(28/01/2019 Veterans for Britain are highlighting the Defence giveaway to the EU which is quietly under way under cover of the current shenanigans in Parliament.
A step too far for Intelligence sharing and much else besides. At a time when we are
supposed to be leaving the EU, why are we signing treaties that bind us as deeply into the new EU Military Union arrangements as if we had not left - will we indeed have left?
Participation in the EU's Defence Procurement arrangements will compel the UK to put all defence procurement contracts out to tender through the EU's defence procurement processes, regardless of the effect on our domestic defence industry (there are a few exemptions, whose applicability will no doubt be determined by the EU). Will we shortly see British defence companies merging with their European rivals in order to simply stay in business?
VfB explain how the timing of the signing of the Defence treaty might have been designed to keep Parliament from having any say in the matter.
(22/01/2019) We are indebted to UK Column for this snapshot of "our" First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Philip Jones KCB ADC surrounded by senior officers, seemingly taken in a British military establishment (complete with painting including Mrs Thatcher!).
Oh, and two EU flags and superfluous red arrows.
Has EU Military Union arrived without anyone noticing?
EU defence procurement seems to be on a roll with BAE Systems ceding a controlling stake in a military vehicles joint venture to Rheinmetall of Germany, which is also extending its interests with a possible take-over of a Franco-German joint venture tank maker. The EU defence procurement landscape may already be on the move.
Now we do have to be careful not to read too much into a single photo opportunity, but if we consider this in the context of the run-down of the Royal Navy, the recent treaty with Germany on Defence Cooperation, and our existing close institutional ties with the French military under the charitable auspices of the Franco British Council, it all seems to point in the same direction.
France and Germany are leading members of the EU and are both fully committed to PESCO and the full EU military nine yards - to imply that joint treaties covering our military cooperation with these states are unrelated to EU military union is to fly in the face of reality.
(02/12/2018) A study undertake by the IISS in collaboration with DGAP concludes that without the UK, the EU's nascent military "is likely to face extensive capability shortfalls". No wonder they are so keen for our continuing participation "post-Brexit".
The question that we need to ask is why Theresa May is so determined to place our defence assets manpower and defence budget contributions (not to mention the future of our defence industries) under the effective control of the EU, whilst apparently happy to retain no say in how the EU will deploy its/our military. So why has she placed this bargaining chip beyond use in our so-called Brexit negotiations? Maybe it was just another capitulation, kept "under the radar" as part not of the Brexit negotiations but of our deep and special defence relationship. Or give-away if you prefer.
(22/11/2018) Professor Prins' latest article for Veterans for Britain underlines the betrayal of our nation by our government, which it is now crystal clear wants nothing more than to be firmly embedded within the EU, whilst vainly asserting that they are "delivering Brexit". They are right in one sense - they are delivering it to the EU, gift-wrapped with our armed forces and security services, and an extra dollop of £39 billion as the cherry on top.
For the full sorry story see this time-line from UK Column independent multimedia news web-site.
(28/10/2018) UK Column offer their view of the current state of the reshaping of the armed forces of the EU nations (including the UK) into the nascent EU Armed Forces. So much for Brexit. So much for the Conservative Party. So much for our future outside the EU - we will not exist as an independent nation as we will be dependent upon the EU for our military operations.
Is it any surprise that our politicians continue to obsess about Brexit matters economic whilst never mentioning the elephant in the room?
Elsewhere we read that the M.o.D. has postponed an armed forces pay increase (recommended in part to improve the issue of low morale) due to the payroll system being allegedly inadequate to the task. That should fix the morale problem then . . .
Is it unreasonable to wonder how the M.o.D. manages to oversee so many blunders? Perhaps it has had too much practice to change its ways now. Helpfully the National Audit Office produced a short guide in 2015 - perhaps it is suffering from reform overload in a vain attempt to match slow-moving equiment procurement programs to fast-changing priorities.
(05/09/2018) UK forces sporting EU armbands disembark from RAF aircraft - under EUFOR control. Note that EUFOR was previously known as IFOR / SFOR under NATO command - now known as EUFOR under EU command. We are now providing the EU's army. NATO is dying - Long Live EUFOR?
Veterans for Britain comment here.
VfB are a useful source of accessible information both on the EU's push for its own armed forces and for the UK's apparent willingness to become fully enmeshed in these plans "despite Brexit".
Whilst their published documents are perhaps not yet as up-to-date as we might like, it has to be acknowledged that the complexities of EU policy in-the-making are notoriously complex and difficult to assess as an operational whole.
In March 2018 VfB published their take on the likely effect of the Draft Exit Agreement on Defence as agreed by David Davis and Michel Barnier. Some of us might believe that the fact that agreement was reached so amicably tells us all we need to know, but VfB's analysis is recommended reading.
See also Dr Lee Rotherham's more recent presentation to the CIB.
VfB have also published a useful "Action Plan Factsheet" (albeit a year old now) which covers the basics on the financial planning assumptions that the EU is working towards. Notable is the insistence that "duplication" (ie: national procurement from national suppliers) should be overtaken by using the EDA ( European Defence Fund) to steer EU defence spending towards chosen defence suppliers working in cooperation with each other on EU defence projects. Whilst this might bring down costs by removing "duplication" it would also seriously reduce competition in the defence market, replacing competition based on price functionality delivery etc for competition for the ear of the relevant EU defence procurement sub-committee.
Not seen this in the UK press?
The Eurocorps website shows what is really going on with the "EU Army", and how it will provide the EU contribution to the NATO Alliance. No mention of UK forces ... yet. A key point is that this is not a collection of units from individual countries. The Eurocorps units of mixed nationalities will owe their allegiance not to their own country but to the EU.
The House of Commons Library houses a research briefing (January 2018) entitled "European Defence: where is it heading?". It seems entirely vague about the UK's involvement - we seem unable to move beyond our support for EU PESCO and related initiatives and to address the role of our armed forces post Brexit. It seems to me that the allegiance of our armed forces is critical to this debate - how may their allegiance to our Monarchy be reconciled with taking their orders from the EU, which will unarguably become a foreign power after we leave?
In this context Mrs May's promise of unconditional support for EU security and cooperation sits extremely uneasily with ongoing developments and it may not be surprising that no announcements about our defence relationship with the EU are to hand at present.
This debate needs to be held in public, meanwhile the Franco British Council is hosting defence talks with France (who as members are not independent of the EU) behind closed doors.
More information here.
PESCO (Permanent Structured Cooperation) is the EU initiative to create EU armed forces, drawn from the nation states but commanded directly by a group of EU committees.
Our Tory Government has been quietly working with the EU on this project ever since the EU referendum and apparently regardless of the resulting vote to leave (no, I haven't seen this reported by the BBC either).
For the history of this project, see the UKColumn web-site here.
For an up-date as at 13th Nov 2017 watch this revealing UKC News report.
As at 16th November the UK has after all NOT yet actually signed up to the whole PESCO nine yards but read this fascinating UKC report on the UK's involvement in EU defence initiatives over the past year - the door remains open for the government to sign up to PESCO at any time in the future (or even simply to participate in reality without actually applying ink to paper).
But surely on a matter as vital to the nation as defence, Parliament will need to be consulted before we could possible consider signing up for PESCO...?
We should note that the Government is technically within its rights to sign new treaties with the EU under the Royal Prerogative without getting Parliamentary approval . . . and it is noteworthy that according to Veterans for Britain our MPs may not have been particularly diligent in holding the Government to account on defence matters (but see the section on the recent Defence Select Committee session below).
In any event it is perfectly possible for the UK government to commit what remains of our forces to the EU command structure under the guise of supporting our NATO partners, since NATO and the "EU army" are seemingly moving closer together. PESCO is simply a signature on a bit of paper that would merely provide formal confirmation of the arrangement.
The fact that PESCO Is even being considered (let alone virtually fully supported) at exactly the time when we are supposed to be leaving the EU tells us all we need to know about the "Brexit" towards which Mrs May is guiding us.
The session on 14th November 2017 at which the committee questioned witnesses General Sir Richard Barrons (rtd), Admiral SIr George Zambellas (rtd) and Air Marshal Sir Baz North (rtd), to throw light upon the National Security Capabilities Review into the state of our armed forces.
It's quite a long session, notable for the outspoken views expressed by the witnesses. If you have an interest in defence, this is essential viewing; follow this link.
The web-site German-Foreign-Policy.com (German News Information Services GmbH) reports on the background to PESCO here.
It gives a run-down on Germany's initial involvement, some of the historical competition between Berlin and Paris, and finally the last paragraph headed "Empire Unification through War" which needs to be read for it's insight into how some of the leading people involved see this project (no I have not made this up).