EU FOREIGN AFFAIRS, DEFENCE AND DEVELOPMENT POLICY SUB-COMMITTEE Inquiry into European Defence Capabilities: lessons from the past, signposts for the future Oral and written evidence Contents Dr Dana Allin, International Institute for Strategic Studies – Oral Evidence (QQ 71-90) ........ 3 BAE Systems – Oral evidence (QQ 314-344) ................................................................................... 17 Memorandum by Mr Edgar Buckley, E. V. Buckley Consulting Ltd .............................................. 37 Ambassador Nicholas Burns – Oral Evidence (QQ 266-290) ....................................................... 41 Professor Malcolm Chalmers, Royal United Services Institute – Oral evidence (QQ 91-115) ...................................................................................................................................................................... 57 Ms Xenia Dormandy, Chatham House – Oral Evidence (QQ 71-90) ......................................... 80 Mr Etienne de Durand, Institut français des relations internationales - Oral Evidence (QQ 291-313) ..................................................................................................................................................... 81 European Defence Agency, Madame Claude-France Arnould, Chief Executive – Oral evidence (QQ 197-220)........................................................................................................................ 106 European External Action Service, Mr Robert Cooper, Counsellor – Oral Evidence (QQ 116-131) ................................................................................................................................................... 118 European External Action Service, Mr Maciej Popowski, Deputy Secretary-General – Oral evidence(QQ 244-265) ......................................................................................................................... 127 European External Action Service, Mr Walter Stevens, Director, Crisis Management & Planning Department – Oral evidence (QQ 132-154) .................................................................. 136 European External Action Service, Mr Pierre Vimont, Executive Secretary-General – Oral Evidence (QQ 176-196) ....................................................................................................................... 148 European Union Military Committee, General Syrén, Chairman – Oral Evidence (QQ 155- 175) ........................................................................................................................................................... 161 European Union Military Staff, Lieutenant General Ton van Osch, Director-General – Oral evidence (QQ 221-234)........................................................................................................................ 172 Finmeccanica UK – Oral Evidence (QQ 314-344) ......................................................................... 185 Foreign and Commonwealth Office – Oral evidence (QQ 35-70) ............................................ 186 Foreign and Commonwealth Office – Oral evidence (QQ 345-368) ........................................ 187 Memorandum by Dr Bastian Giegerich, Bundeswehr Institute for Social Sciences and International Institute for Strategic Studies ...................................................................................... 188 Professor Anand Menon, University of Birmingham – Oral evidence (QQ 91-115) ............. 192 Ministry of Defence – Oral evidence (QQ 35-70) ......................................................................... 193 Ministry of Defence – supplementary written evidence ............................................................... 213 Ministry of Defence – Oral evidence (QQ 345-368) ..................................................................... 216 Ministry of Defence – further supplementary written evidence ................................................. 235 Dr Christian Mölling, Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP; German Institute for International and Security Affairs) – Oral evidence (QQ 291-313) ........................................... 237 NATO Defence Policy Planning, Major General Heinrich Brauss, Deputy Assistant Secretary- General – Oral evidence (QQ 235-243) .......................................................................................... 238 Sir Peter Ricketts, National Security Adviser – Oral Evidence (QQ 1-34) .............................. 247 Thales UK – Oral Evidence (QQ 314-344) ...................................................................................... 264 UK Aerospace, Defence, Security and Space Industries (ADS) – Oral Evidence (QQ 314- 344) ........................................................................................................................................................... 265 Memorandum by Nick Witney, European Council on Foreign Relations ................................. 266 2 of 270 Dr Dana Allin, International Institute for Strategic Studies – Oral Evidence (QQ 71-90) Dr Dana Allin, International Institute for Strategic Studies – Oral Evidence (QQ 71-90) Evidence Session No. 3. Heard in Public. Questions 71 - 90 THURSDAY 3 NOVEMBER 2011 Members present Lord Teverson (Chairman) Lord Inge Lord Jay of Ewelme Lord Jopling Lord Lamont of Lerwick Lord Selkirk of Douglas Lord Sewel Lord Trimble Lord Williams of Elvel ________________ Examination of Witnesses Witnesses: Dr Dana Allin, International Institute for Strategic Studies, and Ms Xenia Dormandy, Chatham House. Q71 The Chairman: Good morning and welcome to this session. This is the fourth of the open evidence sessions in our inquiry into the military capabilities available to the European Union, where we are trying to understand how European defence and the security policies of the European Union fit into how defence and security work more generally—not just for this continent but how that fits into a broader north Atlantic position. As you have probably guessed, we want to look at the American dimension, which is particularly important. The EU-NATO relationship has come up strongly in a number of other studies that we have done in the past. I will just formally remind you that this is a public evidence session. We are being webcast. We are also taking a transcription and you will get a copy of that within the week; if you see any factual errors, you will be able to correct those. I think that you have had an idea of the sort of questions that we want to ask. I do not think that either of you wants to make an opening statement but I will ask if you could just introduce yourselves. It is very much up to you who answers which question; it is not compulsory for both of you to answer all the questions but clearly you are very welcome to if you wish. I hope that is clear. Perhaps I could ask you to introduce yourselves briefly, then we will start the session. Xenia Dormandy: Sure. Thank you very much, first of all, for inviting me today. I am Xenia Dormandy and I currently run the project on the United States at Chatham House. I have spent 13 of the last 15 years living in the US—I am half-American and half-British—with four 3 of 270 Dr Dana Allin, International Institute for Strategic Studies – Oral Evidence (QQ 71-90) of those years working in the US Government. I was in the State Department, in the Vice- President’s office and in the National Security Council focusing on South Asia, on homeland security and on non-proliferation. I then spent about four years at Harvard, running a research centre on international affairs there, then a couple of years in Switzerland. I arrived here about six months ago and, as I say, I am working at Chatham House on the US. Dr Dana Allin: Thank you very much for the invitation. I am Dana Allin. I am a senior fellow for US foreign policy and transatlantic affairs at the International Institute for Strategic Studies. I am also the editor of Survival. I am all-American but I have spent 14 years in the UK and quite a few years before that in many places in Europe. I think that my sort of expatriate situation actually brings out more rather than less of an American perspective, if you understand what I mean. The Chairman: That is something interesting to explore, maybe later or afterwards. Perhaps we could start off with Lord Jay. Q72 Lord Jay of Ewelme: Thank you very much, Lord Chairman. Could I ask to start with whether you see US policy as switching, in a way, from Europe towards what it would perceive to be its own strategic interests that lie more in the Pacific? If that is the case, would that be for political or strategic reasons or because there has to be a choice, given budgetary constraints, and would you see that as being to the detriment of NATO? As a second part to that question, can you see whether any evolution or change in the way in which NATO operates could affect the way in which the US regards it? Those are the key questions for me. Xenia Dormandy: Perhaps I will start. I am sure that many of you saw Secretary Clinton’s speech of about two or three weeks ago, which was about US attitudes towards Asia-Pacific. There is no question at all that the US does see Asia-Pacific as the most challenging area— the area where there is most opportunity but most threat as well—so there is clearly, and has been during the Obama Administration a shift, as it were, towards Asia. With that understanding, that is not to say that there is an ignorance of Europe or that America is actually moving