NAVAL GAZING? Jul 2021
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BRIEF / 16 NAVAL GAZING? Jul 2021 The Strategic Compass and the EU’s maritime presence by Daniel Fiott* Security and Defence Editor, EUISS INTRODUCTION Seventeen days prior to the accidental blockage of the Suez Canal on 23 March 2021 by the super container Ever Given, a French aircraft carrier strike group had passed through the canal on its way to the Indian Ocean (1). It does not take an active imagination to think what could have transpired had these naval forces become trapped in the Suez Canal following a hostile act on their navigation systems. It is only possible to envision such scenarios because maritime Summary security is increasingly beset by geopolitical tensions. We know that the European Union is heavily depend- › The EU and its member states will find it ent on maritime trade routes for power projection increasingly difficult to sustain the rules- and its economic prosperity — 75 % of goods enter- based order and the Union’s own economic ing Europe do so by sea today and Europe’s navies prosperity without a sizeable and consist- and shipping firms rely on free navigation. However, ent investment in maritime power. China’s naval expansion in the Indo-Pacific, Russia’s naval presence in the High North and the Baltic, › The politics of the EU’s approach to mari- Black and Mediterranean Seas and Turkey’s hostile time security is conditioned by questions of maritime acts in the Eastern Mediterranean call into geographical priorities and how to balance question the relative freedoms Europeans have en- ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ maritime risks. joyed at sea for decades. › The Strategic Compass should set measur- able targets that lead to a higher and more Of course, it remains to be seen whether the EU can credible EU naval presence, and it may generate a greater maritime presence in such a con- even instigate a shift in the way the EU thinks text. The Union has accrued experience in deploying about maritime security more broadly. © European Union Institute for Security Studies, 2021. The views expressed in this publication are solely those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union. DANIEL FIOTT naval operations, undertaking border and coastguard vessel and nuclear attack submarine — to the Pacific functions, performing maritime safety tasks, coun- at the start of 2021 (3). Although many of these initia- tering piracy and conducting maritime surveillance tives have been given impetus because of the grow- assignments. More recently, the EU has even estab- ing importance of the Indo-Pacific, it is important lished new maritime initiatives such as the to note the geographical extent of Europe’s maritime Coordinated Maritime Presence (CMP) concept, which ambitions and the (direct/indirect) proximity of mar- is designed to enhance maritime security in fragile itime threats, risks and challenges. areas such as the Gulf of Guinea. EU member states such as France, Germany and the Netherlands have These enhanced European maritime security initia- also invested in national strategies and guidelines for tives have given rise to questions about what role na- maritime engagement in the Indo-Pacific, and the EU val power should play within the Strategic Compass. will follow suit by the end of 2021 with its own strat- One can understand why, especially given a grow- egy. A new EU Arctic strategy will be released in ing European recognition that freedom of navigation October 2021. NATO is also about to revise its own and the international law of the sea are steadily be- Strategic Concept, which will undoubtedly focus on ing eroded. Some EU member states are directly im- maritime issues too. plicated in this challenge, and it is worth recalling that Denmark, France and Portugal At the same time, by March 2022, here is a have some of the largest Exclusive the EU will present a Strategic Economic Zones (EEZs) in the world Compass for security and defence, T security and when calculated in km2. However, which is in part supposed to pro- economic rationale free and secure seas and oceans are vide clearer guidance on what type for enhancing the in the interests of all EU member of maritime actor the Union should Union’s maritime states as they provide the basis for become. This is a challenging task. Europe’s economic prosperity — There is limited political agree- presence. consider that Europe is home to 329 ment on the Union’s maritime se- key seaports (4). There is a security curity role, and there is uncertainty and economic rationale for enhanc- about how far the EU should geographically extend ing the Union’s maritime presence. Even marine in- itself when it has concerns closer to home. There is surers are increasingly taking into consideration se- also the question of limited European naval capabili- curity and geopolitical considerations when insuring ties. Tackling these issues, this Brief asks how the shipping companies, vessels and ports (5). Regardless Strategic Compass can make a tangible difference to of whether a member state is landlocked or not, every the Union’s role as a maritime security provider. Our EU member state feels the effect of maritime sup- first port of call, however, is to better understand the ply disruptions. For example, Covid-19 led to an im- contemporary nature of maritime threats, risks and mediate 4.1 % decrease in global maritime trade in challenges. 2020 in addition to disrupting supply chains, ship- ping networks and ports. (6) Yet it is not just pandemics and canal blockages that threaten maritime trade. Increasingly, climate HARD AND FAST? THE change will transform maritime spaces. For example, if climate adaptation and coastal protection efforts CHANGING NATURE OF fail by 2100 approximately 48 % of the world’s land area, 52 % of the global population and 46 % of global MARITIME SECURITY socio-economic infrastructures and activities are at risk of flooding (7). Coastal areas in the EU and beyond Europe’s navies are increasingly being called upon are the most at risk from climate change. For the EU, to perform maritime security tasks. Violent piracy in this means that critical infrastructure such as ports, the Gulf of Guinea has been met with enhanced na- harbours and naval bases will be vulnerable and there val vigilance in the area, insecurity in the Strait of could be resource depletion because of environmen- Hormuz has resulted in a European maritime aware- tal risks. What is more, climate change could lead to ness initiative (EMASOH) and longstanding crises in the collapse of fishing stocks due to water warming, Libya and the Horn of Africa have required the de- which in turn may lead to conflict between states ployment of EU naval forces in the form of Operations and fishing companies, and new shipping lanes are Irini and Atalanta. On top of this, countries such as likely to open up in the summer season in the Arctic. France, Germany and the Netherlands have deployed Increasingly, climate change could aggravate trans- or plan to deploy naval forces to the Indian Ocean and boundary maritime disputes, especially where ma- the South China Sea. Germany will deploy its frigate rine conservation spaces or resources overlap with Bayern in the second half of 2021 (2) and France initi- contested EEZs. Finally, the increased use of renew- ated ‘Mission Marianne’ — consisting of a support able marine energy installations and connectors may 2 NAVAL GAZinG? | THE StrAteGic COMPAss And THE EU’S MAritiME Presence replicate well-known infrastructure vulnerabili- at the same time. This is why it is difficult to craft ties at sea (8). responses to the construction of artificial islands, il- legal sand dredging and sea mining, the collision of The oceans and seas are not then only conduits for civil and military vessels, civil harassment of naval maritime trade: they are also home to food sources, vessels, submarine threats or the use of fishing ves- vital critical infrastructure and strategic economic sels or coastguards as proxy ‘maritime militias’ (15). inputs. For example, consider that the Sea-Me-We-5 Legal ambiguity and the congestion inherent in the submarine telecommunication cable routes through maritime domain give rise to legal and regulatory six separate maritime zones such as the Mediterranean loopholes that can become security vulnerabilities (16). Sea and the Malacca Strait and has 18 different land- China exploits these vulnerabilities through a tac- ing points including France, Italy, Myanmar, Oman tic of combining military and constabulary forms of and Singapore (9). Subsea energy pipelines and off- maritime coercion (17). shore installations are also vulnerable maritime in- frastructures — the EU imports gas and oil through These hybrid tactics are not used by China alone. the Mediterranean, Baltic and North Seas. Turkey is employing similar methods in the Furthermore, critical raw materials that are essential Mediterranean through its use of survey vessels to for the European economy are located far beyond EU illegally drill in Cyprus’s territorial sea and EEZ. shores and this includes magnesium from China, Maritime security closer to the EU is, therefore, palladium from Russia, ruthenium from South Africa another pressing issue for the Strategic Compass. and niobium from Brazil (10). Criminal networks also Consider that the EU has a coastline of 68 000 km operate across multiple seas and oceans. Safeguarding and over 2 000 inhabited islands (18) and the Baltic, sea lines of communication (SLOC) will therefore be Black, Mediterranean and North Seas are also impli- another key task for the Strategic Compass. cated in security or geopolitical risks. Here, Russia remains a regional concern and the Although not all EU member states hina is a growing modernisation of its submarine fleet see an immediate need for a lurch and long-range precision strike ca- towards the Indo-Pacific, China is a C geopolitical pabilities means that Moscow can growing geopolitical maritime rival maritime rival that threaten Europe via the Atlantic, the that cannot be overlooked.