[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.