Paris, 27 January 2004: The President of the WEU Assembly, Armand De Decker, who is also President of the Belgian Senate, said in his address to Ambassadors of the EU’s Political and Security Committee (the PSC in its WEU Permanent Council format) on 21 January that despite the fact that there had been elements of consensus on the security and military aspects of the draft European Constitution, it would be dangerous to denounce the modified Brussels Treaty before ratification of the European Constitution, which should contain an acceptably worded mutual assistance and defence clause.

President De Decker said that if such a clause were adopted − a success for Europe which would be welcomed by the Assembly − it would be necessary to establish proper European interparliamentary oversight of ESDP and the EU’s collective defence provision by member states’ national parliamentarians. Today, only the modified Brussels Treaty made provision for interparliamentary oversight of ESDP.

The President observed that the regular meetings of the Assembly with the Permanent Council in its PSC formation were “natural” because the WEU Assembly was an assembly composed of European national parliamentarians. These contacts would be complemented by meetings with the Permanent Council of NATO. The Assembly was the only European parliamentary body with this level of regular contacts. In this capacity it contributed to the reinforcement of EU-NATO relations.

During the meeting, Spanish Ambassador Carles Maria Casajuana (WEU Presidency), his Italian colleague Maurizio Melani (former EU/WEU Presidency) and his Irish colleague Declan Kelleher (current EU Presidency) briefed parliamentarians on the results of the Brussels IGC summit and the way ahead for further negotiations on the European Constitution.

***

The Irish Ambassador explained that the European security architecture would now be in a “transitional phase” and much would depend on the outcome of the IGC. So far, ESDP had been “open and inclusive”. Work needed to continue on that basis so as to involve every member state. With respect to ESDP, the challenge facing the PSC would be “to find common positions among the 25 member states and stick to them”. The PSC, he added, had been tasked to oversee the development of the capabilities the EU required to respond to requests from the UN at short notice and on a short-term basis. The Council of Ministers would discuss the issue in March. Bosnia and Herzegovina could become the “focal point” of all the Union’s instruments. The Irish Presidency would not, however, seek to launch a follow-up mission to SFOR. This would probably happen by the end of 2004.

Assembly Rapporteur Bart van Winsen (Netherlands, Federated Group) asked how substantial the consensus on mutual defence had been at the end of the December summit in Brussels. Ambassador Kelleher replied that member states had arrived at a working consensus, taking into account the aspiration of some countries to have a mutual defence clause as well as the fact that others were not yet ready to sign up to such a clause. It would have to be sufficiently flexible to allow countries which had not signed either the modified Brussels Treaty or the North Atlantic Treaty to accept it. Ambassador Melani believed that more progress would have to be made on the issue of mutual defence and structured cooperation.

Assembly Rapporteur Renzo Gubert (Italy, Federated Group) asked what the legal basis for defence cooperation would be if the IGC failed again. Council members replied that the biggest problem for the Union at this stage would be to find the military capabilities necessary for carrying out the more complex operations scheduled. Although the Nice Treaty did not make provision for enhanced cooperation in the field of security and defence, it would not be an obstacle to cooperation for the purpose of improving military capabilities. It had always been possible for a group of member states to cooperate on capabilities. It was pointed out that practice sometimes ran ahead of the legal framework. When the opportunity arose, this would be recognised and the relevant legal provisions would be made.

The British MP Kevin McNamara asked PSC Ambassadors what the difference was between the wording of the mutual defence clauses of Article V of the modified Brussels Treaty, which stipulates that it applies in the case of a country being the object of an armed attack in Europe, and the provision of the draft Constitutional Treaty, which refers to a country being the victim of an armed aggression on its territory... He added that the wording of the modified Brussels treaty seemed to be much clearer, citing the case of the Falklands invasion or a scenario in which any overseas territory of an EU member state is attacked. Government representatives answered that different territories of member states had different types of status and the circumstances under which a new mutual defence clause could be triggered would have to be studied.

President De Decker asked whether those new EU member states which were at the same time members of NATO (Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia) would be eligible for membership of WEU. Ambassador Casajuana replied that at the time of the last enlargement of WEU, the Council had issued an invitation to the new members. Whether such an invitation would be issued this time depended on the outcome of the IGC.

National parliamentarians had earlier in the day met Dr Ernst van Hoek, Chairman of the meetings of National Armaments Directors in the framework of the Western European Armaments Group and Organisation (WEAG/WEAO), to discuss the future of European armaments cooperation and of the 19-nation organisation. Parliamentarians urged governments to step up their efforts to set up the European Capabilities Agency. The members of the Agency Establishment Team (EAT) have not been nominated and work has not started. However, a report by the EAT to the EU Council is due in April 2004. The Ambassadors confirmed that the aim was still to set up the Agency by the end of this year. Ambassador Casajuana said that one of the EAT’s tasks would be to address the issue of how to “incorporate” WEAG/WEAO on the basis of “cooperation, the transfer of functions or integration”. Until then, the continuity of the activities of WEAG/WEAO needed to be ensured.

Completing an interparliamentary day on ESDP, André Dumoulin from Liège University and author of a number of publications on WEU and ESDP, gave his views on the prospects for ESDP. He said that in adopting the European Strategic Concept the EU had taken the realistic view that the use of force could not be excluded, but that it would be necessary to clarify the conditions under which military instruments would be used, especially in cooperation with the United States.

Dumoulin believes that the aim of those member states which are pushing for structured cooperation is to trigger the further development of ESDP and reinforce the European pillar of NATO. But it would also allow them to cooperate and act outside the EU and NATO should those organisations be unable to take action owing to a self-blockade. Therefore, he argues, avant-garde or pioneer groups could have a stimulating effect but at the same time could also prove divisive.

If the IGC failed to provide the legitimacy for structured cooperation again, member states participating in such groups would, as had been proposed by the Group of Four meeting in April last year, turn to “ad-hoc” cooperation arrangements outside the Nice Treaty (this being the Treaty that would then govern the European Union’s activities) or be obliged to work as the core consisting of the ten member states of WEU by once again reactivating that Organisation. However, Mr Dumoulin’s personal view is that some member states will seek to “deconstruct” WEU in the near future while at the same time developing equivalent structures in the European Union.

The text of André Dumoulin’s intervention (in French only) is available on the Assembly’s website.

Forthcoming Assembly events are the President’s participation in the Munich Security Conference (former “Wehrkunde”) 6-8 February and an Assembly seminar in cooperation with the Spanish WEU Presidency and the Spanish National Parliament on EU cooperation with southern Mediterranean countries on new threats such as terrorism and proliferation of WMD, which will take place on 9-10 February in Valencia. For more information on the seminar please contact the press service.