How is This for evidence?
Why the European Defence Agency? The European Defence Agency has been created to help EU Member States develop their defence capabilities for crisis-management operations under the European Security and Defence Policy. The Agency will achieve its goals by: Encouraging EU governments to spend defence budgets on meeting tomorrow's challenges, not yesterday's threats; Helping them to identify common needs and promoting collaboration to provide common solutions. The Agency's success will mean: Better military capabilities; Stronger European defence industries; Better value for European taxpayers.
The European Defence Agency has been created to help EU Member States develop their defence capabilities for crisis-management operations under the European Security and Defence Policy.
The Agency will achieve its goals by:
This was my point.
.
My point has been that there is no discourse open to citizens about EU defense.
How open is "my minister"?
That's what I want to know
[about to state the obvious] ... this is why I come here: to keep refining my understanding of government [French, EU and other] and with that knowledge be in a better position to evaluate arguments, mine and others'.
My apologies, Migeru, for having become a bit edgy, yesterday. -- My primary concern re defence and security issues is that Europe will find itself corralled into the US's foreign policy fold by virtue of agreements that no longer serve their original purpose and which should have been reevaluated, if not abandoned, years ago. Europe is presently in the midst of a tug of war between North America and Asia. Europe's policy in such matters is essential to pulling the world back from the vertiginous precipice we're staring down, by speaking reason to belligerent parties. Whether, despite its best and most reasonable intentions, Europe will be drawn into armed conflicts against its will is a matter that warrants discussion and clarification.
There's no question that the opportunity to be heard through the EC website's open consultations is potentially a positive thing, but I should have thought that one might find more substance here. [I see that this has been pointed out further down in the thread]
Now, regarding geopolitics, defence and NATO maybe you should consider writing a diary. Also, what exactly is France's position on NATO? It's sort of in it but not quite, isn't it?
It seems to me that NATO is destined to unravel like the Delian League. I think that subtext is what makes Alexander G. Rubio's diaries so appealing. guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
I'll see what I can do to get a diary together on NATO.
You needn't feel alone in being relegated to a position of being told "how it is" only after "how it is" has been decided for all practical purposes. That, indeed, is the very position in which Europe's national parliament-members find themselves. In that, it is very important to distinguish their total marginalisation from the marginalisation of European heads of state-- Prime Ministers and Presidents. These are often a deal more aware of and involved in the issues as they are discussed and hammered out--often in "informal meetings" between the Commission, its agents, and, most importantly, the tremendously powerful corporate lobbies who can as good as draft the Commission propositions themselves--as they have done!
For the Euro heads of state, the EU--i.e. the Commission-- serves a very handy dual purpose: it can and does do, effectively in what is tantamount to private dealings, what these heads of state could not do in front of their own parliaments and electorates. On the other hand, whether or not the European Commission does what the heads of state like or not, it is always a convenient whipping-boy, offered up as useful political cover for the heads of state to "blame", saying that these things are, alas, out of their hands. That is sometimes true and other times not true.
In any case, the fact remains that dealing with the Euro Commission is something like having a "tiger by the tail". It is extremely powerful, well-organized, and it is at the beck and call of the international corporate community which, while not a monolith, is the most consistent, unified, wealthy and powerful set of interests in the world today-- bar none.
I cannot urge strongly enough the importance of reading the information contained in Raoul Marc Jennar's Europe, la trahison des élites (édition augmentée), Fayard, Paris, May 2005.]
and, once more, the invaluable set of references (many in english) at Étienne Chouard's website . "In such an environment it is not surprising that the ills of technology should seem curable only through the application of more technology..." John W Aldridge
If there is no published information as to Defense policy, we might as well have no voice at all.
the site to which you refer me is primarily announcing fait accompli, not inviting debate.
And it is an EU agency. One of Javier Solana's multiple hats is heading the EDF. guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
The page I linked above is the view from the European Commission (see also this), and it gives you pointers to all the relevant institutions. At the Commission level, I think it is Benita Ferrero-Waldner (EU Commissioner for External Relations) that would have any responsibility for Defence issues.
In the European Parliament it is Committee on Foreign Affairs that has responsibility for the CFSP.
Committee responsible for: 1. the common foreign and security policy (CFSP) and the European security and defence policy (ESDP). In this context the committee is assisted by a subcommittee on security and defence;
One thing we don't do enough of in Europe compared to the US is to contact our representatives directly. You now have a list of all of yours [in the case of the European Parliament you can contact the chairmen of the committees, and document rapporteurs, regardless of nationality or political affiliation]. guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
I'll scour these too, but I can't help entertaining the idea that we're missing the point.
missing the point altogether.
The Togo football federation [/snark of the century]
The Common Foreign and Security Policy seems to follow under the purview of the EU Council. This means it is fully intergovernmental and you are represented in it by your minister, Michèle Alliot-Marie
Meetings bring together the Foreign Ministers of Member States. Ministers responsible for European Affairs, Defence, Development or Trade also participate depending on the items on agenda.
Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) The principles and objectives of the CFSP are to safeguard the common values, fundamental interests, independence and integrity of the Union, in conformity with the principles of the UN Charter; to strengthen the security of the Union in all ways; to preserve peace and strengthen the international community, in accordance with the principles of the UN Charter; to promote international cooperation; and to develop and consolidate democracy and the rule of law, and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. Under the CFSP, the Council adopts Joint Actions and Common Positions. It normally takes decisions by unanimity. The Council also adopts conclusions on the main issues in discussion. The Council is also responsible for the European Security and Defence Policy. Defence Ministers traditionally participate in GAERC [General Affairs and External Relations Council] meetings twice a year, in addition to their informal meetings (also twice a year). The Secretary-General of the Council/High Representative for the CFSP [that would be our friend the omnipresent Javier Solana] participates in General Affairs and External Relations Council meetings and plays a key role in the formulation, preparation and implementation of the CFSP. In the field of CFSP, the Political and Security Committee (PSC) helps define policies by drawing up opinions for the Council, without prejudice to the role of the Permanent Representatives Committee (Coreper) in preparing Council sessions. The PSC also exercises, under the responsibility of the Council, political control and strategic direction of crisis management operations.
The principles and objectives of the CFSP are to safeguard the common values, fundamental interests, independence and integrity of the Union, in conformity with the principles of the UN Charter; to strengthen the security of the Union in all ways; to preserve peace and strengthen the international community, in accordance with the principles of the UN Charter; to promote international cooperation; and to develop and consolidate democracy and the rule of law, and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.
Under the CFSP, the Council adopts Joint Actions and Common Positions. It normally takes decisions by unanimity. The Council also adopts conclusions on the main issues in discussion.
The Council is also responsible for the European Security and Defence Policy. Defence Ministers traditionally participate in GAERC [General Affairs and External Relations Council] meetings twice a year, in addition to their informal meetings (also twice a year).
The Secretary-General of the Council/High Representative for the CFSP [that would be our friend the omnipresent Javier Solana] participates in General Affairs and External Relations Council meetings and plays a key role in the formulation, preparation and implementation of the CFSP.
In the field of CFSP, the Political and Security Committee (PSC) helps define policies by drawing up opinions for the Council, without prejudice to the role of the Permanent Representatives Committee (Coreper) in preparing Council sessions. The PSC also exercises, under the responsibility of the Council, political control and strategic direction of crisis management operations.
