Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Wing Commander Christopher Luck MBE MA RAF Deputy Director, Strategy & War, Department of International Security & Military Studies, USAF Air Command &

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Wing Commander Christopher Luck MBE MA RAF Deputy Director, Strategy & War, Department of International Security & Military Studies, USAF Air Command &"— Presentation transcript:

1 Wing Commander Christopher Luck MBE MA RAF Deputy Director, Strategy & War, Department of International Security & Military Studies, USAF Air Command & Staff College, Maxwell AFB

2 WHY IS A MILITARY GUY HERE? “War is not merely an act of policy but a true political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse, carried on with other means…The political object is the goal, war is the means of reaching it, and means can never be considered in isolation from their purpose.” Carl Von Clausewitz, , from ‘On War’

3 Ends Means National Diplomacy Objectives I nformation Military Economic Another way of looking at it … Ways GrandStrategy

4 THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA A DISCUSSION

5 DISCLAIMER My Views, not those of my Service or Government

6 SCOPE Background The Historical Drivers for the formation of the EU The EU today A comparison of the EU and US Same concerns and ambitions, different perspectives The Implications for the US of: A Disintegrating EU An Further Integrating EU Conclusion and Thoughts to Ponder Questions

7 The Historical Drivers for the EU

8 Violence

9

10 "A day will come when all the nations of this continent, without losing their distinct qualities or their glorious individuality, will fuse together in a higher unity and form the European brotherhood. A day will come when there will be no other battlefields than those of the mind - open marketplaces for ideas. A day will come when bullets and bombs will be replaced by votes". Victor Hugo Another Quote…

11 "A day will come when all the nations of this continent, without losing their distinct qualities or their glorious individuality, will fuse together in a higher unity and form the European brotherhood. A day will come when there will be no other battlefields than those of the mind - open marketplaces for ideas. A day will come when bullets and bombs will be replaced by votes".

12

13

14

15 The Historical Drivers for the EU Peace, safety and security Economic and social solidarity Promote the European model of society –Democracy –Economic prosperity –Health –Education –Human Rights

16 “…a united states of Europe...”

17 The EU today …and how does it work?

18 Paris – 1951 Rome – 1957 France Germany Italy Belgium Netherlands Luxembourg

19 European Council 1974 United Kingdom Ireland Denmark

20 Greece

21 Spain Portugal Common currency €

22 Maastricht (East Germany)

23 € launched 2002 Sweden Finland Austria

24 Estonia Latvia Lithuania Poland Czech Rep Slovakia Hungary Slovenia Cyprus Malta France Germany Italy Belgium Netherlands Luxembourg United Kingdom Ireland Denmark Greece Spain Portugal Sweden Finland Austria Estonia Latvia Lithuania Poland Czech Rep Slovakia Hungary Slovenia Cyprus Malta

25 Future Croatia Rumania Bulgaria Turkey

26 KEY DATES & HISTORIC STEPS Paris 1951 – coal/steel community Rome 1957 – beginnings of EEC Maastricht integration ‘The Euro’ Constitution Time Level of integration Churchill 1946 States delegate parts of national sovereignty to shared institutions ESDP 1999 – security policy

27 COMMON POLICIES Economy & Society: Agriculture Audiovisual Biotechnology Civil Society Competition Consumers Culture Customs Union Economic $ monetary Education Employment Energy Enterprise Environment Fisheries Food Safety Information society Internal market Justice Public health Regional policy R & D Space Sport Taxation Trans-European network Transport Youth International Affairs: The EU in the World Institutional Affairs: Governance The Future of Europe-debate Finance: Budget Fight against Fraud Grants Public Procurement

28 KEY EU TREATIES 1951 (Paris) Treaty of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) 1957 (Rome) Treaty of the European Economic Community (EEC) and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) 1965 A treaty is signed merging the executive bodies of the three Communities and creating a single Council and Commission 1970 (Luxembourg) The treaty is allowing the European Communities to be increasingly financed from "own resources" and giving greater powers to the European Parliament 1975 (Luxembourg) The treaty is giving the European Parliament greater power over the budget and setting up the European Court of Auditors. It comes into force on 1 June (2/17 Luxembourg and 2/28 Hague ) The Single European Act. This paves the way for creating the single market by (Schengen Agreement) The Schengen Agreement abolishes checks at the borders between member states of the European Communities 1992 (Maastricht) The Treaty on European Union 1997 (Amsterdam) The treaty is giving the European Union new powers and responsibilities 2001 (Nice) The Treaty changes the EU's decision-making system so that the Union will be ready for enlargement. It comes into force on 1 February 2003

29 EU-US Data EUUS Area, 1,000 Square Miles1,5373,718 Population (Millions) Population Density/Square Mile29675 Unemployment Rate % Gross Domestic Product (Billions $) Inflation (GDP Price Deflator %) Defense expenditure (Billions $) Development aid (Billions $)3612 Total active duty personnel (Millions) FY2003

30 “If I want to talk to Europe, who do I phone?“ Henry Kissinger 1970s

31 Council of Ministers EU Council Constitution Ratified 2 ½ year President Judiciary Executive Legislative Commission Parliament Court of Justice Pre-Constitution Javier Solana Commission Council of Ministers

32 BACKGROUND SUMMARY Peace & stability based European regeneration Organization of sovereign states –Confederation –Increasing integration “How deep a Union?” Constitution

33 EU - USA Same, but different

34 NATIONAL STRATEGIES “A Secure Europe in a better world” – European Security Strategy (December 2003) –Also known as “Solana Paper” “The National Security Strategy of the United States of America (September 2002)

35 EU VS US STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES Addressing Threats Building Security in Neighborhood International Order based on effective Multilateralism (UN) Robust Economy More unified Voice Prevent our Enemies from Threatening Us… Work with others to Defuse Regional Conflicts Develop Agendas for Cooperative Action with Other Main Centers of Global Power Ignite a New Era of Global Economic Growth …Opening Societies and Building the Infrastructure of Democracy

36 KEY THREATS Threats –Terrorism –Proliferation of WMD –Regional Conflicts –State Failure –Organized Crime Perception & Approach different than in USA

37 ARE THE USA AND THE EU DRIFTING APART? Perception Gap Strategy Gap Capabilities Gap Attitude Gap Value Gap Religious Gap Source: vanHerpen, Six Dimensions of Growing Transatlantic Divide

38 PERCEPTION GAP EU does not consider itself at war –“Europe has never been so prosperous, so secure nor so free” Europe old Vulnerability –Terrorism already in 70s USA considers itself at war New US Vulnerability Source: vanHerpen, Six Dimensions of Growing Transatlantic Divide

39 STRATEGY GAP New Imperialism or Noble Idealism? European doubts: –Legitimacy (UN/Customary Law/Just War?) –Feasibility (better end state?) –Consistency (longer than one administration?) –Risks (escalation?) –Motives (national interest?) Source: vanHerpen, Six Dimensions of Growing Transatlantic Divide

40 CAPABILITIES GAP Rapid increase of US Military Power in 90s Sole military Superpower EU has very limited ability for military power projection Source: vanHerpen, Six Dimensions of Growing Transatlantic Divide

41 ATTITUDE GAP EU Multilateralism –Largest share of Peacekeepers and international policemen EU Soft Power –Europe prefers the use of economy as main instrument of power US Unilateralism –Coalition of willing US Hard Power –Military superiority causes the US to seek primarily military solutions Source: vanHerpen, Six Dimensions of Growing Transatlantic Divide & Judt, Tony, “Europe vs America” The NY Review of Books (2005)

42 VALUE GAP EU believes in democratic legitimacy from the will of an international community US believes in special legitimacy of their own democracy US believes that their values are significant for mankind and are therefore universal Source: vanHerpen, Six Dimensions of Growing Transatlantic Divide

43 RELIGIOUS GAP Europeans see Americans as ‘fundamental’ Christians where as they see themselves as secular Christians –“Evil Empire” (USSR) –“Axis of evil” (North Korea, Iran, Iraq) –Schiavo Case/Gay Marriages/Stem Cell Research/Faith-Based Initiative Source: vanHerpen, Six Dimensions of Growing Transatlantic Divide

44 UNILATERALISM VS MULTILATERALISM Donald, what’s up with Europe? They are talking about a Union! I don’t know George. Which Europe are you talking about, the old Europe or the new Europe?

45 EU’s FUTURE AND THE IMPACT ON THE USA An EU drifting apart or An EU more unified

46 DISINTEGRATING EU Constitution fails and the EU will gradually disintegrate. Consequences –Diplomatic –Informational –Military –Economic

47 DIPLOMATIC CONSEQUENCES Multiple actors vs One EU

48 INFORMATIONAL CONSEQUENCES No strong actor with long experience in world affairs. European influence 1938

49 INFORMATIONAL CONSEQUENCES Loss of soft power around the globe Slows spreading of common values

50 MILITARY CONSEQUENCES Weaker NATO alliance –Incapacity to support US in global ops –Technology gap Lack of will to commit national forces to global operations

51 ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES Stops the spread of prosperity Lack of prosperity leads to instability Complex system of multiple markets Decreased investment opportunities Mutual investments in jeopardy Lack of competition for the US

52 INTERDEPENDENT WORLD Historical GDP growth per capita

53 EU DISINTEGRATES SUMMARY EU disintegration is NOT in the US interest, because : –D: Dr. Rice has no one to call –I : Loss of stabilizing global soft power –M: Even weaker alliances –E: Negative impact on global economy

54 INTEGRATING EU: THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF EUROPE Scope: Unification through the EU Constitution. EU expansion will enhance the level of integration CFSP and ESDP will enhance Security Politics The Confederate States of Europe – Analysis according to the “DIME”. EU Security and Defense Policy Perspectives and US interests

55 Foundation of unified ideas, values, interests, and action. Strengthened and guaranteed core values of peace, prosperity, democracy. Unification process promotes progression with new and future members. Less bureaucratic due to common agreements. EU expansion will enhance the level of integration EEC Signing Ceremony, Rome 1957 EU Meet, Rome October 2004 source: UNIFICATION THROUGH THE EU CONSTITUTION

56 Common Security Strategy unifies ideas and security policy. Will promote active and passive security among its member states. Will provide for hard and soft military powers and forces. Will form, build, and transform to stay up to date. Stronger Europe – Stronger Atlantic Alliance. CFSP AND ESDP ENHANCE SECURITY POLITICS source:

57 “…if you want to have a trans-Atlantic dialogue between grown-ups, I know that any president and any American administration is willing to listen to the European voice as long as it is one European voice.” Hoop Scheffer, Secretary General of NATO THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF EUROPE – THE DIME

58 Constitution facilitates diplomatic relations. Unification through a foundational and constitutional basis. Strategies Intra- and Inter-States commonly agreed and laid down. Harmonizes and synchronizes with UN Charter and therefore international law. EU model of building democracy – through assistance, admonition and negotiations. source: THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF EUROPE – DIPLOMATIC

59 Strong soft power around the globe. Cultural experience in world affairs. Common future IO standards. Galileo GPS THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF EUROPE – INFORMATION

60 ESDP will shape, equip, and train coalition forces over the full spectrum of operational needs. AIRBUS 400 M NH 90 EUROCOPTER EUROFIGHTER TIGER THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF EUROPE – MILITARY

61 Employs and if necessary leads coalition operations abroad Operation ARTEMIS source: Operation CONCORDIA THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF EUROPE – MILITARY

62 George C. Marshall Konrad Adenauer and Charles de Gaulle Prosperity and Stability through common shared open markets. Multiple Markets enhance global competition and stability. Competition towards US necessary. THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF EUROPE – ECONOMIC

63 CFSP / ESDP – and NATO -US criticism to EU specific structures -US fears EU military structures as a rival to NATO -EU continues relying on NATO alliance and burden sharing EU SECURITY AND DEFENSE PERSPECTIVES AND US INTERESTS

64 CFSP / ESDP and US Interests -EU sees partnership in NATO -EU also needs independent forces (Homeland Security) EU Security Strategy revolves around multilateralism US skepticism about the EU as a peer rival is non substantial EU SECURITY AND DEFENSE PERSPECTIVES AND US INTERESTS

65 The Result: - Equality, prosperity, peace, and democracy! - More unification - More direction - More quality vs. quantity - More conformity according to the principles of the UN - More promotion of international cooperation - Change is difficult! source: Bassford,Jomini and Clausewitz:Their Interaction, Georgia State University, 1993 THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF EUROPE – CONCLUSION

66 CONCLUSION

67 Peace and security wanted - economic cooperation was the first step. It has kept the peace.

68 CONCLUSION Peace and security wanted - economic cooperation was the first step. It has kept the peace. Churchill’s premise of “jaw, jaw not war, war”

69 CONCLUSION Peace and security wanted - economic cooperation was the first step. It has kept the peace. Churchill’s premise of “jaw, jaw not war, war” What US worries about, EU worries about “Same, but different” - Cultural divide

70 CONCLUSION Peace and security wanted - economic cooperation was the first step. It has kept the peace. Churchill’s premise of “jaw, jaw not war, war” What US worries about, EU worries about “Same, but different” - Cultural divide Not a question of “if the EU is going to integrate further” – only “how much?” What do the US want: –Peer competitor? –Partner?

71 President Bush 8 Feb 05 “…want to be a partner and not a rival [to the EU]” “It is time to turn away from the disagreements of the past. It is time to open a new chapter in our relationship, and a new chapter in our alliance.” Sec State Rice 9 Feb 05

72 One wag said it ought to be an interesting trip after all that has been said. “When I first mentioned I might be traveling in France and Germany it raised some eyebrows. 'Oh, that was the old Rumsfeld’ ”

73 Frames of Reference Thucydides: Fear, Interests, Honor Waltz: Man, Internal Organization of States, Anarchic International System Ikenberry: Balance of Power, Hegemony, Constitutionalism Peace as the lowest level of ‘war’ (DIME)

74 THOUGHTS TO PONDER 1.Ratification of Constitution 2.Wolfowitz at the World Bank/John Bolton UN Ambassador 3.EU selling arms to China 4.Iran & North Korea 5.Turkey 6.Ageing Europe 7.Google War – France 8.Just War – Prevention 9.Demise of the State system? 10.Peer Competitors

75 QUESTIONS?


Download ppt "Wing Commander Christopher Luck MBE MA RAF Deputy Director, Strategy & War, Department of International Security & Military Studies, USAF Air Command &"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google