.

in three different groups: the Europe of

2019 to Jarosław Kaczyński, leader of the

The populists in Europe can count on impor-

Nations and Freedom (ENF), the European

Polish party Law and Justice, a common

tant support from outside the EU: Russia’s

Conservatives and Reformists (ECR), and

action plan. Marine Le Pen, French lead-

President Vladimir Putin is working on the

Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy

er of the far-right party Rassemblement

destabilisation of the Union, and he is in

(EFDD). The different populist streams

National (RN) with her non-coherent and

friendly contact with Marine Le Pen and

are discussing at wide among them how

changing ideas on the EU finally reached

Austrian Vice-Chancellor Hans-Christian

to find an order of battle for the next Eu-

an understanding with the Italian “Capi-

Strache from the far-right Freedom Party

ropean elections, where they could make

tano” mid-April 2019. Salvini also teamed

(FPÖ). And of course there is Donald Trump,

significant gains, and if successful how to

up with MEP Jörg Meuthen (EFDD group)

who said that the “European Union is an

portray the Union as a lame duck.

from Germany’s right-wing populist party

enemy to the United States”.

However, it seems for the moment that

Alternative for Germany (AfD).

Matteo Salvini, Italy Minister of Interior and Vice President of the Council of Ministers. Leader of the nationalist League party (Lega Nord, LN) which governs Italy together with the populist party Five Star Movement (MoVimento 5 Stelle). Starkly Eurosceptic, Salvini opposes illegal immigration into Italy and the EU as well as the EU’s management of asylum seekers.

Heinz-Christian Strache, Austria Vice-Chancellor since December 2017 and leader since 2005 of the radical right-wing Freedom Party (Freiheitliche Partei Östereichs, FPÖ) which is part of the coalition government together with the centre-right Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP). Strache sees in immigration and “islamisation” the greatest danger for Europe.

Viktor Orbán, Hungary Prime Minister from 1998 to 2002 and since 2010. Member of the far-right party Fidesz-MPSZ. Affirms the “Christian roots” of Europe, and sees himself as the defender of Hungary and Europe against Muslim migrants.

Andrej Babiš, Czech Republic Second-richest man in the Czech Republic, Babiš was reappointed Prime Minister in June 2018. Leading the party AN0 2011 (based on the movement Action of Dissatisfied Citizens) which he founded in 2012. Pleads for closure of the EU external borders and “saving the European culture” from migrants.

Jarosław Kaczyński, Poland Since 2003, President of the nationalist Law and Justice party PiS (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość) which he co-founded with his twin brother Lech Kaczyński, the late Polish President. He was the Prime Minister from 2006 to 2007 and is widely considered as the man behind Polish-EU policies and as de facto leader of his country. photos: © European Union 2018, Source: EP Michel Christen (Salvini); Gregor Tatschl, CC BY-SA 2.0, Flickr.com (Strache); European Union, Audiovisual Service (Orbán, Babis̆ , Kaczyń ski)


Why do we give a chance to populist movements? Populism tries to take advantage of the world’s complexity by proposing its simplification

by Giulia Tilenni, European affairs and defence analyst, Paris


ne month before the European elections, several questions regarding the future of the European Union (EU) remain unanswered. If Brexit is considered one of the main sources of uncertainty, the rise of populist movements across the continent could not only upset the existing European political balance, but also accelerate the decline of the European Union as we know it.

Political integration seems far away More than 60 years after its creation, the EU has finally reached its primary objective of maintaining peace across the continent. Despite the progress made in several fields of action and the establishment of the Eurozone and the Schengen area, political integration seems far away. Worse still, Brussels has been considered unable to effectively respond to the 2010s economic crisis, or to mitigate its effects, and to the migration crisis of 2015. The fact that the EU has betrayed its citizens, being unable to respond to their needs in terms of wealth and security has become the preferred argument for populist parties. Now in power in several European countries, parties such as the League (Italy), Fidesz (Hungary), and PiS (Poland), have convinced their supporters of the need to profoundly change the EU. They usually accuse Brussels of being the source of their domestic troubles, claiming that the most important decisions are taken by European institutions according to their own selfish interest rather than according to the best interest

photo: © European Union 2018, Source: EP

MAIN TOPIC: Saving the EU

of the European people. According to populists, people should regain command of political power by replacing the existing political elites, considered responsible for the current economic and social situation.

Factors propelling the rise of populism Divisions between ruling elites and citizens are one of the most important factors in the rise of populist movements across the continent. Indeed, populists exploit the disenchantment of Europeans towards traditional parties that, accused since they gain power of betraying the commitments made during their electoral campaigns, are unable to respond to citizens’ expectations. Furthermore, misinformation, easily spread thanks to social media and the Internet, and the complexity of today’s world are crucial elements populists try to use to their advantage. The Internet and social media provide easy access to information to larger numbers of the population than through traditional media. On the one hand, the poor quality of information delivered by mainstream media and on the other, the difficulties in efficiently tackling misinformation campaigns make the access to false or incomplete information increasingly easy. Coupled with the ongoing cultural regression on the European continent, some segments of Europeans believe that educated people are not the most informed ones, claiming that anybody is able to govern in an effective manner. Populist movements are not only contributing to publicising this message, they are also using it to gain political support. For instance, the Italian 5 Star Movement obtained significant



Giulia Tilenni is an analyst specialised in defence and European affairs. Postgraduate in International Relations (University of Bologna, Italy), she served as analyst and editorial coordinator for the Italian online magazine Il Caffé Geopolitico. Since 2016, she has collaborated with different international magazines specialised in defence issues, namely Defence Procurement International (UK), Armada International photo: private

(Indonesia), European Security & Defence (Germany) and Opérationnels SLDS (France). Ms Tilenni is an active member of EuroDéfense France.

preference in the 2013 and 2018 Italian political elections by proposing to totally renew ruling elites and oust people considered “professional politicians”. However, the party is now victim of its own strategy: we can of course renovate the political elite, but we cannot do politics without experts, as the situation of the Italian government illustrates well. Moreover, nationalist parties such as the League in Italy and Rassemblement National in France try to take advantage of the world’s complexity by proposing its simplification. Part of the popular support that these movements attract comes from their alleged ability to simplify complex phenomena to make them understandable, and present complex problems such as migration as easy to solve. Consequently, the fact that ruling elites usually invoke complexity as the reason why certain issues are difficult to handle is considered mere storytelling and as a further demonstration of their inability to govern.

Mitigate the popularity of populist movements United in diversity, the European motto, has probably never been so true. If European countries want to maintain an international role – or rather, build a proper one – they are forced to gather together. Not only are international dynamics so complex that they can no longer be addressed by single European countries, but Europe also has the “disadvantage” of being a democratic system that has to compete with autocracies such as Russia and China, where decisions are made easier and faster. Although populism will not be the answer to the EU’s problems, growing divides among people and ruling elites as well as the inability of the EU to act effectively in some domains cannot be ignored. Eurobarometer data released in December 2018 shows that about 70% of European citizens believe that their country benefits from being of a member of the European Union. However, the same data highlights that an important share of European citizens wants the EU to reshape its priorities to provide them with more defence, security and social rights. Citizens’ pro-European initiatives are multiplying across Europe in an attempt to mitigate the propagation of populism by bridging the gap between people and politicians. Increasing the transparency of EU political activities, fighting against disinformation campaigns and better communicating on the impact of

the European Union on our daily lives (something that British citizens are becoming familiar with after having voted to leave the EU) are probably the first steps to be taken to halt the spread of populist movements across the EU. In the meantime, trying to pay more attention to citizens’ expectations and working on modernising pro-European parties or creating new ones, such as Volt, in order to raise citizens’ interest in the EU and increase voters’ turnout for European elections, will be of utmost importance to effectively tackle populists and avoid the break-up of the European Union.

The importance of building a counter-narrative Pro-European parties usually criticise populist proposals by pointing out that they are irrational and unfeasible. However, the populist narrative remains more inspiring for people, as it can comfort them in their daily frustration, an objective that pro-European parties have visibly failed to achieve. Consequently, building an effective pro-European counter-narrative is of utmost importance to prevent populists from gaining further support. To be successful, this new narrative should be

between ruling elites and citizens are one “Divisions of the most important factors in the rise of populist movements across the continent.” 


Giulia Tilenni

based on two axes: selling the dream of a Europe that could be great again and engage in a “win-or-die” political fight against populists. Pro-European parties should convince citizens that gathering together to strengthen the EU is the only way to survive in the face of the large non-democratic forces of all natures amassing at the gates. They should also stress that this objective is rational, but also achievable, while the dream of self-determining nations put forward by populists is likely to fail. Moreover, pro-European politicians should revolutionise their behaviour to enhance their “competitiveness” in comparison to populists: tactical behaviours to limit risks for front leaders should be replaced by a more “pugnacious” attitude that mirrors populists’ tactics. This means considering the fight for the EU as a value to be protected at all costs, including the loss of elections should the given objectives remain unachieved.

MAIN TOPIC: Saving the EU

The way ahead: more Europe to uphold human rights

by Ana Gomes, MEP (S&D, Portugal), European Parliament, Brussels/Strasbourg


fter 15 years and three mandates fulfilled as a MEP in the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats, I will leave the European Parliament completely convinced that, more than ever, we need more Europe and a stronger European Union (EU). Needless to say that this does not mean that one has to be uncritical and obsequious towards the EU’s and its policies. On the contrary: only by being critical regarding the EU’s policies and actions can we help to strengthen and improve it. Only that way can the EU be better equipped in its actions and goals of reducing inequalities and discrimination, in the absolute need of defending human rights of all citizens and in enhancing the rule of law across the Member States, as well as in finding sustainable solutions and strategies in the field of migration and climate change.  

Fight populism and fascism Strengthening the EU is also the only way to fight the populism and fascism that unfortunately have been growing all over Europe, which is now present in most parliaments of the EU Member States, including Spain with the recent elections. It is precisely the extreme right that has been fostering the nasty anti-migration and Eurosceptic narratives to instill fear among the European citizens. And it is the weak and bad democratic politicians who do not dare to counter that narrative. They fail not just the EU, but democracy and peace, by enabling extremists to sow bigotry and violence.

photo: © European Union 2019, Source: EP Sebastien Pirlet

Strengthening the EU is the only way to fight populism and fascism

Some have claimed that the alternative for advancing the European Union and democracy in Europe lies in a liberal alternative. I disagree. It is not that liberal ideology that will make the difference in Europe, namely to curb the populist and fascist and anti-European forces that are on the loose. It is a neoliberal ideology – and I make the distinction because it is an ideology of the economic field that, from my point of view, has even compromised the European project these last decades. The deregulatory neoliberal ideology was the one that allowed the capture of the various Member States and governments and institutions by corrupt interest groups that, with sectoral agendas, have destroyed what should be common European interests and public interests in each of the Member States. From my point of view, the financial crisis of 2008 was not exclusively imported from the United States. It was much the result of these neoliberal policies and of decades of deregulation that has destroyed jobs and boosted inequalities in various Member States. It has also shaken the citizens’ confidence in their rulers who then realised how many of the goals of governance at national and European level were being perverted, were not being achieved, were serving the rich to become richer against the majority of citizens feeling increasingly poor and insecure. The predominance of precarious jobs and the lack of vision to fight them led to the rise of populist, Eurosceptic and fascist movements that today are seeking to capitalise on the insecurity and distrust of citizens in the rulers. Any political family, and here I include my own political family that allowed itself to be contaminated by all this neoliberal nonsense, so negative, so perverse, namely through the thesis of this third way...



Lack of credibility Thus, nowadays, we have a tremendous problem in Europe because no political family has credibility. If a political family like my own ends up buying a more moderate, more presentable version of neoliberal theses whether defended by liberals or defended by the conservatives of the EPP, voters prefer the original. Therefore, we are in a very difficult situation in which Europe itself is being questioned by the citizens. In my opinion, the problem is not Europe: it is the way we let the Member States be captured by these sectoral and private interests and how neither governments at national level nor governance at European level is seen as capable of projecting the public interest. And this is associated to the distrust of the citizens towards politicians and governments, we have here in fact an ideal culture site for fascism and for all types of populists. The answer or the solution is not easier, but I am sure that it is not through the neoliberal ideology that we are going to save Europe or save each one of our countries from these forces of obscurantism, regression, against migrants and ethnic and sexual minorities and that are fostering prejudice. Such forces have been generated within the EU and are also being financed from abroad by those who want to destroy us, whether Mr Putin, with an EU destruction agenda, or Mr Trump with an agenda of total neglect of the importance of the alliance between the United States and Europe.

Council. Citizens need to know that it is the Council, where the governments sit, that has been blocking the reform of Dublin, approved by a large majority in the European Parliament and that would ensure a fair solution in the responsibility sharing among the Member States to receives refugees. By not acting, the EU governments are fuelling the business of human traffickers. Safe and legal ways for migrants and refugees are the only way to reduce significantly the migratory influx. At the same time, extreme right wing governments, as the one of Salvini in Italy, are now criminalising human right defenders and limiting the rescue activities of the NGOs that have stepped in to make up for the lack of state rescue operations. The Iuventa case has set a new precedent: not only was the ship seized, but also the Italian public prosecutor’s office is expanding its investigations against individual crewmembers of the organisation. This is completely inacceptable. If NGOs did not have in place rescue operations, more lives would be lost – it is their courageous work that we have to be thankful for! Previously, in January this year, we already witnessed, with the saga of SeaWatch3, the hypocrisy of the European governments claiming to be Christians, but not paying attention to the appeals of the Pope.

The case of Libya

At the same time, in Libya we keep on paying the price for the lack of Europe both regarding the political situation of the country and the defence of migrants and refugees, compoundMigration and human rights ed by the recent strikes that have reached Tripoli and put in In these years at the European Parliament, I have been a full danger refugees and migrants. The Libyan government must member of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home immediately release all migrants and refugees from these Affairs (LIBE) and a staunch supporter on the need to find a horrific detention centres where they are held illegally and face sustainable solution to the migratory inflows, based on the appalling abuse and torture. respect of human rights of the refugees and international law. The EU cannot excuse itself from what Libya became. Lack of Migration is not something that we fight against, but rather Europe, the absence of the EU, played into the hands of the something we manage by applying human policies that uphold Member States, entering into new and old rivalries for oil, the rights of the migrants and refugees. We have witnessed arms and influence, after the fall of Kaddafi. Like the UN, the that migration policies have been at the core of the cleavages EU neglected the need for disarmament, demobilization and between the different political forces in the European Union. reintegration (DDR) and security sector reform (SSR) to ensure Most of the files that we have been working on in the field that any Libyan governance would be controlling a national of migration have been blocked by the Member States in the army chain of command. Prime Minister Ali Zeidan came to beg us for that help in 2013, as he also begged NATO, to no avail. Instead, the EU Member States, led by Italy, choose to fabricate a fake “Libyan Ana Gomes MEP Coast Guard” which is no more than militia torturing has been a Member of the European Parliament since 2004. She sits on migrants and refugees to keep the human trafficking the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) and the supply flourishing. No wonder that Haftar, backed Subcommittee on Security and Defence (SEDE), and she is a member of the by Egypt, the UAE, Saudi Arabia but also France just Delegation for relations with the US and of the Delegation to the Parliamentary dared to disrupt the UN organized National ConferAssembly of the Union for the Mediterranean. ence in Ghadames leading to so much bloodshed and Born in1954 in Lisbon, she was Diplomatic Adviser to the Portuguese Pressuffering in Tripoli. No wonder that, under Haftar, ISIS, ident (1982-1986) before being posted to the Permanent Mission to the UN Al-Qaeda, the Makdali and other terrorist groups will and international organisations in Geneva (1986-1989) and the Embassies gain ground for sanctuary in Libya. They will come to in Tokyo (1989-1991) and London (1991-1994). She joined Portugal’s Perhaunt us, as much as they already haunt the people of manent Mission to the UN in New York in 1997 and then became Portugal’s Libya. Then, we all will deeply regret that there was no Ambassador in Jakarta (1999-2003). EU to act and help Libya.



MAIN TOPIC: Saving the EU

Walls are not eternal (Ed/Céline Merz, Bonn) Walls are built

people out, but they can also stop them

are not eternal and certainly not the wall

by people for all sorts of reasons. They

getting out, oppressing people and taking

the US President is determined to build

are intended first and foremost to protect

them hostage, depriving them not only of

at the border of Mexico against refugees

and secure, asserting ownership, but are

their physical freedom but also closing their

and migrants, a wall of shame unworthy

normally permeable. Walls normally keep

minds. But as the Berlin Wall shows, walls

of a democratic state…

The Berlin Wall

Wall in Lima, Peru

Built in 1986, the ten-kilometre long and three-metres high wall in Peru’s capital Lima serves to shut off the rich north from the poor south of the town. Thus, the neighbourhoods are socially separated and do not communicate with each other. photo: Paolo Carrasco, CC BY2.0, flickr.com

Ceuta and Melilla Border Fence

The Berlin Wall was a border fortification system of the German Democratic Republic (GDR), which existed for more than 28 years, from 13th August 1961 to 9th September 1989. Under the pressure of GDR population, the Berlin Wall fell in September 1989 and the SED dictatorship collapsed. photo: Thiémard Horlogerie, CC BY SA 2.0, flickr.com

The Spanish exclaves Ceuta and Melilla belong to Europe, but are located in North Africa. In 1993, an eight-kilometre long fence was

Mexico Border Wall

built around the exclave. Six-metres high and arranged in three rows, the wire fences are to protect the Spanish cities from African migrants and refugees striving to come to Europe. photo: wikimedia commons, CC BY SA 4.0

Wall of separation of Nicosia

US President Donald Trump wants to build a wall about ten meters high along the more than 3,000-kilometre-long border

After the attempt of Greek Cypriot nationalists to integrate the

between the US and Mexico to keep out migrants and refugees

island into Greece, Turkey responded in 1974 by the occupation

trying to reach the US.

of the Northern part of Cyprus. The capital Nicosia is divided

 photo: Jonathan McIntosh, CC BY 2.0, flickr.com

and nowadays controlled by the UN. 

photo: © Hartmut Bühl



European elections: The 9th term of the European

(Ed/Alexa Keinert, Berlin) After a turbulent 8th term for the European Parliament (EP) and Commission, keep Europeans on their toes. At press time, Great Britain is preparing to take part in the elections to the 23rd and 26th May 2019. This 9th term and the preceding election campaign bear some novelties while d tion as complex as ever. The new European Parliament will begin its work with a constitutive plenary ses


T ► ► ► ►

he voting systems in the MS adhere to their national laws. Accordingly, the process of the election of the European Parliament differs among them: 5 out of 27 MS have compulsory voting. 14 MS have electoral thresholds. These vary from 1,8%, 3%, 4% to 5%. For citizens of 4 MS it is not possible to vote from abroad. The different voting systems include preferential voting, closed lists and a single transferable vote.

Voter turnout in EP elections 70 %

61,8 %

59,0 %

60 %

58,3 %

56,7 % 49,5 %

50 %

45,6 %

43,0 %

42,6 %

40 % 30 %

EU average for voter turnout

20 % 10 % 0%









Novelties ► Depending on Britain’s exit from the EU before the 23rd of May, the number of seats in the EP is reduced from 751 to 705. 27 of the UK’s 73 seats are redistributed to 14 other MS, while the remaining 46 seats are left vacant for possible future enlargements. ► The suggestion to assign some of the UK’s seats to transnational lists has been dismissed by the EP. Nonetheless, there are several transnational movements that are standing for election, such as the pan-European party Volt, or the electoral alliances Maintenant le Peuple and European Spring. ► The so-called Spitzenkandidaten (lead candidate) process, introduced for the 2014 election, shall be applied to this year’s election: the EP will only accept candidates for President of the European Commission if they were the official Spitzenkandidat of their respective party/group during the election campaign. ► The EP launched an election campaign of its own, called This time I’m voting, aiming to raise the voter turnout.


MAIN TOPIC: Kolumnentitel Saving the EU

n Parliament

the so-called Brexit will continue to e new European Parliament between differing voting systems make the elecssion on 2nd July.



ince the first direct election in 1979, the European Parliament has gained more and more rights and relevance as an institution in the European Union, as well as being the representative body of EU citizens (see timeline pages 18-19). The question remains as to whether MEPs act as European representatives or merely in the interest of nation states. Research shows that they tend to be Europhile – but does this pro-EU position represent the citizens of the EU? The strengthening of Eurosceptic factions in the EP might suggest otherwise. Scholars also found that political competition within the EP goes along the lines of a left/right or anti/pro EU-immigration axis rather than nationality.1


What do Europeans think of the EU and EP? Results from the latest Eurobarometer survey, conducted in autumn 2018, show that: ► More than 40 % of the Europeans trust the EU, while national governments and parliaments are trusted by only 35% of their citizens, ► 49% of Europeans agree that their “voice counts in the EU”, while 47% disagree, ► Across the EU, 71% say that they feel like citizens of the EU. What is more, in every MS more than half say so.

Citizen participation and the EP Between July 2014 and December 2017, the EP in Brussels and Strasbourg ► was visited by 1,1 million citizens, ► answered 230,000 requests via “Ask EP”, ► held 408 public hearings in committees, ► received 5400 citizen petitions.

Political groups in the EP MEPs are organised in political groups according to their political affiliation. Currently, there are eight in the EP. 25 MEPs are needed to form a political group, while at least one-quarter of the MS must be represented. Some political groups represent European political parties – such as the European People’s Party and the Party of European Socialists – whilst others are more loosely organised coalitions of European and national parties as well as individual MEPs.

Number of MEPs
















Number of Member States









Number of political groups

















Number of national political parties



Summary of findings in N. Brack (2018): Opposing Europe in the European Parliament. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics.

graphic: ESDU/Beate Dach; source: European Parliament



The challenges facing Europe must serve to relaunch the European project

How to build a European industrial policy that respects social demands by Laurent Berger, General Secretary, Confédération Française Démocratique du Travail (CFDT), Paris


FDT considers that the European Union (EU) must act urgently to address six major challenges that go beyond the national framework: • Democracy to face xenophobic and Eurosceptic parties, • The ecological transition with climate change, • The technological transition and its impact on jobs, work organisation, and the work-life balance, • Social and territorial cohesion with inequalities between people and between territories, • The demographic transition that underlines the financing and organisation of social protection • The challenge of the EU’s rank in the world.

We need ambitious common policies In order to address these challenges, ambitious common policies must be implemented, especially in the field of industry, integrating social and environmental aspects. In France, CFDT with other trade unions and several associations presented 66 proposals for a social and ecological pact.1 The same approach must be carried out at a European level to rally those in favour of a new way of development targeting quality. We must rely on technological change and the ecological emergency to make economic developments complying with major international commitments: 2030 Agenda, ILO conventions, Paris Agreement, etc. EU and Member State tax and fiscal policies should contribute by strengthening the resources and objectives of the European investment plan, and many areas are impacted: renewable energies, building renovation, recycling, transport, infrastructures, etc. The social aspect must include the antic-

Laurent Berger has been CFDT’s General Secretary since his first election in 2012. Prior to this he was the Deputy General Secretary responsible for employment issues and occupational integration, as well as the negotiations regarding unemployment insurance and photo: © CFDT

youth employment. Mr Berger has been

ipation of change and support for workers to help them cope with change (training, social protection, unemployment insurance, etc.). The ageing of the European population will foster a “silver economy” but will require social investments. This must be part of a development with quality of life at its core.

The method for moving forward The method for moving forward is a fundamental question: for the project to be carried out by as many people as possible, everyone must be involved – institutions, trade unions, employers’ and workers’ organisations, civil society and citizens. Companies themselves are also key players and they have a fundamental responsibility. Their action cannot be limited to lobbying institutions. They must engage in an open dialogue with their employees and society. Citizens’ expression must be both free and organised. A direct relationship between citizens and public authorities cannot be sufficient. Believing that with modern tools we would achieve an “electronic democracy” that would allow citizens to express themselves permanently and an interpretation of their aspirations is a dangerous illusion. Organised civil society must play its role in analysing, elaborating and structuring proposals in order to feed an informed debate. Without it, there is a clash between a technocratic conception of democracy (the experts have analysed the situation and know what to do), and populism that will oppose “the people” (arguing that aspirations have been ignored) to “the elites” (denounced as being far from the ground). The “yellow vest” crisis in France is characteristic of such a trend. Negotiation between the social partners occupies a special place, as they are at the heart of value creation and its distribution. These negotiations are also a way to create standards. Major social progresses have often emerged first through social dialogue. Participatory democracy, social democracy and political democracy must interact with each other to constitute a full democracy. The EU-Commission has established procedures to consult citizens and civil society. They must be given a boost and the European, inter-professional and sectoral social dialogue must be relaunched. That is the way to build European policies, industrial policy in particular, that respects social demands. The scale of the challenges facing Europe must serve as a support for a relaunch of the European project, as this would be an excellent way to deepen its democratic functioning.

with the CFDT for over two decades. 1 www.cfdt.fr/portail/outils/argumentaires/66-propositions-pour-donner-a-cha cun-le-pouvoir-de-vivre-srv2_659070


MAIN TOPIC: Saving the EU

Seizing the opportunities of a united Europe

New liberal dynamics in a reformed EU by Nicola Beer MdB, Vice-President of FDP, Spitzenkandidat for the European elections, Berlin

Nicola Beer MdB is the newly-elected Vice-President of the German Free Democratic Party


he idea of a united Europe within a European Union is a true lighthouse project. When its founding fathers, Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman, sketched out this visionary idea against a background of devastation and rubble – our continent was not much more in the aftermath of the Second World War – it did not only seem highly ambitious, it was also an ultimate effort to save Europe and prevent a repeat of similar catastrophes.

(FDP) and has been a Member of the Bundestag since 2017. She was the FDP’s Secretary General from 2013 to April 2019. Ms Beer served as State photo: © Laurence Chaperon

Secretary for European Affairs at the

Hessian State Ministry of Justice (2009-2012) and as State Minister of Education and Cultural Affairs in Hesse (20122014). She is currently running for the European Parliament

What has been achieved? Peace, freedom and prosperity – these, in a nutshell, are the key achievements of the European unification process. What is more, the EU has given us a set of fundamental freedoms. In the economic sphere, the free movement of goods, services, capital and people. Even more importantly, the political dimension, the so-called Copenhagen criteria, has given us institutional stability, the rule of law, human rights and the respect for and protection of minorities. European diversity and regional differences are also key and have led to today’s multi-speed Europe, with some Member States in the monetary vanguard (the Euro zone) and some with a common external border (the Schengen area). All these achievements are of a truly liberal nature – a fact that many of us seem to have forgotten.

What is at stake today? Today, the EU faces threats from both within and outside. Governments like those of Poland, Romania and Hungary defy the very democratic values to which all EU Member States have subscribed. Others, such as Italy and Austria, seem to have forgotten that solidarity is a cornerstone of the European success story. Negative influences from outside Europe are even more worrying – with a transatlantic partner focused on ‘America First’ and increasingly autocratic neighbours to our East (the Kremlin and China) and South-East (AKP-Turkey).

What can be done about it? Our answer can only be more liberal policies. We need to reform the EU to make it more dynamic and vigorous, offering concrete solutions to people’s problems and improving their everyday lives. Let me flesh out three new liberal dynamics to guarantee Europe’s future. Innovation and competition First, we need to promote economic growth by innovation and fair competition. This is the only way to enable our small and

and is also member of the ALDE Team Europe.

medium sized enterprises to uphold their value propositions and compete successfully on global markets. Our common currency needs to be strengthened with Member States accepting their joint responsibility and complying with the set of rules we have all approved. The pooling of debt is not our solution. We must aim to fight climate change with a fully-fledged emissions trading scheme. Stronger democracies Second, we need to foster stronger democracies across Europe that ensure fundamental rights, an independent judiciary and a free press. The EU needs to be closer to its citizens and give them a greater say in the way it is run, including by reaping the benefits of digitalisation. On the institutional front, we want to empower the European Parliament to initiate legislation and reshape the Commission to make it a smaller, punchier body. And to make European citizens more passionate about Europe, we call for a new fundamental principle: the freedom of educational opportunities throughout the EU. United in global affairs Third, we need to speak with one strong European voice on foreign, trade and security policy. Building up European armed forces, jointly protecting our external borders and developing a European immigration and asylum system. By taking such bold initiatives we can assert ourselves in an increasingly Hobbesian world and defend our European values. We believe that free trade is a driver of economic growth and aim to promote it through the WTO and new bilateral treaties, including between the EU and the US. Let us join forces to provide our own, truly European answer: a more liberal European Union to fully seize the opportunities of a united Europe.



The new European Union

photo: © EIB

Public resources alone will never suffice

by Dr Werner Hoyer, President of the European Investment Bank (EIB), Luxembourg


he European project has led to prosperity and built safeguards for common rights, freedoms, and values that we acknowledge and cherish. The enormous scale of global challenges and opportunities exceeds the capacity of any single EU Member State. The EU can and indeed must serve as a conduit to turn national interests into collective responses. We need to make Europe more competitive if we are to secure the European project over the longer term and ensure a better life for the next generation. I would like to lay out how the European Investment Bank, the EU bank, is working towards these goals every day.

Investing in the European economy Signs of a slowdown have started to emerge in the global and European economies, intensifying in the last few months. Part of this has been due to uncertainties surrounding Brexit and part to the renewed debate about international trade, tariffs, and protectionism. When we asked firms about their longerterm outlook for our annual Investment Report, we found growing pessimism about the political and regulatory climate. More significantly, when we asked them to look a year ahead, firms were a lot less optimistic than before about the economic climate. It is against this background that we need to invest in the European economy to enable it to keep pace with global competition and make up for lost ground. In addition to digitalisation,


Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs), education and skills and sustainable energy supply, the modernisation of infrastructure is an area that is often overlooked. Infrastructure investment has continued on a downward trend, and at 1.7% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) now stands at about 75% of its pre-crisis level. It is important not just to build new infrastructure, but also to maintain existing infrastructure. Proper maintenance of a bridge or a road can, on average, amount to about half the initial construction costs, but it is not high on the political agenda as it is not as exciting as cutting ribbons on new projects. Yet the tragic events in Genoa last year remind us that investment in existing infrastructure is crucial. Infrastructure is also a prerequisite for development and innovation, and it creates jobs. With infrastructure 2.0 we will see smart roads with smart lighting, connected to the satellite services that will enable self-driving vehicles.

Increasing the role of financial instruments The next EU Multi-Annual Financial Framework (MFF) is in the works. In it we need to increase the role of financial instruments, compared to simply doling out grants and subsidies. We have very successful experience to guide us in the form of the Investment Plan for Europe and the European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI). The idea was to set aside  21 billion from the coffers of the EU budget and the EIB, using it as a guarantee to provide more and higher risk-finance and, thus, to get investment going again in Europe after the crisis. The initial objective was to mobilise  315 billion of investment by 2018. We exceeded this handsomely and are now working

MAIN TOPIC: Saving the EU

must develop a true prosperity strategy for the partnership between “WeEurope and Africa and other emerging economies worldwide.” 

Werner Hoyer

towards the second phase target of  500 billion. The best part of this is that the loans will be repaid with interest, and the money can then be reused for subsequent projects. And most importantly, the beneficiaries are also putting their own money into the projects, and – knowing that they have to repay the loans with interest – are coming forward with projects that have the potential to shape Europe’s future. In the next MFF we need to maintain what worked well in the EFSI, such as the division of responsibilities: the EU bank did the banking part once the EU Commission had set the policy.

Meeting Sustainable Development Goals When we look at the ambitious goals we formulated at the COP21 in Paris for climate and at the UN for sustainable development, we see that progress is being made – but far too slowly. We must develop new, sharper and more focused tools. Crucially, we must also become more effective in attracting private investment. Public resources alone will never suffice. After lengthy discussions with the UN Secretary General last year, the EIB issued its first Sustainability Awareness Bond (SAB). It was only a small pilot issue, yet it raised  500 million to help finance our contribution to meeting the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Our initial focus has been on the water sector. This year, we plan to issue further sustainability bonds to fund other Sustainable Development Goals, such as healthcare or education. The Sustainability Awareness Bonds follow in the footsteps of our Climate Awareness Bonds (CAB) which pioneered the green bond market. While these have allowed us to increase the proportion of our lending that goes towards combating climate

change (close to 30% last year), this is still not enough. We have committed to provide $US 100 billion of climate-related investment in the five years to 2020, and to increase our climate action financing to 35% of all of our investments in developing countries from 2020 onwards. We are supporting the EU’s global role by investing outside of the EU, helping to reach policy goals defined by the Commission and Member States. In 2018, we invested a record sum of  1.6 billion in Sub-Saharan Africa, creating jobs and improving living conditions on the continent. We are ready to do more and support a shift in development policy from aid to investment. We must develop a true prosperity strategy for the partnership between Europe and Africa and other emerging economies worldwide.

Working together as a Union

The EU bank reflects Europe’s ability to deliver projects collectively at a time when many across the continent seek to present parochial nationalism as a better option. The bank’s investments bring Europeans closer together, and that is the basis on which future jobs and growth, as well as a sense of common endeavour, will be built for all EU Member States. The bank is also a great example of the value of working together, in the form of favourable financing conditions on a scale not achievable by Member States acting alone. In fact, in opposition to the trend towards nationalism at some extremes of the political spectrum, the EIB is clearly becoming more European. Instead of looking at a series of individual countries, we are increasingly considering Europe as a whole, because of our common challenges and because it is so obvious that we are stronger when we work together. The European Parliament elections are sure to broaden the debate about the continent’s direction. The debates during the election campaigns must highlight the added value of working together as a Dr Werner Hoyer Union, whether working at home or in Africa, which has been President of the European Investment Bank (EIB) badly needs investment. I hope the debates before and Chairman of its Board of Directors since 2012. Born the elections will emphasise the need to invest in 1951 in Wuppertal, he holds a PhD in economics from infrastructure, innovation and climate, and highlight the Cologne University. From 1985-1987 he was Director ways of bridging the market gaps that hold back Economics and Information of the Carl Duisberg, Society Europe’s competitiveness and growth. in Cologne and then became a Member of the Bundestag photo: © EIB The EU bank will continue to represent Europe in (1987-2011). Mr Hoyer was Minister of State and Deputy action, despite the uncertain backdrop that our Defence Minister from 1994-1998 and from 2009-2011. From 2000-2005 he continent currently faces. Our goal is to improve was President of the European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party (ELDR). the lives of citizens through investments that really matter – all over Europe.




Western Balkans mural (Ed/nc, Paris) On 4th April, High Representative Federica Mogherini participated in the unveiling of a street art mural in Brussels during the EU-Western Balkans Cultural Week. The mural is a piece of art created by Rikardo Druškić, a well-known young artist from Bosnia and Herzegovina. Druškić said at the inauguration: ”My main goal as an artist during this creative process was to represent my city of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the Balkans in a different, more positive light. Art has many purposes and one of them is to connect people. I hope that with this work I come close to that goal.” Federica Mogherini said that the artist was not only bringing to Brussels and to Europe a wonderful gift, but that he also was bringing “the Balkans to where they belong, which is at the heart of Europe.” The High Representative added: “It is now for us, both at the European Union level with our Member States and with the authorities of the Balkan countries, to bring all the Balkans inside of the European Union. This is the next step. I am convinced that today, compared to five years ago – we started with our mandate four and a half years ago – each and every one of the six partners that we have in the Western Balkans is closer to the European Union. And I believe that we can still use the seven remaining months of the mandate of this Commission to do some irreversible steps for each of you to get closer to, and finally in, the European Union. Because

Group photo in front of the Balkan mural. In the middle Federica Mogherini, on her

for the Balkans I even have a difficulty

left the artist Rikardo Drus̆kić. 

photo: © European Union 2019, source: EC – Audiocisual Service

in using the word enlargement; I think it is really a matter of reunification of our continent.


I think that this mural will be a very pow-

only way – to mend the wounds of war in

The creation of the mural was supported

erful reminder for the citizens of not only

the region once and for all and to do it

by the EU, the Balkan Trafik Festival and

Brussels and Belgium, but also of all of

in this colourful, joyful manner that the

the City of Brussels. It will become part of

Europe, and the institutions of the Eu-

younger generation of the Balkans always

the popular Brussels’ Street Art Parcours.

ropean Union to complete the work of

expresses. I think you know where you

reunifying our continent. And I believe this

belong, and that is here. So thank you

would also be the best way – possibly the

for bringing this gift to us.”

> Watch the video: https://bit.ly/2I1aBt5

MAIN TOPIC: Saving the EU

photo: © European Union 2019, source: EP

Consolidation of the Western Balkans is crucial for European security The EU must become more pro-active

by Tonino Picula MEP, Chairman of the Delegation for relations with Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Kosovo, European Parliament, Brussels/ Strasbourg


he European Union (EU) opened up the prospect of EU membership for the countries of the Western Balkans at the beginning of the 2000’s. The idea behind this enlargement discourse was that EU membership of these countries would further contribute to spreading and protecting liberal democracy and the institutions that safeguard it, as well as empowering democratic forces in the Western Balkan countries, thus resulting in mutual gain for both sides. Enlargement remains one of the most successful EU policies. However, the enthusiasm of the early naughties has since faded, to say the least. Less than two decades later, the perception of the advantages of enlargement, although still present, is decreasing. A number of factors have contributed to the rising level of doubt after the initial optimism, the latest of which, namely Brexit and the pandemonium surrounding it, has caused a significant change in the enlargement discourse, falling just short of a full paradigm shift.

The burden of the past It is important to remember that for more than half a century the majority of Europeans have enjoyed an era of peace that has spanned three generations and seven de­

cades. The same cannot be said for the populations of former Yugoslavia. The Western Balkans, the most dynamic part of Southeast Europe, is a post-conflict area from a security point of view, in which the burden of the recent past, war and its consequences, still determine the volume of co-operation. The collapse of Yugoslavia and particularly the way in which the former state crumbled, will have lasting effects on this part of the continent. The events of the first half of the 1990’s have thus had radically different impacts on the EU and the Balkans. After the fall of the Berlin Wall, the signing of the Amsterdam and Maastricht Treaties and the accession to the EU of Austria, Sweden and Finland, the European project gained momentum. On the other hand, the disintegration of Yugoslavia resulted in almost 3,800 km of new borders on the map of Europe.

A breeding ground for ethnic conflicts Nevertheless, the EU’s policy of enlargement has had a positive impact – there has been no major outbreak of violence in the Western Balkan region since the early 2000s. However, the

level of stability that has been achieved in “The the Western Balkans is still not robust enough to prevent sudden outbreaks of violence.” 

Tonino Picula



˘˘ ˘ in the historic The Bascarsija center of Sarajevo which was rebuilt after the 1992-1995 civil war photo: © European Union 2018, source: EC audiovisual service

Western Balkans are still a potential breeding ground for ethnic and other conflicts. To give a precise figure: there are currently thirteen areas within former Yugoslavia that are either susceptible to the outbreak of conflict or where conflict is currently ongoing. These conflicts are most often the consequence of long-standing tensions, according to a recent study by the Heidelberg Institute for International Conflict Research. Today, stability in the Western Balkans depends on the outcome of two countervailing movements: slow but gradual progress by the countries of the Western Balkan on their path of accession to the EU and the counter-reactions of various radical groups whose aim is to preserve the status quo. The divisions are apparent first and foremost within the respective states, but these internal conflicts often affect inter-state relations too. The level of stability that has been achieved in the Western Balkans is still not robust enough to prevent sudden outbreaks of violence. That is why EU policy must be pro-active and must be based on sound assessments.

Resolving the problems is in Europe’s interest From a purely pragmatic viewpoint, it is in the best interests of the EU to assist in resolving the problems of the Western Balkans, because if they remain unresolved they are bound to spread beyond the area’s boundaries. It is also in the best interests of the EU not to wait for the formal approval of candi-

Tonino Picula MEP has been Member of the European Parliament since 2014. During his political career he has held offices in local authorities and in the Sabor, the national parliament of Croatia. Mr Picula was Foreign Minister from 2000-2003, then Mayor of the city of Velika Gorica (2005-2009) and Vice-chair of the Committee on Foreign Affairs from 2007 to 2011. He also served as Vice-President of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly from 2011 to 2013.


date status or the opening of accession negotiations to push for the proper implementation of the rule of law. Failure to do so can only encourage the kinds of extremism that the EU is trying to combat in different parts of the world. The Western Balkans is also of crucial geostrategic importance to the EU, as it is a region of unfinished European integration, completely surrounded by both EU and NATO Member States. It is therefore essential for the EU to become more deeply involved in the region; the less present it is, the bigger the vacuum that will open up, that other players will not hesitate to try and fill. It is no secret who those other players are. This is absolutely critical given the context of security consolidation. Russia, Saudi Arabia and Turkey are not exactly subtle about their interests in the region, each for their own reasons. However, the prospect of EU membership, as well as the ambition of the vast majority of the Western Balkans states to join NATO have significantly altered the political climate and created historically unique circumstances in which those countries that have been most often in conflict with each other now share the same foreign and security policy goals.

A long-term geopolitical vision Security is now one of the major concerns of European citizens and the EU must therefore fulfil its duties and effectively protect them. This is why the development of security capabilities has become vital, along with the whole spectrum of soft power instruments. Over the course of the past three years, the European Union has made bigger strides in the fields of security and defence (with the ultimate goal of establishing the European Defence Union) than in its entire history. Europe needs a long-term geopolitical vision and strategy that will enable it to be effective in tackling the root causes of recently emerging threats instead of being stuck with dealing with their aftermath. The EU must become more pro-active instead of merely responding. It goes without saying that the Western Balkans should serve as a testing ground for this ambition.

MAIN TOPIC: Saving the EU?

It is time to start discussions on our common ambitions

Transatlantic relations: shared history and common values by Michael Gahler MEP, European Parliament, Brussels/Strasbourg

Michael Gahler MEP has been a Member of the European Parliament since April 1999. Born in 1960 in Frankfurt/Main, he is current-


n Europe, we have lived in peace for more than 70 years thanks to NATO and the EU. 2019 marks important jubilees for NATO and the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP): in April, we celebrated the 70th anniversary of the Transatlantic Alliance and in June, we honour the beginning of the EU’s military arm which kick-started in 1999. Although both organisations share a common history and have common values, Europeans must get their act together and start organising European security and defence by Europeans for Europeans.

EU and NATO delivered on their promises Both organisations were founded in the aftermath of the Second World War on a common set of values: peace and stability through freedom and democracy. Our shared history across the Atlantic especially forced us to stay together. After the disasters of war, mass murder and oppression, it was right to rebuild Europe on common transatlantic values. The shared

is of utmost importance to “Itorganise security and defence by Europeans for Europeans.”

Michael Gahler

values across the Atlantic have built the backbone for the establishment of the rules-based international order. So far, the EU and NATO have kept these promises. NATO’s 70th birthday reminds us that the US engaged with soft and hard power in Europe, that NATO helped to overcome the Cold War and that it protected our interests in the Balkans and Afghanistan. In 2012, the EU received the Nobel Peace Prize “for over six decades of contributions to the advancement of peace and reconciliation, democracy and human rights in Europe.” In addition to these achievements, the EU stabilised the European continent and its neighbourhood as a security actor. Within the well-established CSDP, European soldiers serve in several operations and missions: among them, Operation Althea in Bosnia-Herzegovina since 2004, the EU NAVFOR Atalanta Operation off the shore of Somalia since 2010, or the EU NAVFOR

ly a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, serves as the EPP Group Photo: private

Coordinator in the Subcommittee on Security and Defence, and is a substitute member of the Transport and Tourism Committee.

Mediterranean Operation since 2015. Civilian missions such as the EU Monitoring Mission in Georgia demonstrate that we do not ignore even the “frozen” conflicts, but shine a light on the realities on the ground.

Well-known certainties under attack In 2019, however, we have to realise that well-known certainties in the field of security and defence are under attack. Several governments within the “free world” have developed different commitments when it comes to our common values. Across the Atlantic, President Trump is turning away from the US support to liberal democracies. In addition, he is questioning the future existence of NATO and the US commitment to European security. On the European front, in the run up to the European elections, right and left wing populists question the benefits of a rules-based liberal order. They suggest turning towards Russia’s President Putin to organise Europe’s security. Both extremes are wrong. Rather than handing our fate over to Putin, it is of utmost importance to organise security and defence by Europeans for Europeans, because no EU Member State has the capacities or capabilities to face future challenges on its own. Once we organise ourselves, it is on us to deliver on military capabilities to achieve our common military ambitions. Mocked in many contexts, this also means taking seriously the debate on a European aircraft carrier and starting discussions on our common ambitions and the future of European warfare. As a next step, a White Book on Security and Defence needs to describe the way towards common defence. It will define common interests and link our strategic thinking with the development of necessary military capabilities. This could set the precedent for building a European strategic culture, which has to be the next cornerstone in finalising the European Defence Union as the European pillar of NATO.


A European army: a vital debate

Europe needs an army to defend itself and stay united

by Frédéric Mauro, Lawyer, Paris/Brussels, and Olivier Jehin, Journalist specialised in matters of defence, Brussels


n 6th November 2018, the president of the French Republic, Emmanuel Macron, raised the idea of a “true European army”. Six days later, at the European Parliament in Strasbourg, the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, called for the “elaboration of a vision enabling us to achieve one day a true European army” as a “complement to NATO”. On 22nd January 2019, at the time of the signing of the new Franco-German treaty in Aachen, they reaffirmed this perspective. Taboo for a long time, these two words – European army – were spoken for the first time by the President of the European Commission, JeanClaude Juncker. They still irritate Eurosceptics, who see them as infringing upon national sovereignty, but also those who prefer to leave the defence of Europe to the United States, as well as those who fear the militarisation of the European Union (EU).

Widespread support from European citizens However, according to the spring 2018 Eurobarometer, on average 75 % of Europeans support the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). In 2007, they were even 79% to want more autonomy from the United States for this CSDP. It is unfortunate that this question has not been asked again since then. When it comes to the French, if we believe the rare surveys that exist, 62% of them are favourable to the creation of a “European army”1


This can doubtless be explained by the fact that the words “European army” are understandable by all citizens in all countries, which is far from being the case when it comes to the CSDP, the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), the European Defence Fund (EDF), the Coordinated Annual Review on Defence (CARD) and other acronyms that are comprehensible only to experts in the field. In the political debate, these two words enable the clarification of an objective – common defence – which should unite the European people. However, the critics of the idea of a European army have mainly focused on proving that it is unrealistic, without considering whether is was desirable. Why? Simply because the idea is frightening and seems impossible to enforce.

An idea that frightens through its implications Because of the underlying principle of autonomy, the idea of a European army annoys Donald Trump and a number of American leaders, even though they are demanding increased European investment in defence. However, at this stage of the transatlantic relationship, it has become obvious that the United States is only interested in the defence of Europe as long as it serves its own interests. This is very clearly what the attitude of the President of the United States translated to at the July 2018 NATO summit in Brussels. It is also what is motivating his repeated attacks against the European Union. The very idea of a militarily autonomous European Union repulses him as he prefers to confront Europeans in a dispersed way. And it is precisely because the EU forms a bloc on which he has no hold that he considers the Union a commercial “foe”, an organisation to be destroyed. Because it is synonym of integration, the idea of a European

photo: © European Union 2018; Source: EP


MAIN TOPIC: Saving the EU?

Frédéric Mauro is a lawyer specialised in matters of European defence. He has authored a number

European army, if it exists one “The day, will be born of the capacity of

Europeans to take, together and independently of others, decisions in the area of defence and to execute them.”  Frédéric Mauro / Olivier Jehin

of reports for the European Commission and European Parliament, the last of which addresses the question of a defence White photo: private

Book at European level.

Olivier Jehin is a journalist. He covers especially European defence as well as NATO and was editor-in-chief of the information letter ‘Europe, Diplomacy & Defence’ for 15 years.

photo: private

army scares Europeans. It is also symptomatic that, at the Helsinki summit, which is in many ways the founding act of the CSDP, the writers took care to mention that the process being enforced “did not involve the creation of a European army”. Indeed, what characterises an army in the first place is its strategist. Thus, who will lead this European army? Who will give orders? Who will be responsible for the loss of lives? The idea of this army is not one of a big Franco-German brigade extended to the whole continent. If it exists one day, it will be born of the capacity of Europeans to take, together and independently of others, decisions in the area of defence and to execute them. In other words, before anything else it is a political question which offers Europeans the choice between freedom and submission.

A long-term vision… Much has been achieved since 2016 for European defence, but there is still a lot to be done if we want the EU to truly protect Europe and its citizens. Threats in our neighbourhood are multiplying, the credibility of the Atlantic Alliance is eroding, and we are powerless to defend ourselves collectively without the Americans. But we will not go further with the current method based on cooperation in an intergovernmental framework with the objective of preserving the façade of twenty-seven sovereignties. If European defence is facing an impasse, it is because it has twenty-seven brains and only one, atrophied arm: the CSDP. It will never work. Not now, nor in one hundred years. We must change methods.

… to which we can quickly give shape An effective European defence assumes that we can plan, develop, produce, acquire, support and use our capacities together. We need to move from simple operational and industrial

cooperation to the progressive integration of our defence tools. This is the path that the vision of a European army proposes. It does not mean that each Member State will abandon its flag and that, from one day to the next, all regiments will be merged into a vast group marching under the European banner every 9th May at the Schuman roundabout. It means that European forces must be able to autonomously lead clearly identified missions, relying on effective common planning and a strong chain of command. In other words, they must be capable of acting as if they constituted a single army. Why should what is feasible within NATO not be possible within the Union? To move forwards, a few conditions must absolutely be met. These involve, first, ensuring that decisions are taken by qualified majority and constituting a sufficient defence budget, based on a proportional funding key, to allow the development of joint capabilities, the acquisition of common capacities and to cover the entirety of the costs of operations carried out together. Then, they involve adopting a strategic concept which clearly identifies the missions assigned to European forces and assuring, through the strong and committed involvement of the chiefs of defence, common planning of the capacities needed to this end. Finally, they involve the creation of an European headquarters with adequate resources for the planning and command of operations.

The stakes of the electoral campaign Even though he does not dismiss the idea of a revision of the treaties, Emmanuel Macron clearly mentioned, in his recent open letter to European citizens2 in the run-up to the European elections, the conclusion of a defence and security treaty. In the current political landscape, it seems indeed extremely difficult to reach the required unanimity for a revision of the European treaties. The best way to move forwards with a European army is doubtless the one that will allow those who want to, and can,



Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel at the signing of the new Franco-German treaty in Aachen, 22 January 2019. At this occasion the French President and the German Chancellor laid out their commitment to a future joint European army 

to do so outside of the framework of European institutions, as long as this process is coherent with the planned developments of the EU, especially through the European Defence Fund “in connection with NATO and our European allies”, as the French president writes. The autonomy of European defence is not intended to undermine transatlantic collective defence, but to give Europe a capacity to defend its own interest, analogous to the American armed forces defending the interests of the United States. A few weeks before the European elections that will be crucial for the future of the EU, the stakes of defence must become a central theme of the election campaign. These last few years, the threats on the international scene and especially those in our immediate neighbourhood have multiplied: political instability; conflicts of diverse natures in Georgia, Ukraine, Syria, Libya; terrorism; degradation of maritime security, etc. In this context, no European state has been able to act alone or without the support of the United States. If we want to restore our sovereignty and independence, we need a European army and a long-term strategic perspective. Europe needs an army to defend itself and stay united. It is not an option. It is a necessity.

photo: © European Union, 2019

Merkel’s call for a European army German Chancellor Angela Merkel in her speech at the European Parliament (Strasbourg, 13.11.2018,) called for the establishment of a true European army. She said: “We need to create a fully capable, European military force for rapid deployment to affected regions in times of crisis. We have made great progress on permanent structured cooperation in the military domain. That is a good thing, and these efforts have received wide support here. Yet (…) we ought to work on the vision of one day establishing a proper European army. Yes, that’s how things stand. Four years ago, Jean-Claude Juncker said: a joint EU army would show the world that there would never again be a war between EU countries. That would not be an army in competition with NATO (…) but it could be an effective complement to NATO.” > Web: Full speech: https://bit.ly/2Gr6MLD

few weeks before the European elections that will be crucial for the “Afuture of the EU, the stakes of defence must become a central theme of the election campaign.” 

Frédéric Mauro / Olivier Jehin

1 Sondage Odoxa for the Institut des Relations Internationales et Stratégiques and Le Parisien : « vers l’armée européenne ? » (‘Towards a European army?’) 2 For a European Renaissance, Emmanuel Macron’s opinion piece published in Le Figaro on 4th March 2019


MAIN TOPIC: Saving the EU?

To enable our continent to assume responsibility for its own destiny

European Army or Permanent Structured Coalition? by Jacques Favin Lévêque, General (ret), EuroDéfense France, Versailles

Gen (ret) Jacques Favin Lévêque graduated from the French Polytechnique University and then was an officer of the Corps of engineers.


t a time when President Macron and Chancellor Merkel, as well as President Junker previously, have broached the subject of a future common defence thanks to a “European Army”, others are advocating more pragmatic step-by-step developments, building on the prospects opened up by “major steps” taken in this area in the recent past. The main purpose of such remarks by these political leaders is undoubtedly to demystify the issues at stake, which have often been subject to fantasy and preconceived ideas. As they impinge on the sovereignty and identity of Member States, they are complex issues and do not therefore surface very often in public debate.

No operational reality This being said, talking of a “European Army” is only one simple and graphic way of responding to the wishes regularly expressed by European Union citizens in the Eurobarometers. It is a way of tackling a complex international issue and an attempt to express in simple language the measures that the EU could take to be fully able to shoulder responsibility for the defence of its strategic interests, and particularly of its territory and people.

idea of a European army is “The predicated on the idea of Europe

being a political power with all the attributes of a federal state.” Jacques Favin Lévêque

Everybody realises however that at a time when the European Union is unsettled by the current resurgence of nationalism here and there, as well as the diversity of strategic approaches, it is impossible to give any operational reality to whatever dream people may have of merging Member States’ armed forces and integrating them into a single army. In addition, and more importantly, the idea of a European army is predicated on the idea of Europe being a political power with all the attributes of a federal state. General Charles de Gaulle,

During the Cold War he served in the 2nd French Corps in Germany. Then Photo: private

he was assigned at the Army Staff and the Armament Directory of the

French MoD before becoming the Director General of GICAT, the French industrial association. General Favin Lévêque is a very active member of the Board of EuroDéfense France.

in his time, dismissed such an idea in the following terms: “For there to be such a thing as a European army, in other words an army of Europe, Europe itself would have to exist as a political economic financial, administrative and, above all, moral entity. It would need to be a sufficiently thriving, established and recognised entity to be able to generate the instinctive loyalty of its subjects and pursue its own policies so that, if necessary, men would be prepared to die for it in their millions! Is that the case? No serious person could dare answer yes!” (February 1953).

How to build up a European defence In reality, the policy initiated by Member States through the European Council starts from the current concept of European defence, confined to external operations. It does however lay the foundations of an autonomous European defence, the first step of which would follow from the decisions taken since the summer of 2017. PESCO: The first of these is a Structured Permanent Cooperation (PESCO), a somewhat arcane and technocratic sounding name but which henceforth opens up significant possibilities for cooperation among EU Member States in the area of defence capability and to a lesser extent – at least for the time being – in the area of operations. EI2: Then there is the European Intervention Initiative (EI2) launched by France in 2018 in order to conduct a more detailed analysis, together with the 10 current partner countries, of the geopolitical and geostrategic conditions necessary for joint operational engagement. EDF: Finally, the European Commission has decided to establish a European Defence Fund, potentially able to finance a large portion of defence R&T spending and contribute to the development funding of common weapons programmes.



These promising initiatives, even though tangible results are not yet visible, could become the building blocks of a European defence policy that would go beyond the current Common Security and Defence Policy and the Petersberg missions so as to fully assume the defence of EU territory, currently – according to the terms of the Washington treaty – under the umbrella of NATO.

Strategic autonomy in defence and security It is true of course that dependence on the United States is still firmly rooted in the culture of many Member States, particularly in Eastern Europe and the Baltic Republics. The shifts in Euro-American relations that were perceptible under President Obama and have been further accentuated under President Trump, undermine mutual trust, probably for ever. It is no longer therefore just a wild dream to envisage a European defence that would be autonomous in the medium term and even sovereign in the longer term. Indeed, the quest for strategic autonomy in Defence and Security is already the European Union’s stated objective. To achieve such a goal in concrete terms, why not revisit the traditional concept of a “coalition” and make it permanent? In other words, establish a “Permanent Structured Coalition” of Member States of the European Union. This coalition would have to be enshrined in a Treaty signed in a European capital and then taking the name of the city. But why not call it the “Strasbourg” Treaty, to symbolise

European unity on both sides of the Rhine? Such an alliance of countries in the coalition could take a leaf out of the Atlantic Alliance’s book and set up a kind of European NATO as its military arm. Like the Washington Treaty, it would have its Article 5, reflecting the solidarity of the treaty parties in their collective defence. Indeed, Article 42-7 of the Treaty of the European Union already goes a long way towards expressing this solidarity. Only the second paragraph would have to be amended in order to give the EU full responsibility for the defence of its own territory, with due regard for the Atlantic Alliance. In this way, the sovereign member nations of the European Union would decide to form an institutionalised and permanent coalition and organise their common defence through a politico-military structure that would include the PESCO, the EDA, a permanent HQ and the Eurocorps, thus bringing together existing entities within the EU.

All for one and one for all It took almost 10 years for the European Council to acknowledge and adopt the concept of PESCO. Why not aim, by 2025, to gather the signatures of the 27 Member States of the European Union under a future Treaty of Strasbourg? This would enable a European Permanent Structured Coalition to shoulder responsibility for our continent’s destiny: “all for one and one for all” would then become the motto for the defence of Europe, united in diversity but above all, in adversity!


Call for cand


The European Award for Citizenship, Security and Defence is intended to reward outstanding efforts towards promoting European citizenship and European security and defence awareness. The prize is organised annually by the association “Civisme Défense Armée Nation” (CiDAN), together with the European Interparliamentary Security and Defence Association, with the support of the Behörden Spiegel. The Berlin Security Conference, organized by this media, hosts the award ceremony. The competition is open to all European citizens and legal entities in all countries which are Members of the European Union. The main award areas concerned are the following : • Promoting the European values of democracy and human rights, • Tangible and visible achievements in promoting a sense of European citizenship, • Raising awareness of European security and defence in schools and universities and among the public at large; • Reinforcing resilience against terrorism, • Promoting the concept of key European security interests, • Promoting the awareness regarding the importance of a powerful European Technological and Industrial Base • Remembrance ceremonies, in a spirit of reconciliation. Completed application forms should be sent, before Sunday 30 June 2019, by email to euro-award@cidan.org, and in printed form by post to: CiDAN - 9ter, rue Edouard LEFEBVRE- F 78000 VERSAILLES, France > More information, including the rules, can be obtained by writing to the address: euro-award@cidan.org, or by visiting the website: https://www.cidan.org/home


Disaster management, CBRNe protection, and development

photo: Š EDA

Intensified by climate change, natural disasters threaten mankind, while manmade disasters, including CBRNe terrorist attacks, are a high and real risk worldwide. How can these threats be countered by coordinated EU policies? And how can the Union adapt its development policy to enable nations around the world to protect themselves against these threats? What are the strategies that industry is proposing in this field? This chapter strives to give answers to these questions.


We have to create a shared culture of prevention

Managing disasters: the role of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism by Monique Pariat, Director-General of DG ECHO, European Commission, Brussels

Monique Pariat has been the Director-General of the European Commission’s Directorate General for


atural disasters are a serious threat for our lives, economies and ecosystems. Deadly storms, hurricanes, and flash floods are becoming more damaging and devastating. The fact that Sweden and other Northern European countries witnessed persistent dry conditions leading to raging forest fires in 2018 is clear proof that climate change is transforming risk patterns at an accelerated pace.

European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (DG ECHO) since September 2015. She studied at the Institute of Politphoto: © EU Commission

ical Studies of Strasbourg and the College of Europe in Bruges. Working for the EC

since 1987, Ms Pariat has been Director for the Mediterranean and the Black Sea (DG Maritime Affairs and Fisheries), Director for General Affairs (DG Justice and Consumers) and Deputy

A stronger European response to disasters In 2018, over  2 billion of damage was reportedly caused by natural disasters in Europe. If one also considers the consequences of man-made disasters, such as for instance Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) incidents, the need for resilient civil protection structures is even more justified. It was for this reason that the Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM) was developed. Revamped in 2014, thanks to a new legal base introduced by the Lisbon Treaty, the UCPM sets the basis for a comprehensive approach to disaster risk management that supports national efforts in this area. However, over the last few years, the UCPM has not always been in a position to offer the necessary assistance to Member States in need, particularly when several Member States have been simultaneously affected by a disaster. In November 2017, the Commission therefore adopted a proposal to strengthen the UCPM through the creation of additional reserve capacities at an EU level – ‘rescEU’. After a year of negotiations, the new UCPM is now a political reality.

#rescEU Under the new legislation, the Commission and Member States will develop a reserve of civil protection capacities (the ‘rescEU’ reserve). This reserve is conceived as a safety net that will be used as a last resort instrument, only when national capacities are insufficient or overwhelmed. The reserve will be composed of different types of capacities, including aerial firefighting means, but also capacities to respond to medical emergencies and to CBRN incidents. This list is not exhaustive and could be expanded to include other types of capacities. The Union’s budget will cover most (or in some cases, the entirety) of the costs, but their ownership will always be granted to Member States. In exchange, the Commission retains strategic decision-making over the deployment of the rescEU reserve, including in cases of conflicting requests. The existing mechanism, by which Member States are pooling together civil protection


Director-General of DG Agriculture and Rural Development.

capacities and capabilities, is also strengthened, with higher financial incentives. The new legislation, however, goes beyond the response phase. It also steps up disaster prevention and preparedness. It aims to create a shared culture of prevention, through the sharing of knowledge and best practices among Member States. The establishment of the new Union Civil Protection Knowledge Network is expected to steer this process.

Real EU added value Unlike military or police forces, civil protection structures greatly vary in each Member State. Even the denomination may be different, as we refer to civil protection, civil defence, rescue services or civil contingencies. In most Member States, the oversight of civil protection lies within the Ministry of Interior, but in some cases, the policy is coordinated by the Ministry of Defence or of Justice, or directly attached to the Prime Minister’s office. Despite these differences, civil protection is something that you recognise when you see it. When, for instance, wildfires ravaged several regions of Portugal in 2017, or put Swedish contingency planning to the test in 2018, citizens expected their administration to provide a rapid and coordinated response. The new UCPM is a concrete and tangible expression of European solidarity, a European risk-sharing tool that can be mobilised in exceptional situations and which is sensible both from a political and economic point of view. Politically, the new UCPM is a forward-looking instrument, as it ensures that the Union is ready not only to face the realities of today, but also the threats of tomorrow, and does so with less red tape and higher efficiency. The enhanced UCPM also facilitates economies of scale by allowing the better use of available resources. In sum, the UCPM is a European solution to a European challenge.

Security and Defence

50 years of CBRN protection photo: © ESDU

Hartmut Bühl asked Hasso von Blücher (right) about innovative CBRN protection and the success of his company

Interview with Hasso von Blücher, Owner of Blücher GmbH, Erkrath


he European: Herr von Blücher, this year you are celebrating the 50th anniversary of your highly successful company. May I offer you my warmest congratulations and thank you for granting me an interview on this occasion here in Erkrath. What first gave you the idea of founding a company that aims to protect people? Hasso von Blücher: In the 60s and 70s, Central Europe was overflowing with millions of soldiers, countless tanks and all of the attendant military hardware. To the great satisfaction of their respective allies, the two German states were seen as the battleground of a future nuclear war. In West Germany alone, almost 6,000 nuclear warheads were deployed – most of them mounted on short or medium range missiles – and almost all of them designed to detonate on German territory. Nothing whatsoever was envisaged for the protection of the population. In cooperation with the German Federal Office for Civil Protection, we therefore developed a basic protection kit for civilians to ensure that their respiratory tract and skin would not be contaminated by radioactive particles. That programme collapsed two years later because the German Parliament refused to pass legislation to implement the law on civil protection. At that point, we decided to continue our work as a small working group and capitalised on our experience to develop military protection suits. This has enabled us, little by little, to conquer today’s leading position in military protection garments. The European: So, a somewhat timeless political and philosophical perspective then, and a certain idea of man as the

focus of your thinking and your work. As well as your military background. Hasso von Blücher: Please don’t give me such praise! With the CBRN defence troops in Sonthofen and at the army officers’ training school in Munich, I acquired detailed knowledge of the means of mass destruction. That is what gave me the technical background to develop various technologies for personal protective equipment. The European: You have always been entrepreneurial and innovative. Proof of that is surely the Brügger Mühle (Mill), your Head Office, where we were walking around. I am most impressed by the harmony between history, functionality and the connection between art and nature. Was that a matter of intuition or deliberate planning? Hasso von Blücher: It was both. Contrary to most people who look at something and see only rubble, rats and rust, I have a wonderful gift for imagining how it can be restored and exploi­ ted. The Brügger Mühle was unsellable for 30 years. It layed damaged and unused. I was able to buy it for a good price and it is now the most sought-after corporate facility in Erkrath, with about 14,000 square meters of office space. The European: Your company has always been at the forefront of research and is renowned for its capacity to innova­te: SARATOGA (CBRN and Fragment Protection) and ­SARATECH (Air and Water Filtration). What further innovation do we need in both sectors? Hasso von Blücher: In the area of CBRN protection, the next generation of protective suits will be more lightweight than before and made from fairly stretchable material, so more comfortable to wear while offering additional protection against aerosols. In terms of fragment protection, our protective perfor-



mance is by far the best. We now have to convince the market of this superior quality. And in the area of water filtration, the major challenge not only in Europe in the next decade will be to make higher performing filters to filter out toxic trace substances from drinking water and industrial wastewater.

SARATOGA Chemical Protective Suit

The European: How would you define a future strong European industry policy? Hasso von Blücher: A good EU industrial policy should set the right incentives and leave the rest to the market. It would have to be exactly the opposite of the current German industrial policy. I believe that there are too many subsidies producing the opposite of the intended outcome. Subsidies for renewable energies for example hinder the efficient reduction of CO2 emissions through certificate trading. And for every nuclear power plant that is shut down in Germany, a new one is built on the other side of the border, which may not be maintained as carefully as the one that has been shut down. None of this is coordinated with our neighbours. The result is confusion, environmental nationalism and incompetence! The exact opposite of what we need! The European: And what about the European Armament cooperation? German governments continue to be reluctant. Do we need a new definition of what constitutes an armament?

i BLÜCHER GmbH Founded in 1969 by Hasso von Blücher and located with its Headquarters in Erkrath, near Düsseldorf, the company is an export oriented provider of filter technology for industrial and

photo: © Blücher GmbH

The European: From the outset, the Blücher company was export-oriented and has had great and lasting success. Over the last 50 years, you have sold more than 12 million protective suits or the material to make them. Has the change in US trade policy had any effect on your company yet? Hasso von Blücher: No, our sole obstacle has been the German Foreign Ministry because of extremely restrictive export regulations.

Hasso von Blücher: In Germany, there is a peculiar attitude towards everything military: it is the “triumph of hope over historical experience”! Take as an example the restriction of our own products: they are designed exclusively to protect and not to destroy life, but defined as armaments, just like explosives and ammunition! Which means that they are not only hit by all official sanctions, but also by informal, politically motivated, export restrictions. The European: If you could make one wish for yourself and one for Europe, what would they be? Hasso von Blücher: The wish for myself would be that I remain healthy in body, mind and soul so that I can go on being active and creative for another 20 years. For Europe I hope for a joint protection of our external borders, a European army and a much tighter network of the various intelligence and police agencies. Concerning the Euro that is dividing Europe, what nobody had in mind as a result, when it was created, I sometimes ask myself if we shouldn’t turn back and start again by restoring our national currencies, and – as we need some sort of common currency – reinstate the ECU as a covered common monetary unit…

medical use. With its worldwide established product SARATOGA, Blücher is a leading manufacturer for air permeable protective clothing for military and civil defence, emergency and disaster management based on the development and production of adsorptive compound materials for the protection against

The European: …You see me perplexed, but smiling. Which one of your proposals do you think will be realised? Hasso von Blücher: With a bit of luck my first wish might be fulfilled! But it is unlikely that the second will be, I’m sorry to say.

chemical and biological agents. > Web More information: https://www.bluecher.com/en


The European: Herr von Blücher, thank you very much for your openness. I wish continued success to your firm and good health to you personally.

Security and Defence

Effective development aid through coherent and concrete projects There can be no security without development, nor development without security

Interview with Henriette Geiger, Director, DG DEVCO, EU Commission, Brussels


he European: Ms Geiger, in the Directorate General (DG) for International Cooperation and Development (DEVCO), you are the Director responsible for People and Peace and Human and Society Development. What are the guiding principles of your mission? Henriette Geiger: Our main purpose is to engage with countries all over the world while bringing added value to the European Union. Focusing on the UN 2030 Agenda and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and their role in EU international cooperation and development policy, the Directorate General is responsible for formulating EU development cooperation policy and sectoral policies. This means ensuring cooperation with partner countries but also with local players like large cities, which play a major role in many countries and are often the main victims of climate change, conflicts, terrorism and other global threats. The European: What are the convictions that underpin your action? Henriette Geiger: The underlying objective of our work is to promote the EU’s fundamental values of democracy, the rule of law and the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Human rights are integral to effective work on poverty alleviation and conflict resolution, in addition to being an essential bulwark against extremism.

The European: You mentioned that your mission is based on concertation with Member States and other strategic partners. What is your experience in this respect? Henriette Geiger: The European Commission is an EU institution which aims to promote the interests of EU Member States while at the same time engaging with strategic partners. In the security area, my officials are working with many global partners such as those of the UN family (WHO, IAEA, OIE, UNSCR 1540, Biological and Chemical Weapons conventions - BWC and CWC), the US, Japan, Canada and other mission-based or regional organisations (OSCE, OPCW, ASEAN, African Union). We have close consultations with NATO on issues of common civil-military interest, such as counter-terrorism, cybersecurity, hybrid threats or CBRN security. Another organisation we are cooperating with is the International Science and Technology Centre (ISTC) in Astana. The European: What is the added value for the EU to be represented in the ISTC? Henriette Geiger: The ISTC, which is based in Astana (Kazakhstan), is an intergovernmental organisation co-funded by the EU, the US, Japan, South Korea and other global partners. Under the umbrella of the ISTC, cooperation and capacity building activities on security matters are discussed and initiated under a co-funding mechanism. Examples are water security in Central Asia or secure uranium transport in Central Africa. Such cost-effective and flexible mechanisms provide mutual information exchange with strategic partners in sensitive areas and reinforce multilateral and regional cooperation.



Climate change poses a considerable risk to global security 

The European: One of your actions is to engage in cooperation with third countries in order to address global threats. In your view, what are the major threats we are talking about? Henriette Geiger: One of the biggest global threats nowadays is of course climate change, which poses a considerable risk to global security. Others relate to terrorism, the rise of violent extremism, organised crime, misuse of chemical, biological or radio-nuclear materials (CBRN), attacks against IT systems and critical infrastructure. The emergence of new plant-animal-human diseases or pandemics, aggravated by climate change and migration, cross-border industrial accidents like Fukushima or Seveso and the increased occurrence of natural disasters, are emerging threats that pose new challenges. The European: You definitely see close links to security? Henriette Geiger: Yes, let’s consider a few examples of climate change or water security to illustrate how they are intrinsically linked. Climate change is a threat multiplier, which exacerbates conflicts and population migrations. Early warning and prevention measures are needed to help promote good neighbourly relations aimed at reducing tensions over limited natural resources. Our knowledge base can be increased through targeted public awareness campaigns to ensure that people become more aware of climate-induced security implications

photo: Sonse, CC BY 2.0, Flickr.com

and spill-over effects. One of our new actions in 2019 will be to engage Central Asia, a strategic area that can be a shield against illicit drug trafficking, radicalisation and terrorism, and a region crucial for EU security. The purpose of this action is to establish an integrated approach to climate induced security challenges and create development opportunities that will be resilient to climate risks. This will also contribute to the EU’s overall development and global commitments such as Clean Water and Sanitation, Climate Action and Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions. The European: And your example for water and security? Henriette Geiger: This is a very complex issue. In the fertile basins of the Amu Darya (Uzbekistan) and Syr Darya (Kazakhstan) rivers, the watersheds have become exposed to new threats linked to climate change: melting ice from glaciers has started to release huge quantities of highly toxic or radioactive waste originating from the former Soviet Union’s uranium mining industry. Our ongoing cooperation programmes in this region, through the Instruments contributing to Stability and Peace (IcSP) and the Instruments for Nuclear Safety (INSC) help to address these emerging security challenges in close cooperation with partner countries and the international community.

Henriette Geiger has been Director in the European Commission in the Directorate General for International Cooperation and Development, DEVCO, since 2018. She plays a leading role in implementing the people and peace aspects, including security, of the 2030 Agenda of the United Nations and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in EU international cooperation and development policy, and coordinates actions to implement the 2017 European Consensus on Development in this area.


The European: What about access to potable water in cities? Henriette Geiger: In terms of water security and access to safe and secure drinking water, large urban areas are also facing the new challenges of ageing infrastructure or poor protection of their reservoirs. To give you an example, many reservoirs are located in the open air and are therefore difficult to protect against intentional poisoning. Many big cities in emerging countries also suffer from water scarcity, which slows their development.

Security and Defence

work is driven by the promotion and respect of EU values and princi“Our ples, such as democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms.” 

The European: And in arid regions in the Middle East and the Gulf, huge investments are being planned to build nuclear power stations generating electricity to produce drinking water through desalination. Henriette Geiger: Yes, indeed. Even if it is safe and based on modern technologies, producing drinking water from seawater is highly energy-intensive. These nuclear power stations will require appropriate safeguards, safety and security governance mechanisms, such as regional early warning systems to detect CBRN contamination, as they may be targets for acts of terrorism or cause Fukushima or Chernobyl type accidents. The European: You mentioned CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear) threats as one of the crucial issues. How does your programme address them? Henriette Geiger: CBRN threats and risks are addressed through the EU’s global CBRN Centres of Excellence Initiative (“EU CBRN CoE”). It currently involves 62 partner countries in eight regions in the South and East of Europe, the Middle East and the Gulf, Central and South East Asia and Africa. It promotes security governance related to CBRN risks and covers not only intentional acts but also natural and accidental risks. What is unique with the Centres of Excellence is that partner countries are directly involved in the process, guided by the strong engagement of the EU and UN (UNICRI). Under their guidance, national and regional meetings contribute to confidence-building through professional networking. This programme is also driven by a strong South-South collaboration. The European: Indeed, it sounds like a convincing and promising concept. What about coordination within Member States and about funding and industry cooperation?

Henriette Geiger

Henriette Geiger: The CBRN-CoE activities are underpinned by the 2017 European CBRN action plan1 and available expertise inside the EU. Member States and their CBRN experts are implementing the majority of CBRN activities and projects funded under this initiative. This guarantees a direct transfer of EU excellence to partner countries. In each of the eight regional centres, an on-site technical assistance expert is deployed and provides permanent technical and operational guidance to regional and national CBRN teams in all fields. EU industry, academics and first responders are connected to the CBRN-CoE through the network of national focal points and EU delegations as well as the CBRN research community of users on security, established by DG HOME under its Horizon 2020 security research programme. Regional CBRN centres and EU delegations play an active role in facilitating contacts between EU industrial stakeholders and CBRN national authorities. For example, a mobile CBRN laboratory has been delivered to the Pasteur Institute in Dakar. Another will be delivered this year to a country in Central Asia and will be deployed and tested in real conditions during a cross-border field exercise scheduled in Uzbekistan in 2020. The European: Ms. Geiger, as the CBRN CoE concept is such a success, why are you not expanding this strategy to other fields? Could it not be a fruitful extension of the EU’s Global Strategy for greater resilience within its neighbourhood? Henriette Geiger: That is a good point. There is no reason why this should not be considered in the future. Such bottom-up, voluntary, regional and trust-building investments, based on close partnerships and South-South cooperation can make a big difference when they are well implemented and conducive to greater medium and long-term engagement between the EU and partner countries. Several options could be considered, if there is political will and appropriate financial resources. One of them could be to extend the geographical scope of the CoE programme to Central and South America and to South Africa; another could be to enlarge the technical scope of the initiative to cybersecurity, climate or critical infrastructure security; or, it might be possible to open new CoE networks without overloading the existing CBRN CoE. The European: Ms. Geiger, I would like to thank you for this conversation and wish you continued success.

The countries that join the CBRN CoE initiative work together in eight regions, headed up by a secretariat at regional level

source: CBRN CoE


COM(2017) 610



CONFERENCE REPORT 13th German-African Energy Forum

“Realising and Financing Africa’s Energy Revolution”

(Ed/hb, Brussels/Paris) The 13th Conference on Energy in Africa, organised by the Afrika-Verein der deutschen Wirtschaft (German-African Business Association) on 27-28 March 2019 in Hamburg was an important one, bringing the real problems and solutions of the African energy revolution to the table. 400 delegates from politics, industries, banks and academia from all over Europe and Africa discussed over two days the approaches for pragmatic, rapid and manifold, as well as realistic and makeable solutions.


he city of Hamburg gave its support through the attendance of Senator Michael Westermann and the German government through Minister of State Nils Annen, Foreign Affairs, and State Secretary Andreas Feicht, Economy and Energy. The organiser gave the Energy ministers of African countries the possibility to outline and discuss regional and national projects in special panels which were extremely helpful for industries, hearing first-hand about projects, their design and the status of realisation, the risks and the financing issues.

Dr Stefan Liebing, Chairman of the Afrika-Verein, welcoming parti­

Dr Gloria Magombo, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Energy and p ­ ower

cipants at the first evening reception

development, Republic of Zimbabwe

photo: © Studio Fabian Hammerl & Kathrine Uldbaek Nielsen / Afrika Verein


Africa’s energy revolution was discussed under the aspects of the Influence of digitisation in the energy sector. Regarding Energy supply, the participants agreed that there must be a complementarity of the different grids available, but that decentralisation is a remedy for remote areas, covering the energy need off-grid, using microgrids for all available streams. The forum on Innovative off-grid financing developed guidelines. There was unanimity that Energy storage will be complementary through the use of hydropower and batteries. Training

photo: © Studio Fabian Hammerl & Kathrine Uldbaek Nielsen / Afrika Verein

Security and Defence

Interview with the Afrika-Verein’s CEO Hartmut Bühl asked Christoph Kannengießer, CEO of the Africa-Verein, for his thoughts at the conference. The European: Mr Kannengießer, you are the CEO of the Afrika-Verein. Realising and financing Africa’s energy revolution, what a challenge! What is your first impression concerning participants, competences and acceptance? Christoph Kannengießer: I am very satisfied with the results of our conference. We had some very good statements for the opening session and I was very pleased to see the great number of attendees and all the networking that took place. I was also pleased with how many high-ranking representatives from Africa attended and how they have been able to start developing new ideas with our members and partners. The European: Do you share my impression that this conference – based on a very stringent and pragmatic programme – was directed to achieve results? Christoph Kannengießer: Yes, indeed! It is time that we get things done. This is the reason why I am very happy that a lot of entrepreneurs told me today how satisfied they are that Afrika-Verein facilitates the initiation of contact and their interaction with African companies and politicians.

Christoph Kannengießer, CEO of the Afrika-Verein photo: © Studio Fabian Hammerl & Kathrine Uldbaek Nielsen / Afrika Verein

The European: Financing in general will remain a problem. Did you see progress in stimulating investments from European industries? What about the Afrika-Verein’s proposal to the German government to create a Hermes Credit Fund for Energy in Africa? Christoph Kannengießer: We had some very positive feedback from the German government, announcing that they will consider some of our new ideas and proposals like the “Hermes Credit Fund for Energy in Africa”. We are pushing our ideas forward.

programmes and job creation in energy created new ideas. An insightful highlight was the breakfast session led by Bärbel Höhn, German Energy Commissioner for Africa, on the issue of Women in power. The Afrika-Verein proved its commitment to gender politics: all fora were led by highly competent women, most of them from the Afrika-Verein. > Web: Conference video: https://bit.ly/2IG4rP9

The Energy Forum gathered 400 participants photo: © Studio Fabian Hammerl & Kathrine Uldbaek Nielsen / Afrika Verein

Hon. Jean-Claude Houssou, Energy Minister of Benin, in discussion with Hartmut Bühl photo: © Studio Fabian Hammerl & Kathrine Uldbaek Nielsen / Afrika Verein



Networking on CBRNe detectors Preparing for the worst by innovation through integrity

photo: © Bruker

Interview with Sebastian Meyer-Plath, General Manager of Bruker Daltonik GmbH and President of Bruker Detection, Leipzig


he European: Mr Meyer-Plath, your company is known to be at the top of new ideas and innovation in the CBRNe sector. Could you describe your company in a few words? Sebastian Meyer-Plath: Bruker Detection has been developing and manufacturing products for detection and identification of toxic, irradiating or pathogenic substances since the early 1980s. Used by both the military as well as Civil Government Organisations of more than 100 countries around the globe, our products have contributed to the safety of people on operations as well as in large cities and high profile events like Football World Championships or the Olympics. We are addressing the customer’s needs with regards to chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and explosive (CBRNe) challenges in a holistic approach. The European: In the military sector we know the threats. How would you define CBRNe threats to civil society and our population?

S. Meyer-Plath: The main difference between the two sectors is defined by the objective for the employment of CBRN agents and explosives. In the military sector, the threat posed by CBRNe weapons is quite well defined. The agents are designed to meet specific military needs, e.g. high effectiveness with regards to rendering forces ineffective, persistence etc. Military forces are trained and equipped to continue their mission even when under a CBRNe attack. In the civil sector, and in stark contrast to the military, the populace of a country, a city or large crowds of people are neither trained nor equipped to cope with a CBRNe event. The aim of an attack is primarily to create mass panic, stop vital infrastructure from working, and overwhelm the security forces in their capability to respond, with the primary goal of reducing the people’s trust in the government to prevent such events or respond to and mitigate the results of a CBRNe attack.

Sebastian Meyer-Plath has been the President of the Bruker Detection Division since 2005. After graduating in Microbiology at the University of Bonn, Mr Meyer-Plath joined Bruker in Bremen and held various positions as a Product Manager and Head of Military Sales. He currently holds the rank of Lieutenant Colonel (Reserve) in the CBRN Defence Corps of the German Army and was part of the Scientific Advisory Board for Security Research of the German Federal Government from 2008 to 2011.


The European: This would reduce the resilience of the country, state or municipality. How might terrorists achieve such a situation? S. Meyer-Plath: Terrorists can draw from a much wider spectrum of threat agents ranging from Toxic Industrial Materials, transported through Europe everyday in hundreds of thousands of tons, to radioactive waste from hospitals and ubiquitous biological pathogens, to hoax attacks involving white powders. So the threats are a lot more challenging to detect, to identify and to respond to accordingly. The incident in Salisbury (UK) may serve as an example: after the

Security and Defence

i use of a comparably small amount of agent, the decontamination has been on-going for a year now and has only just been completed.

Bruker Corporation Bruker is a large corporation serving a multitude of markets including pharma, academia, the petrochemical and chemical industry, semiconductor production, clinical IVD and other mar-

The European: What is your strategy to protect citizens? S. Meyer-Plath: The civil security organisations have only recently started to accept CBRNe threats beyond large scale accidents or natural disasters. We developed CBRNet™ on the basis of sensors, and this was the only last missing part of the full solution we are proposing. The basis of the strategy remains the availability of a broad range of sensors, creating a lot of data which needs to be transformed into information. CBRNet™ forms nodes where the data from the sensors is collected and transformed into useful information. These nodes provide local command structures with the data of the sensors in their area of responsibility combining these with data from their GPS positions, adding the local weather information in order to calculate a so-called hazard prediction. An unlimited number of these local nodes can be combined in higher nodes to follow the command structure up the top command level. The European: Are you flexible with regards to the use of sensors from others than Bruker? And what about the security of communication lines? S. Meyer-Plath: Indeed, it is important for CBRNet™ to be

kets with a need for state-of-the-art analytical instrumentation and solutions, which provides Bruker Detection with a broad technology base to draw from.

S. Meyer-Plath: All sensors can be interrogated online down to the spectrum level in order to allow scientists or specialists to look at the relevant raw data to assist the decision makers. The European: And what about training? S. Meyer-Plath: With CBRNet™ this can be done remotely by simulating alarms, sensor readings, sensor errors, etc. in preplanned scenarios enabling the operators to train as close to a real scenario as possible. The European: Detection is, as I understand, the first step. A further one is to prevent CBRNe attacks, isn’t it? S. Meyer-Plath: Well, indeed. Let me say it this way: I would be happy to get to the first level of making our cities smart and safe, but a smart city is not yet a safe city, and I duly hope that the opportunity to include the multitude of sensors in a city as well is not missed by city councils. That is of course not limited to CBRNe sensors. But such a sensor network cannot help to prevent incidents.

not hope for the best, let’s prepare for the “Let’s worst, but in a tailored, flexible and therefore

The European: So, you do need more! What would be a first step towards the ability to prevent an incident? Sebastian Meyer-Plath S. Meyer-Plath: We needed to further enlarge the sensor basis of the network to be able to monitor and detect in even as flexible as possible with regards to the type and origin of more locations, such as for example precursor chemicals for sensors. Security and stability of the communication lines for hazardous substances, and start combining sensor data with this sensor network is paramount so employing an encrypted other data such as bills of lading, proforma invoices, cargo multi-bearer network which switches automatically to another manifests, etc., to generate as much “CBRNe Intelligence” as communication method is important. possible.

financially justifiable way.” 

The European: And what about mobile phones? S. Meyer-Plath: In the case of a terrorist attack in a city, the first thing to go down is the mobile phone network, either overwhelmed by the number of calls, or deliberately switched off by the security organisations to prevent further attacks which might be triggered remotely using mobile phones. In that case, CBRNet™ will switch to another communication system like satellite phone lines or Tetrapole. The European: Can the sensors be interrogated online?

The European: What equipment do you need? Could you make it evident with an example? S. Meyer-Plath: Yes, with an easy one: using a small-scale example of an international football match taking place in a stadium with a few VIP boxes and the expected attendance of some heads of states of the two nations playing. The stadium has never been fitted with any CBRNe devices before but has CCTV (closed circuit television) coverage. Intelligence is reporting a high risk of an incident involving chemical or radiological matter.



How sensors can help to save lives Sensor Data

Customer / Decision makers


Sensor Data Sensor Data

Recognised CBRNe picture

CBRNet Advisers


better decisions

save lives

graphic: Beate Dach, ESDU; source: Bruker

The European: This sounds interesting. What would be the first step? S. Meyer-Plath: The first step is a site survey to be conducted by a CBRN operations specialist and an engineer, both could be Bruker employees. In addition to the usual entrance check points with pat-down, bag-inspection and metal detector portals, in this case the decision is made to monitor the four entrances to the stadium with stationary point detectors monitoring the air in the tunnels and staircases, in combination with stationary radiation detectors able to identify the radioactive isotope and differentiate between isotopes used for medical treatments and unwanted isotopes (dirty bomb). The VIP boxes are monitored by point detectors as well. The European: What about the seats and the playing field? S. Meyer-Plath: The seats and the playing field are monitored with one stand-off detector, capable of continuously scanning the whole stadium and detecting and identifying any hazardous gas or vapour in real-time. Finally, situated in the basement is the control room, where all detectors and sensors in use are connected with CBRNet™ using an encrypted multi-bearer network for communication. The personnel is one scientist and one CBRN operations specialist and two instrument operators for setup and stand-by technical service.

The European: How long does the planning and installation process need? S. Meyer-Plath: We need a couple of days for survey, planning and setup, four people, about ten point detectors, one standoff detector, and the CBRNet™ kit. A van could transport all of it including the personnel. This is what we call “CBRNet™ Deploy” and is available to rent. The European: I understand that, technically, all can be done. Whose responsibility is it? S. Meyer-Plath: The responsibility for the security of an event will always reside with the responsible security organisation; Bruker will only assist with advice when required. The European: One of those responsibilities is the very sensitive domain of mitigation. How do you help decision makers with CBRNet™, in view of informing the population in an adapted and smooth way? S. Meyer-Plath: The worst possible error to make is to either not communicate at all or to give wrong information. CBRNet™ gives the most important answers to the questions “what, when, where” as well as the hazard area based on current weather conditions in real time. All sensor alarms shown on the map can be interrogated remotely from the control room or Command HQ to eliminate any risk of false alarms and the situational picture can even indicate the right choice of evacuation routes, the approach routes for the emergency services, first aid posts, etc. The European: What can Bruker offer to municipalities and event organisers who do not have the appropriate infrastructure or only need it sporadically? S. Meyer-Plath: We offer the small scale variant of CBRNet™, called CBRNet™ Deploy, for rent, including the operators, advisors, and hardware, tailored to the actual requirement for a specific event or location. I am convinced that with the flexibility we are offering with CBRNet™, it is much easier to mitigate the CBRNe risk in a cost effective way. Let’s not hope for the best, let’s prepare for the worst, but in a tailored, flexible and therefore financially justifiable way.

Make stadiums secure through CBRNe detectors


photo: Peter Feldbrügge

The European: Mr Meyer-Plath, thank you for this conversation.

Security and Defence

Immediate and professional response in CBRN incidents

by Thomas Popp, General Manager, Kärcher Futuretech GmbH

Thomas Popp has been the General Manager of Kärcher


he dynamics of global politics, emerging regional conflicts and the rise of international terrorism have changed the framework for the deployment of modern armed forces. As a result, protection in the case of CBRN threats has become more important. But not only in the military field, CBRN incidents may occur anytime in many different environments with limited or no early detection possibilities. Those incidents require an immediate and professional response in order to protect people and facilities. For such scenarios, Kärcher Futuretech offers a wide range of solutions for the decontamination of people, equipment and vehicles as well as for infrastructure and indoor facilities.

Never before has decontamination been so fast The MPDS 2 module is the smallest and most efficient all-inone decontamination device of its class for the decontamination of material and vehicles. With simultaneous two-lance operation, a wide range of cleaning and decontamination tasks can be carried out. When equipped with additional accessories for three-lance operation, simultaneous pre-treatment, main treatment and post-treatment are possible. Thanks to a powerful diesel motor, an integrated power generator and an optional, removable pump for non-aqueous agents, the MPDS 2 is a completely self-sufficient decontamination unit. The clearly structured operating panel enables intuitive operation whilst the compact and robust construction with euro pallet dimensions ensures easy transport.

photo: © Kärcher

Decontamination solutions for all kind of scenarios

Futuretech since 2011. The company is an internationally well-known specialist for protection and supply systems. Kärcher Futurtech is active in the business areas of CBRN protection systems, water supply, Photo: Kärcher Futuretech

mobile catering and field camp systems. The company develops reliable products “made in Germany” to provide support under the harshest conditions.

More flexibility for personal decontamination With the DSAP system, Kärcher Futuretech offers a mobile, rapid response system for the decontamination of a large number of people. The special feature of the system lies in the flexible configuration of the shower lines for ambulatory persons and non-ambulatory persons with two to four shower lines in which complete gender separation is possible. Inflatable tents for dressing and undressing are connected to the entrance and exit. Air conditioning or heating units can be integrated upon request. With four shower lines, decontamination of up to 180 ambulatory persons is possible within one hour. Each shower line can be operated separately. The shower process is adjustable and enables shower programmes with a duration of 60, 90 or 120 seconds and a water temperature up to 36°C.



Decontamination of ambulatory and non-ambulatory persons

State-of-the art vacuum technology The VDM 265 employs a unique technology for the chemical and biological decontamination of sensitive material. Thanks to special vacuum procedures, sensitive equipment such as optical and electronic equipment which cannot be treated by thermal decon methods or using aggressive liquid decon

photo: Kärcher Futuretech

chemicals can be decontaminated. The chemical decontamination process is accomplished using only the optimal interaction between temperature and vacuum cycles and is completely chemical free. The degradation of biological warfare agents is carried out by vaporizing biological decontaminants in a vacuum atmosphere.

i Kärcher Futuretech GmbH Kärcher Futuretech GmbH, headquartered in Schwaikheim, Germany near Stuttgart, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Alfred Kärcher SE & Co. KG. Kärcher Futuretech develops and manufactures Mobile Water Supply, CBRN Decontamination, Mobile Catering and Field Camp Systems for civil and military defense operations. Complementary to its innovative product portfolio Kärcher Futuretech provides customer-centric logistical services and training worldwide, even in remote areas. Kärcher Futuretech integrates Kärcher‘s globally valued core competences in the fields of high pressure and burner technology into its high-quality, robust and reliable systems. Combined, these unique competences have enabled Kärcher Futuretech to achieve a leading position in the industry of Mobile Water Supply, CBRN protection and base camp related systems for over 30 years. Decontamination with the vacuum technology


photo: Kärcher Futuretech

Authors in 2018

Our Authors in 2018 Author/ Title

Volume N°


Asselborn, Jean • Migration crisis: national egoism versus European values (Interview with Hartmut Bühl)



Avramopoulos, Dimitris • Working together with Africa towards a more stable and prosperous shared neighbourhood



Bellouard, Patrick • Galileo – a European achievement



Borrel, Josep • Migration: myth and reality



Bühl, Hartmut • The end of the current world order (Editorial) • Backsliding into the 19th century (Commentary) • Europe at a crossroads (Editorial) • A solemn call for peace • The UN Compact for Migration (Commentary)

29 29 30 31 31

3 29 3 18 26

Chizhov, Vladimir • Democratic People’s Republic of Korea: breaking the vicious circle



Coban, Mete • Let young people have a say



Chung, Eunsook • Deterring North Korea: a task for the ROK-US alliance



Dieckmann, Bärbel • Reducing the impact of climate damage



Dreyer, Gisbert • Perspectives for climate-change stricken Africa



Eisenstadt, Michael • Strengthen the Nuclear Deal and counter Iran’s destabilizing activities



Fabbrini, Federico • EU-UK security cooperation after Brexit: opportunities but challenges



Fihn, Beatrice • Did we forget about nuclear weapons?



Gahler, Michael • Making sense of the EU initiatives on defence



Ghoshal, Debalina • The Air and Missile Defence Battle System of the US Army



Giuliani, Jean-Dominique • 2018: the return of Europe? (guest commentary)



Gottschild, Thomas • Prospects for further European air and missile defence cooperation



Gyllensporre, Dennis • Interoperability also depends on strategic leadership



Helfmann-Hundack, Judith • A new compact for a better life and peace in Africa



Hellmich, Wolfgang • Our future is Europe



Ionesco, Dina • Environmental migration and displacement



Jirkal, Rostislav • Europe is far away from public and private interoperability in cyberdefence



Keinert, Alexa • Brexit – suspense remains!



King, Marcus DuBois • Violent extremism and the weaponization of water in a changing climate



Knaus, Gerald • Did NATO’s intervention in the Balkans work? (Interview with Hartmut Bühl) • Borders, migration and refugee policy - how Europe fails

30 31

56 24

Konertz, Martin The crucial role of the EDA in coordinating the race for capabilities (Interview with Hartmut Bühl)



Kujat, Harald • Interoperability: finally an innovative approach • The end of America’s commitment to protect Europe

29 31

42 45

Link, Jörg • War by accident



Lombardi, Chris • Common solutions for common threats





Author/ Title


Volume N°


Malewich, Baruch • On nuclear controllability and nuclear disasters



McAllister, David • Only diplomacy can solve the North Korea crisis



Mérindol, Valérie and Versailles, David • Prospective roles for the EDA in the Common Security and Defence Policy



Ming-Zong, Zhang • View from Taiwan: the future of the geo-economic order in Asia



Nielsen, Greta • Armed forces and the challenges of climate change



O’Sullivan, Sinéad • We must prepare and react to climate and security risks through space technologies



Papke, Verena • The Aquarius’ daily work to save people’s lives (Interview with Nannette Cazaubon)



Pascu, Ioan Mircea • European Defence: the time to act (Guest commentary) • Adapting the EU’s security and defence structures (Interview with Nannette Cazaubon)

30 31

61 42

Petriccione, Mauro • The European Union’s action on climate protection



Pouzyreff, Natalia • The European Intervention Initiative adds value to PESCO



Proll, Uwe • European security can only be tackled by Europe (Editorial)



Quaden, Andrea • How to offer a decent life to refugees



Renner, Andreas • The energy providers’ commitment to climate protection



Robinson, Nicole • Empowering governments to protect their nations with innovative satellite-based solutions



Sabbagh, Michel • Secure flexible satellite communications for peacekeeping and security forces



Schelleis, Martin • Permanent Structured Cooperation and the German Joint Support Service (Interview with Hartmut Bühl)



Schuster, Martin • How to adapt energy solutions to the needs of each country



Šefčovič, Maroš • The Energy Union: boosting resilience, supporting innovation, empowering people



Singh, Michael • Trump’s uppercut to transatlantic relations



Slater, Marshall • Interoperability is the torch in the darkness



Stirnal, Andy Francis • No vacuum in security! • Putting money where the mouth is

29 31

48 51

Suissa, Rachel • Israel’s perception of threat in an unstable geostrategic environment



Tokushi, Hideshi • Need for a long-term strategy to cope with North Korea



Untersteller, Franz • The Under2 Coalition: how climate protection should work (Interview with Hartmut Bühl)



Van Schaik, Louise • The Planetary Security Initiative (Interview with Alexa Keinert)



Vintila, Sergiu Nicolae • PESCO is the step ahead for Europe’s security



Vivekananda, Janani • Climate change, conflict and crisis in Lake Chad



Walter, Robert • Brexit is a nonsense



Weigt, Jürgen • The foundation of interoperability is mutual confidence (Interview with Hartmut Bühl)



Weimert, Daniel • A safe digital information space in pluralistic societies



Zaharieva, Ekaterina • The Bulgarian Presidency: Citizens first



Zhao, Tong • Grand bargain versus incremental approach to disarm North Korea



THE TheEUROPEAN European ––Security SECURITY andAND Defence DEFENCE UnionUNION

The leading magazine for Europe’s security and defence community This magazine, published and edited by Hartmut Bühl, is a product of the Pro Press Publishing Group, Berlin. It offers a platform for discussion on topical issue of European Security and Defence Policy in all his aspects: civil, military, political, industrial and societal. With its current circulation of 1800 hardcopies and more than 22,500 electronic copies it makes a vital contribution to the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) as a veritable discussion platform. Hartmut Bühl has succeeded to link the magazine to the Pro Press Publishing Group’s three most important annual conferences in Europe on security and defence, • the “European Congress on Disaster Management” (www.civil-protection.com), • the “European Police Congress” (www.european-police.eu) and • the “Congress on European Security and Defence” (www.euro-defence.eu), The magazine is the first winner of the European award for “Citizenship, security and defence” 2011

Thus he has created a veritable platform for community-building among readers of the magazine, the congress participants and security and defence industries from Europe and beyond.

A selection of authors in former editions Migration: myth and reality

The European Intervention Initiative

Make sense of EU Initiatives on defence

Josep Borrell i Fontelles, Minister of Foreign Affairs, European Union and Cooperation, Madrid

Natalia Pouzyreff Member of the Assemblée Nationale (6th constituency of Yvelines), Paris

Michael Gahler MEP Spokesperson on Security & Defence (EEP Group), EU Parliament, Brussels/ Strasbourg

► For further information about the magazine: www.magazine-the-european.com SUBSCRIPTION ORDER: by Fax to +49(0)228 9 709 775 or by E-Mail: subscription@magazine-the-european.com Contact: Andy Stirnal · Media and Content Sales Phone: +49(0)176 66 86 15 43 · E-Mail: mediasales@magazine-the-european.com 3 issues for one year, including postage and delivery: Subscription EU: € 42,–

International subscription: € 66,–


VAT no.:

Address (Street, Zip-Code, Town, Country):


E-Mail: Date, Signature:


Profile for esdu

The European Security and Defence Union Issue 32  

The European Security and Defence Union Issue 32  

Profile for esdu