Twenty-Third Report of Session 2008–09

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Twenty-Third Report of Session 2008–09 House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee Twenty-third Report of Session 2008–09 Documents considered by the Committee on 24 June 2009 HC 19-xxi House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee Twenty-third Report of Session 2008–09 Documents considered by the Committee on 24 June 2009 Report, together with formal minutes Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 24 June 2009 HC 19-xxi Published on 3 July 2009 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 Notes Numbering of documents Three separate numbering systems are used in this Report for European Union documents: Numbers in brackets are the Committee’s own reference numbers. Numbers in the form “5467/05” are Council of Ministers reference numbers. This system is also used by UK Government Departments, by the House of Commons Vote Office and for proceedings in the House. Numbers preceded by the letters COM or SEC are Commission reference numbers. Where only a Committee number is given, this usually indicates that no official text is available and the Government has submitted an “unnumbered Explanatory Memorandum” discussing what is likely to be included in the document or covering an unofficial text. Abbreviations used in the headnotes and footnotes EC (in “Legal base”) Treaty establishing the European Community EM Explanatory Memorandum (submitted by the Government to the Committee) EP European Parliament EU (in “Legal base”) Treaty on European Union GAERC General Affairs and External Relations Council JHA Justice and Home Affairs OJ Official Journal of the European Communities QMV Qualified majority voting RIA Regulatory Impact Assessment SEM Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum Euros Where figures in euros have been converted to pounds sterling, this is normally at the market rate for the last working day of the previous month. Further information Documents recommended by the Committee for debate, together with the times of forthcoming debates (where known), are listed in the European Union Documents list, which is in the House of Commons Vote Bundle on Mondays and is also available on the parliamentary website. Documents awaiting consideration by the Committee are listed in “Remaining Business”: www.parliament.uk/escom. The website also contains the Committee’s Reports. Letters sent by Ministers to the Committee about documents are available for the public to inspect; anyone wishing to do so should contact the staff of the Committee (“Contacts” below). Staff The staff of the Committee are Alistair Doherty (Clerk), Laura Dance (Second Clerk), David Griffiths (Clerk Adviser), Terry Byrne (Clerk Adviser), Sir Edward Osmotherly (Clerk Adviser), Peter Harborne (Clerk Adviser), Paul Hardy (Legal Adviser) (Counsel for European Legislation), Dr Gunnar Beck (Assistant Legal Adviser), Lisa Wrobel (Senior Committee Assistant), Allen Mitchell (Committee Assistant), Mrs Keely Bishop (Committee Assistant), Dory Royle (Committee Assistant), Karuna Bowry (Committee Support Assistant), and Paula Saunderson (Office Support Assistant). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the European Scrutiny Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is (020) 7219 3292/5465. The Committee’s email address is [email protected] Contents Report Page Documents not cleared 1 BIS (30528) Protecting information networks from cyber attacks 3 2 DFT (30645) Aviation security charges 12 3 HO (30385) (30651) Use of Passenger Name Records for law enforcement purposes 15 Documents cleared 4 BIS (29896) Legal framework for setting up European Research Infrastructure Consortia 19 5 DFID (29973) (29979) Interim Economic Partnership Agreement between the European Community and its Member States and the South African Development Community States 21 6 DH (29786) Cross-border healthcare 27 7 FCO (30691) Common Foreign and Security Policy 29 Annex: CFSP budget 2008 - commitment appropriations 35 8 FCO (30693) Presidency report on European Security and Defence Policy 37 Annex 1: Mandate for The Swedish Presidency 62 9 HMT (30037) Financial services 64 10 HO (29216) Implementation of the Directive on reception standards for asylum seekers 68 Documents not raising questions of sufficient legal or political importance to warrant a substantive report to the House 11 List of documents 71 Formal minutes 74 Standing order and membership 75 European Scrutiny Committee, 23rd Report, Session 2008–09 3 1 Protecting information networks from cyber attacks (30528) Commission Communication: Protecting Europe from large scale 8375/09 cyber-attacks and disruptions: enhancing preparedness, security + ADDs 1–4 and resilience COM(09) 149 Legal base — Department Business, Innovation and Skills Basis of consideration Minister’s letter of 11 June 2009 Previous Committee Report HC 19–xvi (2008–09), chapter 2 (6 May 2009); also see (27570) 10248/06: HC 34–xxxv (2005–06), chapter 8 (13 July 2006). Also see (29300) 16840/07: HC 16–xxiii (2007–08), chapter 12 (4 June 2008); and (27466) 8841/08: HC 41–xxi (2006–07), chapter 15 (9 May 2007) To be discussed in Council To be determined Committee’s assessment Politically important Committee’s decision Not cleared; further information requested Background 1.1 As the Commission notes, Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) are increasingly intertwined in our daily activities, with some of these ICT systems, services, networks and infrastructures (in short, ICT infrastructures) forming a vital part of European economy and society, either providing essential goods and services or constituting the underpinning platform of other critical infrastructures, and being “typically regarded as critical information infrastructures (CIIs) as their disruption or destruction would have a serious impact on vital societal functions.” The Commission gives as recent examples the large-scale cyber-attacks targeting Estonia in 2007 and the breaks of transcontinental cables in 2008. 1.2 The Commission recalls its “strategy for a secure information society”, which was adopted in 2006,1 where it says “ownership and implementation by stakeholders appears insufficient”. 1.3 The Commission refers to the place in this strategy of the European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA),2 established in 2004 to “contribute to the goals of ensuring a high and effective level of NIS within the Community and developing a culture 1 Which the Committee reported to the House on 18 July 2006: see (27570) 10248/06: HC 34–xxxv (2005–06), chapter 8 (13 July 2006). 2 According to its website, ENISA “was set up to enhance the capability of the European Union, the EU Member States and the business community to prevent, address and respond to network and information security problems. In order to achieve this goal, ENISA is a Centre of Expertise in Network and Information Security and is stimulating the cooperation between the public and private sectors.” See http://www.enisa.europa.eu/index.htm for full information on ENISA. 4 European Scrutiny Committee, 23rd Report, Session 2008–09 of NIS for the benefit of EU citizens, consumers, enterprises and administrations” — a mandate extended “à l’identique” until March 2012, but subject to “further discussion on the future of ENISA and on the general direction of the European efforts towards an increased network and information security”, as a result of which the Commission launched last November an online public consultation,3 the analysis of which will be made available shortly. 1.4 Other elements in the Policy Context to which the Commission refers are: — the European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection (EPCIP)4 and the Directive5 on the identification and designation of European Critical Infrastructures,6 which identifies the ICT sector as a future priority sector, and the Critical Infrastructure Warning Information Network (CIWIN)7 — the Commission proposal to reform the Regulatory Framework for electronic communications networks and services,8 and particularly the provisions to strengthen operators’ obligations to ensure that appropriate measures are taken to meet identified risks, guarantee the continuity of supply of services and notify security breaches,9 which the Commission says is “conducive to the general objective of enhancing the security and resilience of CIIs”, and which the European Parliament and the Council “broadly support” — complementarity with existing and prospective measures in the area of police and judicial cooperation to prevent, fight and prosecute criminal and terrorist activities targeting ICT infrastructures, as envisaged inter alia by the Council Framework Decision on attacks against information systems10 and its planned update;11 — NATO activities on common policy on cyber defence, i.e. the Cyber Defence Management Authority and the Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence; — the G8 principles on CIIP15;12 — the UN General Assembly Resolution 58/199 Creation of a global culture of cybersecurity; and — the protection of critical information infrastructures and the recent OECD Recommendation on the Protection of Critical Information Infrastructures. 3 http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/itemlongdetail.cfm?item_id=4464 4 COM(2006) 786 5 2008/114/EC 6 http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/gena/104617.pdf 7 COM(O8) 676 8 COM(07) 697, COM(07) 698, COM(07) 699 9 Art. 13 Framework Directive 10 2005/222/JHA 11 COM(08) 712 12 http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/g82004/G8_CIIP_Principles.pdf
Recommended publications
  • Quick Guide More Information on the European Defence Agency Is Available at
    www.eda.europa.eu Quick guide More information on the European Defence Agency is available at : www.eda.europa.eu European Defence Agency - Quick guide ISBN : 978-92-95075-31-3 DOI : 10.2836/07889 © European Defence Agency, 2016 For reproduction or use of this material, permission must be sought directly from the copyright holder. For any use or reproduction of individual photos, permission must be sought directly from the copyright holders. Photo credits : p. 12 ©EEAS, P. 13 ©The European Union, p. 14 ©Luftwaffe, p. 15 ©Airbus Group, p. 17 ©Thales Alenia Space, p. 18 © eda, p. 19 © eda, p. 20 ©Austrian Ministry of Defence, p. 21 ©Eurocontrol, p. 22 ©European Commission Archives, p. 23 ©European Commission Archives Responsible editor : Eric Platteau PRINTED IN BELGIUM PRINTED ON ELEMENTAL CHLORINE-FREE BLEACHED PAPER (ECF) 2 EUROPEAN DEFENCE AGENCY Quick guide BRUSSELS » 2016 3 CONTENT 1 | WHO WE ARE 06 Our structure 06 Our missions 07 Our organisation 08 The EDA’s added value 09 2 | HOW WE WORK 10 Close cooperation with other EU structures 11 Close cooperation with non-EU actors and third parties 11 Pooling & Sharing 12 3 | WHAT WE DO 13 EDA’s four main capability development programmes 14 Air-to-Air Refuelling (AAR) 14 Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems 15 Cyber Defence 16 Governmental Satellite Communications (GovSatCom) 16 Examples of efficient cooperation enabled by EDA 17 Airlift Trainings & Exercises 17 Counter-Improvised Explosive Devices 18 Military Airworthiness 18 Support to Operations 19 Examples of EDA acting as an interface
    [Show full text]
  • Planning for EU Military Operations
    January 2010 81 Command and control? Planning for EU military operations Luis Simón ISBN 978-92-9198-161-8 ISSN 1608-5000 QN-AB-10-081-EN-C published by the European Union Institute for Security Studies 43 avenue du Président Wilson - 75775 Paris cedex 16 - France phone: + 33 (0) 1 56 89 19 30 fax: + 33 (0) 1 56 89 19 31 e-mail: [email protected] www.iss.europa.eu European union Institute for Security Studies OCCASIONAL PAPErS n° 80 Oct 2009 Risky business? The EU, China and dual-use technology May-Britt U. Stumbaum n° 79 Jun 2009 The interpolar world: a new scenario Giovanni Grevi n° 78 Apr 2009 Security Sector Reform in Afghanistan: the EU’s contribution The Institute for Security Studies (EUISS) Eva Gross n° 77 Mar 2009 From Suez to Shanghai: The European Union and Eurasian maritime security was created in January 2002 as a Paris-based autonomous agency of the European Union. James Rogers Following an EU Council Joint Action of 20 July 2001, modified by the Joint Action of 21 December 2006, it is now an integral part of the new structures that will support the fur- n° 76 Feb 2009 EU support to African security architecture: funding and training components ther development of the CFSP/ESDP. The Institute’s core mission is to provide analyses and Nicoletta Pirozzi recommendations that can be of use and relevance to the formulation of EU policies. In n° 75 Jan 2009 Les conflits soudanais à l’horizon 2011 : scénarios carrying out that mission, it also acts as an interface between experts and decision-makers Jean-Baptiste Bouzard at all levels.
    [Show full text]
  • OUTCOME of the COUNCIL MEETING Foreign Affairs
    Council of the European Union EN 11598/20 (OR. en) PROVISIONAL VERSION PRESSE 26 PR CO 26 OUTCOME OF THE COUNCIL MEETING 3774th Council meeting Foreign Affairs Brussels, 12 October 2020 President Josep Borrell High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy PRESS Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 B – 1048 BRUSSELS Tel.: +32 (0)2 281 6319 Fax: +32 (0)2 281 8026 [email protected] http://www.consilium.europa.eu/press 11598/20 1 EN PROVISIONAL VERSION 12 October 2020 CONTENTS1 ITEMS DEBATED Current affairs ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Belgrade-Pristina dialogue ................................................................................................................... 4 Belarus ................................................................................................................................................. 5 Russia ................................................................................................................................................... 5 Latin America and the Caribbean ........................................................................................................ 5 OTHER ITEMS APPROVED FOREIGN AFFAIRS – Establishment of a mechanism for bilateral consultations/high level political dialogue between the EU and Panama ...................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 090814 Factsheet EUFOR Althea
    EUROPEAN UNION EUROPEAN SECURITY AND DEFENCE POLICY EU military operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Operation EUFOR ALTHEA) Updated: May 2009 Althea/15 Mission background The military operation ALTHEA in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) was launched on 2 December 2004 and has contributed to the maintenance of the safe and secure environment in BiH. The decision to launch Operation ALTHEA followed the decision by NATO to conclude its SFOR-operation and the adoption by the UN Security Council of resolution 1575 authorising the deployment of an EU force in BiH. In the framework of Operation ALTHEA, the EU deployed 7000 troops, under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, to ensure continued compliance with the Dayton/Paris Agreement and to contribute to a safe and secure environment in BiH. Operation ALTHEA is carried out with recourse to NATO assets and capabilities, under the "Berlin Plus" arrangements. Mandate and objectives Following a Council decision in December 2006, EUFOR was reconfigured during 2007. The force now numbers some 2200 troops on the ground, backed up by over-the-horizon reserves. EUFOR continues to act in accordance with its peace enforcement mandate under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, as specified in UN Security Council Resolutions 1575 (2004), 1639 (2005), 1722 (2006), and 1785 (2007), renewed by the Security Council on 20 November 2008 (Security Council Resolution 1845 (2008)). FACTS AND FIGURES Theatre: Bosnia and Herzegovina Headquarters: Sarajevo (Camp Butmir) Starting Date: 2 December 2004 Head of Mission: The EU Operation Commander is General Sir John McColl (UK). The EU Force Commander as of 4 December 2008 is Major General Stefano Castagnotto (Italy) Mission strength: 2,200 Mission budget: The common costs of the operation are EUR 27 million.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relevance of the Berlin Plus Agreements for the Planning Phase of the Military Operation Eufor Althea
    International Conference KNOWLEDGE-BASED ORGANIZATION Vol. XXVII No 1 2021 THE RELEVANCE OF THE BERLIN PLUS AGREEMENTS FOR THE PLANNING PHASE OF THE MILITARY OPERATION EUFOR ALTHEA Marius PRICOPI, Alexandru BABOȘ “Nicolae Bălcescu” Land Forces Academy, Sibiu, Romania [email protected], [email protected] Abstract: Conducted in Bosnia and Herzegovina since 2004, EUFOR Althea still remains the most significant military operation of the European Union. Using the document analysis as a qualitative research tool, this paper examines the usefulness and viability of the Berlin Plus Agreements (established between NATO and the EU) in the initial planning phase of EUFOR Althea. Keywords: Berlin Plus Agreements, Bosnia and Herzegovina, EUFOR Althea 1. Introduction Europe (DSACEUR), which informs the In the process of European military European Union’s Military Committee on integration, initiated by the Treaty of the major plans and decisions. In his Brussels (1948), the Berlin Plus activity, DSACEUR is assisted by a Agreements hold a considerable Director for EU Operations and a Staff importance. Finalised in March 2003 on the Group, made up of EU officers; the purpose basis of the conclusions of the NATO of this group is to ensure a connection Summit in Washington (1999), they between DSACEUR and the EU Military actually integrate a series of multiple Staff, as well as to implement the SHAPE agreements, mainly regarding [1]: the support in planning and conducting the NATO-EU exchange of classified operation [2]. information; secured access to the planning capabilities of NATO in case of crisis 2. Scientific tool management operations conducted by the In writing this paper, we used the document EU; procedures for sharing, monitoring and analysis as a qualitative research tool, as it returning the employed capabilities.
    [Show full text]
  • 6 the European Union and NATO: ‘Shrewd Interorganizationalism’ in the Making?
    06-Jorgenson-Ch-06:06-Jorgenson-Ch-06 9/19/2008 8:11 PM Page 101 6 The European Union and NATO: ‘Shrewd interorganizationalism’ in the making? Johannes Varwick and Joachim A. Koops After precisely half a century of structured separation and complex coexistence, th e European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) announce d in their December 2002 Declaration on European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) the establishment of a strategic and mutually reinforcing partnership in crisis management. Barely three months after, the conclusion of the so-called Berlin Plus agreement consolidated this partnership even further by providing for the European Union’s access to NATO’s military assets and planning capabili - ties. It was on the basis of this arrangement that the European Union was able to launch its first ever military mission, Concordia , in Macedonia in March 2003. This did not only take one of the closest and most densely negotiated interorga - nizational relationships to the practical realm, but also signalled a military revo - lution in the European Union’s evolution as an international actor. It is therefore unsurprising that the European Union’s European Security Strategy (ESS) also refers to NATO’s importance in its outline of ‘an interna - tional order based on effective multilateralism’ ( Council 2003: 9). In view of reinforcing the European Union’s ‘progress towards a coherent foreign policy and effective crisis management’, the ESS stresses that ‘the EU-NATO perma - nent arrangements, in particular Berlin Plus, enhance the operational capability of the EU and provide the framework for the strategic partnership between the two organizations in crisis management.
    [Show full text]
  • Volunteer Reservists in the Belgian Armed Forces
    Major László UJHÁZY, PhD* NKE HHK Katonai Vezetéstudományi és Közismereti Tanszék [email protected] SOME THOUGHTS ON THE COMMAND STRUCTURE OF EUFOR OPERATION ALTHEA (Gondolatok az EUFOR ALTHEA művelet vezetési rendszeréről) The author looks at the background of the European Union Force ALTHEA, the military deployment in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) responsible for overseeing the military implementation of the Dayton/Paris Agreement. He examines the main objectives of Operation ALTHEA and how these are reflected in the command structure. In doing so he shares his views on human interoperability, the evolution of the comprehensive approach concept and new force structures. A szerző bemutatja az Európai Unió ALTHEA műveletét, a daytoni/párizsi megállapodás katonai végrehajtásáért felelős missziót Bosznia-Hercegovinában (BiH). Megvizsgálja, hogy a művelet vezetési rendszere hogyan tükrözi a művelet fő célkitűzéseit. Eközben megosztja nézeteit a humán interoperabilitásról, az „átfogó megközelítés” kialakulásáról és új haderőstruktúrákról. Kulcsszavak: ALTHEA, Bosnia and Herzegovina, command structure, EUFOR, peace support operations ~ ALTHEA, béketámogató műveletek, Bosznia-Hercegovina, EUFOR, vezetési rendszer * The author served as Policy and Plans Officer at the EUFOR HQ in Sarajevo for six months in 2012. 6 INTRODUCTION The crisis in the Balkans, the disintegration of Yugoslavia, right after the end of the cold, war reshaped all major players in security. It turned out that Europe was not prepared for an issue of such weight. It was also quite clear that an effective European Security and Defence Identity (ESDI) would need years of hard work. NATO started a new phase of operations, to be termed Non-Article 5 crisis response operations, mainly peace support operations.
    [Show full text]
  • NATO and the European Union
    Order Code RL32342 NATO and the European Union Updated January 29, 2008 Kristin Archick Specialist in European Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Paul Gallis Specialist in European Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division NATO and the European Union Summary Since the end of the Cold War, both NATO and the European Union (EU) have evolved along with Europe’s changed strategic landscape. While NATO’s collective defense guarantee remains at the core of the alliance, members have also sought to redefine its mission as new security challenges have emerged on Europe’s periphery and beyond. At the same time, EU members have taken steps toward political integration with decisions to develop a common foreign policy and a defense arm to improve EU member states’ abilities to manage security crises, such as those that engulfed the Balkans in the 1990s. The evolution of NATO and the EU, however, has generated some friction between the United States and several of its allies over the security responsibilities of the two organizations. U.S.-European differences center around threat assessment, defense institutions, and military capabilities. Successive U.S. administrations and the U.S. Congress have called for enhanced European defense capabilities to enable the allies to better share the security burden, and to ensure that NATO’s post-Cold War mission embraces combating terrorism and countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. U.S. policymakers, backed by Congress, support EU efforts to develop a European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) provided that it remains tied to NATO and does not threaten the transatlantic relationship.
    [Show full text]
  • MAINTAINING PARTNERSHIPS Cooperative Security in Europe Table of Contents Features
    per VOLUME 6, ISSUE 3, 2015 ConcordiamJournal of European Security and Defense Issues n NATO AND THE EU n EU NEIGHBORHOOD POLICY Sharing defense responsibilities Building partnerships beyond borders n EUROPE GOES GLOBAL PLUS How to project power abroad Polish Military Modernization n ASYMMETRIC WARFARE Soviet Nostalgia in Russia Europe adjusts to new threats Moscow’s Disinformation War MAINTAINING PARTNERSHIPS Cooperative Security in Europe Table of Contents features ON THE COVER European and allied leaders gather at the September 2014 NATO Summit in Wales. Faced with the challenges of declining defense budgets and Russian intervention in Ukraine, NATO members endeavor to work together to fortify their trans-Atlantic bond. AFP/GETTY IMAGES 34 10 A Global Role for Europe 22 A New Generation of Warfare By Prof. Dr. Sven Bernhard Gareis, Marshall Center By Dr. Jānis Bērziņš, National Defense Academy of The U.S. pivot to Asia forces Europe to Latvia, Center for Security and Strategic Research think independently. Russia’s hybrid warfare seeks to divide Europe. 16 The EU and NATO By Dr. Dinos Anthony Kerigan-Kyrou, Emerging 28 Improving the Neighborhood Security Challenges Working Group By Daniel Ionita, Romanian secretary of state for strategic affairs within the Foreign Affairs Ministry The EU and NATO collectively counter and Laria Stoian, Diplomat in the Romanian Foreign threats. Affairs Ministry NATO and the EU work toward a collective security effort for Eastern Europe. departments COOPERATION 46 Global Cooperation USSTRATCOM offers reassurance in a troubled world. 48 The G7 in a Multipolar World By Alessandro Scheffler Corvaja, research associate, Bundeswehr University, Munich The organization has lost some of its luster and needs to reinvent itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Eu's Crisis Missions in the Balkans
    EVALUATING THE EU’S CRISIS MISSIONS IN THE BALKANS MICHAEL EMERSON & EVA GROSS (EDITORS) ISABELLE IOANNIDES ANA E. JUNCOS URSULA C. SCHROEDER The Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS) is an independent policy research institute based in Brussels. Its mission is to produce sound analytical research leading to constructive solutions to the challenges facing Europe today. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors writing in a personal capacity and do not necessarily reflect those of CEPS or any other institution with which the authors are associated. Photo credits. Top cover photo shows Finnish peacekeepers visiting the memorial plaque of Captain Voutilainen, who was killed on duty 2nd February 1995, while working as a military observer near Rogatica. It is reprinted courtesy of EUFOR Forum magazine. The photo at the bottom, kindly provided by the Press Service of the European Council, depicts the launch of the EU ALTHEA military operation in BiH. ISBN 978-92-9079-709-8 © Copyright 2007, Centre for European Policy Studies. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise – without the prior permission of the Centre for European Policy Studies. Centre for European Policy Studies Place du Congrès 1, B-1000 Brussels Tel: 32 (0) 2 229.39.11 Fax: 32 (0) 2 219.41.51 e-mail: [email protected] internet: http://www.ceps.be CONTENTS 1. Introduction by Michael Emerson & Eva Gross .........................................1 2. Governance of EU Crisis Management by Ursula C.
    [Show full text]
  • Report EU-NATO Relations: Inching Forward?
    May 2017 Report EU-NATO Relations: Inching forward? Julia Himmrich Denitsa Raynova EU-NATO relations: Inching forward? EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Improved collaboration between NATO and the EU is once again a political imperative. Although previous efforts have been stymied by political hurdles, the most recent attempt to re-energise the relationship was the EU-NATO Joint Declaration in July 2016 and the 42 Implementation Action Points of December 2016. For the first time in over a decade, this represents a significant step forward for EU-NATO cooperation. This report assesses the progress made since the July 2016 Joint Declaration. It sets out the limits of the current Joint Declaration framework and offers recommendations for next steps by the institutions and their member states. It takes two key areas of the Joint Declaration as case studies: exercising and capacity building. These case studies identify some general areas for achievable further EU-NATO cooperation as well as further possible steps specific to exercising and capacity building. The report concludes that further constructive and pragmatic development of the EU- NATO relationship is possible despite the political constraints and that member states should raise ambitions for the two institutions to not just cooperate - working together on goals which happen to overlap- but to collaborate - working together towards a common goal. Key findings • After the Joint Declaration, informal structures were enhanced between the EU and NATO to improve cooperation. Although this has improved the relationship of the two organisations, they still operate mainly on an ad hoc basis, an issue which staff in both institutions are actively addressing.
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking Pillars
    Breaking Pillars Towards a civil-military security approach for the European Union Margriet Drent & Dick Zandee Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’ January 2010 CIP-Data Koninklijke Bibliotheek, Den Haag Drent, M. & Zandee, D. Breaking Pillars; Towards a civil-military security approach for the European Union The Hague, Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael. ISBN/EAN: 978-90-5031-149-6 Desktop publishing by: Karin van Egmond Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael Clingendael 7 2597 VH Den Haag Phone: +31 (0)70 – 3245384 Fax: +31 (0)70 – 3746667 P.O.Box 93080 2509 AB Den Haag E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.clingendael.nl © Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright holders. Clingendael Institute, P.O. Box 93080, 2509 AB The Hague, The Netherlands Contents 1. Introduction.................................................................................... 1 2. A comprehensive approach: combining the EU's civilian and military strengths ......................................................................................... 5 2.1 The EU’s comprehensive approach: background and main concepts.......................................................................................... 8 2.2
    [Show full text]