Written evidence from Dr Stephen Lee-Kelland PhD (EUM0008)

 

 

The Impact of The EU Treaties as Amended by Lisbon on UK Defence and Foreign Policy: Suggested Questions

 

 

 

1.      I  Executive Summary

 

  1. The UK has joined the EU and the EU has, as a primary objective in the preamble to the Treaty on European Union, the long term intention of representing the States in foreign policy and defence.  Does the UK Government have the long term intention to relinquish sovereignty in these areas to the EU as it agreed in the Treaty? (See (9) “Long Term Intentions below).

 

  1. Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) was introduced on 1st November 2014 so it would seem that the UK can no longer simply veto EU Council decisions and act alone.  Can the Committee determine how far the UK is still Sovereign in matters of Defence before handing over Sovereignty as in (1) above?  (See (13)  “Current Powers of the UK Government” below)

 

  1. The EU ATHENA Committee provides the UK with a veto on EU defence finance but a veto does not permit control of defence policy.  In particular can the Council determine whether:

 

  1. A.  The UK can ignore EU Council defence decisions and can act independently on major issues that have already come to the attention of the European Council. (See (13) “Current Powers of the UK Government” below)

 

  1. B.  Whether the UK has a truly independent seat on the UN Security Council (See (28) “UK Seat on Security Council” below)?

 

  1. C.  Given that the USA appears to be assuming that the UK is, or will soon be, part of the defence forces of the EU (See  ) is the UK and EU currently planning a joint EU membership of NATO? (See (32) “NATO and the EU” below).

 

  1. Can the Committee determine if there has been a “Lisbon Dividend” in defence spending owing to the new “Solidarity Clause” (Treaty on European Union Art. 24 (3)).  If not then why not?

 

  1. Given that almost all of the other countries in the EU regard a common EU defence to be of the utmost importance (See (37) “The Outside View of EU Defence”) and that QMV means that these countries can press ahead with forming a European Defence organisation that can be involved in international conflicts, is the UK planning for an inevitable entanglement with EU defence action in the future - as it should given the “Solidarity Clause”?  (See (24) “Can the EU force the hand of the UK in military matters” below).  Will these plans involve common equipment specifications?  What will be the consequence of this for the UK defence industry?

 

II Reasons for Concern

 

  1. Long Term Intentions

 

  1. The Treaty on European Union has, as one of its prime objectives that those signing the Treaty have:

 

  1. “RESOLVED to implement a common foreign and security policy including the progressive framing of a common defence policy, which might lead to a common defence in accordance with the provisions of Article 42, thereby reinforcing the European identity and its independence in order to promote peace, security and progress in Europe and in the world”

 

  1. The UK appears to have become a member of an organisation that will, in the long run, assume a common defence and foreign policy.

 

  1. Current powers of the UK Government

 

  1. The primary provisions on defence are contained in the Treaty on European Union and the UK has not negotiated an opt out.

 

  1. Can the UK ignore EU Council decisions on defence (and foreign) policy? The provisions of the Treaties outlined below suggest that it cannot:

 

  1. The Treaty on European Union.  Article 24(3) states:

 

  1. "3. The Member States shall support the Union’s external and security policy actively and unreservedly in a spirit of loyalty and mutual solidarity and shall comply with the Union’s action in this area."

 

  1. Couple this clause with Article 26(1):

 

  1. "1. The European Council shall identify the Union’s strategic interests, determine the objectives of and define general guidelines for the common foreign and security policy, including for matters with defence implications. It shall adopt the necessary decisions."

 

  1. and we seem to end up with a cast iron commitment to supply UK military forces for EU missions.

 

  1. What about UK defence?  Can we act alone?

 

  1. "Art 28. (3).. Whenever there is any plan to adopt a national position or take national action pursuant to a decision as referred to in paragraph 1, information shall be provided by the Member State concerned in time to allow, if necessary, for prior consultations within the Council. The obligation to provide prior information shall not apply to measures which are merely a national transposition of Council decisions."

 

  1. So all UK actions must be referred to the Council before they are taken but Paragraph 1 says that the Council is sovereign in all matters of defence that it considers.

 

  1. Can the EU Force the hand of the UK in military matters?

 

  1. In the Treaty on European Union. Article 42 it describes how the EU is committed to the ongoing task of forming its own military force, the European Union Battle Group.

 

  1. This means that the EU can send in its battle group(s), they get into trouble and all the other members of the EU are then committed to reinforce the attack.  In theory there are over 13 Battle Group Battalions with over 60,000 troops on call.  To date Britain has blocked funding for this enterprise which means that although there are 60,000+ troops available in member states they do not have the common equipment and command required for major actions. Would this change after an IN vote in a UK referendum?
  2. Given that QMV applies so that the EU can act without UK approval, what would be the response of the UK Government if the EU got into trouble in a military conflict?
     
  3. UK Seat on Security Council
  4. Does the UK have an independent seat on the UN Security Council? According to the Treaty on European Union. Article 34:
  5. "Member States which are also members of the United Nations Security Council will concert and keep the other Member States and the High Representative fully informed. Member States which are members of the Security Council will, in the execution of their functions, defend the positions and the interests of the Union, without prejudice to their responsibilities under the provisions of the United Nations Charter.
  6. When the Union has defined a position on a subject which is on the United Nations Security Council agenda, those Member States which sit on the Security Council shall request that the High Representative be invited to present the Union’s position."

 

  1. Nato and the EU

 

  1. Is it implied from the amendments of the Lisbon Treaty that NATO will make a treaty with the EU?  Given the reality of the Lisbon Treaty it makes no sense for the EU to have regions with separate deals with NATO.  The USA already seems to be behaving as if the long term future of NATO involves the EU as a single military entity:
  2. "The Strategic Concept clearly states that an active and effective European Union contributes to the overall security of the Euro-Atlantic area. Therefore the EU is a unique and essential partner for NATO." NATO-EU a strategic partnership.
  3. "We welcome an outward-looking European Union with Britain in it. We benefit when the EU is unified, speaking with a single voice, and focused on our shared interests around the world and in Europe," Philip Gordon said during a visit to London, adding: "We want to see a strong British voice in that European Union. That is in the American interest." Guardian. (Bold typeface added to highlight the view of the USA).
  4. In effect the USA no longer regards the UK to be a sovereign nation and is urging it to play a full role in the EU.  In Article 42 it describes how the EU is committed to the ongoing task of forming its own military force, the European Union Battle Group.
     
  5. The Outside view of EU defence

 

  1. The French View

    “Unless there is a strong reawakening of political determination to make Europe a global power, to prevent it from becoming powerless, and dependent, all of the arrangements for the Europe of Defense will be nothing more than incomplete or lifeless words on paper”French defense Minister, Hubert Vedrine

 

  1. The German view

    "EU member states share a common vision of the EU as a security provider. This is the main driver behind their endeavour to enhance CSDP. The basis of this vision is the experience of several member states that they cannot meet their security interests on their own." European Geo-Strategy"

    "Germany should therefore cooperate especially in the establishment of permanent structured cooperation and help to shape it with France, Poland, Spain and, at some point, Italy"

 

  1. The Spanish view

    "I am fully aware that ‘the European project’ has different meanings in different corners of geographical and political Europe. But in Spain, it mostly keeps the original meaning of an ever-closer union...

 

  1. Spain supports a badly needed permanent planning and conduct capability for both civilian and military missions. On the key issue of military capabilities, the CSDP can be instrumental in bringing about a more efficient European defence industry. CSDP’s development will pave the way for more cooperative capabilities that will require a more efficient industrial base." Enrique Mora, Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs

 

 

  1. “Renegotiation”

 

  1. The UK Government had put the EU on notice that it would further negotiate some terms of the Treaties in 2015, after the 5 year transitional period. (Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union Title VII article 10 (4).  The renegotiation includes Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union  (the disciplining of errant States), powers of the Court of Justice of the European Union under Title VI of the Treaty on European Union.  These negotiations are now under way. None of this seems to involve defence.

 

  1. The Protocols annexed to The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

 

  1. It is only the protocol on Freedom, Security and Justice that might affect the current debate.  However, all of the protocols are noted below to avoid doubt.   When acting under the protocols the UK has agreed that “the Union institutions and the United Kingdom shall seek to re-establish the widest possible measure of participation of the United Kingdom in the acquis of the Union in the area of freedom, security and justice. (Title VII, Transitional Provisions).

 

  1. Euro and management of UK economy:  ON CERTAIN PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND

 

  1. Travel:  ON THE APPLICATION OF CERTAIN ASPECTS OF ARTICLE 26 OF THE TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

 

  1. Migration and asylum: ON THE POSITION OF THE UNITED KINGDOM AND IRELAND IN RESPECT OF THE AREA OF FREEDOM, SECURITY AND JUSTICE.  Concerns Title V of Part Three of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

 

  1. Human Rights:  ON THE APPLICATION OF THE CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION TO POLAND AND TO THE UNITED KINGDOM

 

September 2015