In April 2014, the Consultative Commission on Industrial Change (CCMI) of the European Economic and Social Committee held a seminar at the European Union representation in Madrid on The future of the defence sector in the European Union chaired by the CCMI president, Carlos Trias Pintó, with the aim of spotlighting issues facing the sector and the need to coordinate the strategies and resources of the Member States and gear them to achieving a Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP), emphasising the need to combine civilian with military technology to meet the current challenges facing European defence and security.
The conference was attended by Daniel Calleja Crespo, Director-General of the European Commission's DG Enterprise and Industry, who gave a paper on European defence policy. Speakers during the round table that followed on Challenges of European defence policy were: José Manuel Revuelta Lapique, president of Navantia (formerly Izar, formerly Bazán); Rafael Calduch Cervera, professor of International Public Law and International Relations; and General Juan Campins, Chief of Defence Staff, Ministry of Defence.
Mr Calleja Crespo's speech highlighted three issues for security and defence policy that were hampering the competitiveness of the defence sector:
a) market fragmentation: for example, the United States had only one type of tank, whereas Europe's army used many types for the same purpose; b) reduced investment in R&D and lack of innovation, the budget for defence having been cut by 25% over one decade, leading to significant industrial decline; c) increasingly real threats to the security and defence of European citizens and the recent crises in Europe which demonstrate the need for a defence industry, maximising its potential in communications, telecommunications, special techniques, etc.
At its December 2013 meeting, the European Council on defence, one of the sector's most important resources, discussed the Common Security and Defence Policy in detail, establishing the need for it to be strengthened, with NATO support and with due regard for the independence of the two organisations and the need to work on developing European military capabilities to improve security. One matter that the Council considers fundamental is the need to complete the internal defence market, and it has therefore called on the Commission to monitor and amend the directives on public procurement and free movement of defence-related products.
A number of issues were raised here that are relevant to the sector:
a) support for European industry, which would require framing an industrial policy agenda for defence; b) establishing common standards at EU level or hybrids such as the Airbus; c) need for standardisation and certification, especially aeronautical certification;
EESC-2014-07081-00-00-TCD-TRA (ES) 1/4 EN d) basic support for SMEs, with Europe's network of companies bearing in mind that one problem for the Commission is that it is unable to provide funding for military activities, making it important to establish an interactive programme to provide loans, e.g. through the Cosme, Horizon, Copernicus and Galileo programmes, which are vital for key sectors such as space and its civilian and military applications, maritime security, early warning systems and UAVs and civil drones.
In view of all these factors, the Director-General of DG Enterprise and Industry saw the need for a roadmap that would consider initiating the above action to address the following key objectives:
1. pooling of resources to improve cooperation between the Member States; 2. maximisation of civilian and military synergies, given that the ESC had no influence over military affairs; 3. combating market fragmentation, without neglecting SMEs' potential for innovation; 4. working on internationalisation, since regional policies were problematic in so far as they hampered intergovernmental cooperation, making it necessary to introduce standards; 5. make society aware of the need for defence and encourage education, since public support was needed a priori.
The round table that followed the paper produced very interesting discussions. The first speaker was the president of Navantia, Mr Revuelta, who commented on the points made by the Director-General and mentioned some other factors, including the complexity of the country specialisation process, which meant that Spain had to establish its strategic industrial capacity if it was the strong countries of the European Union that were operating, building and selling, so that specialisation would have to be defined by the Ministry of Defence.
Another notable point was the evidence that low demand within Spain and the internal European defence market made it imperative to be competitive. Moreover, competition between EU and non- EU countries was problematic because all the European countries were competing among themselves and many supported their own defence systems. The defence industry must adapt to the global market.
As demonstrated by Operation Atalanta, coastal protection must be promoted and the naval industry improved; the regional distribution of EU aid through the regional funds would be very helpful to Spain.
The second speaker, professor of International Public Law and International Relations Rafael Calduch Cervera, drew attention to the need to determine European strategic interests in the context of the Common Security and Defence policy, and pointed out the shortcomings of that policy:
lack of clarity about priorities, since threats and risks were not defined; lack of a common political will, with no prospect of this changing;
EESC-2014-07081-00-00-TCD-TRA (ES) 2/4 need for cooperation on defence to be stepped up, with five countries able to sustain such a policy – the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Spain and Germany – albeit with no leader. need to streamline defence and hence the defence industry; no basis for a single market in Europe, in contrast to countries such as China, Russia and the United States, which had single markets; lack of political back-up from the European institutions, with the exception of the European Commission, which was pro-active in the sphere.
When asked whether defence treaties would be developed in a new constitutional process, Prof. Calduch said that he thought that as far as defence needs were concerned it was better not to touch existing agreements like the 1998 Anglo-French pact signed at St. Malo. He added that a consensus could be reached between the five LOI countries, depending on threats and capacity.
The final speaker, General Campins of the Chief of Defence Staff, Ministry of Defence, focused on the current situation with EU defence policy, in which Spain was actively involved (e.g. in Mali and Somalia); he believed that the European Union currently had the best capacity for dealing with any situation and noting that three types of challenge were faced:
1. Structural: The Lisbon Treaty (13 December 2007) was too general, which meant that even if a common European defence policy was in itself well defined and diplomacy was actively maintained, the same was not true of the military dimension. There was no actual formal Council of defence ministers, since only the ministers for external affairs attended the meetings, although Spain had repeatedly asked for a specific Council of defence ministers to be introduced. Structures were too disparate and needed to be streamlined to achieve the necessary military and civilian synergies, early warning, preventive deployment, etc.
2. Operational: Funding was needed for operations, since the country deploying forces was the one that had to pay. It should be noted that civilian operations were fully funded, whereas only 10% of military operations received EU funding, because economic considerations and pacifism currently had the upper hand in Europe, and so the common policy had not got off the ground. Rapid and effective response was needed, since there was no political will among the Member States; this is what was happening in Africa, where only eight of the 28 EU Member States were helping in the Central African Republic.
3. Military capacity: Above all the need to set priorities – aircraft carriers, frigates, drones, etc. – followed by capacity, and then industry. Need to develop a roadmap for Iberdefensa projects.
EESC-2014-07081-00-00-TCD-TRA (ES) 3/4 Need for good will on the part of the participating countries, since there was no clear national will.
When asked whether Europe was a protectorate, General Campins said that he did not think so, and that internal security was a national responsibility, while defence was entrusted to NATO. He added that in this respect it should be noted that an awareness was gradually dawning of the need to take action in danger zones, above all in Africa: Mali, the Horn of Africa, the Sahel, etc. There was an awareness but there was no need for defence because NATO could be called upon: for example, when Al Qaeda attacked, its act could be contained thanks to France.
CONCLUSIONS
Mr Trias Pintó summed up the speakers' comments as follows:
1. All the points made fell within Article 42 of the EU Treaty, which stipulates that common security and defence policy is an integral part of the common foreign and security policy.
2. There was clearly a lack of political will to move forward with a common strategy that would promote common approaches, objectives and solutions.
3. R&D was steadily declining in terms of investment in defence projects.
4. The market was fragmented, the vision for the defence industry fragmented, and overcapacity and duplication were undermining the security and defence industry in Europe, with negative effects on competitiveness.
5. There was a need for a change of mentality and policy to enable Europe to maintain a solid security and defence industry and guarantee its own security.
6. A comprehensive strategy was essential for CSDP so as to give the military sector the instruments needed to guarantee Europe's defence.
7. There was a need to support dual-use technologies.
8. The industrial basis for defence must be streamlined.
9. Europe's strategic interests must be defined in the context of the common security and defence policy, taking account of industrial capacity, which was dependent on the internal market, which would also have to be strengthened.
______
EESC-2014-07081-00-00-TCD-TRA (ES) 4/4