Suivre ce blog Administration + Créer mon blog
18 octobre 2013 5 18 /10 /octobre /2013 11:50
Lithuania Calls for EU To Update Security Strategy

At right, Juozas Olekas, Lithuania's defense minister, speaks Monday during a hearing at the European Parliament. At left is Arnaud Danjean, chairman of the parliament's Security and Defence Subcommittee. (Lithuanian Ministry of National Defense)


Oct. 17, 2013 - By JULIAN HALE – Defense News


BRUSSELS — Lithuania, the current holder of the EU’s rotating presidency, wants EU leaders meeting at a summit here in December to begin updating the EU’s 10-year-old security strategy by, among other things, including cybersecurity and energy security.


It also wants to see the decline in Europe’s defense spending and EU partnerships in security and defense addressed at the summit.


“Over the past 10 years, the world outside Europe has become more unsafe, more volatile and more radical. Meanwhile, Europe itself has become more introverted, politically less ambitious and militarily less able to deal with emerging security challenges, even in neighboring territories,” Lithuanian Defense Minister Juozas Olekas told members of the European Parliament in a speech Monday.


“In the review of the strategy, Europeans will need to think well beyond the problems in our vicinity. We cannot ignore the fact that the US, which over decades was deploying considerable forces in Western Europe will, in the future, focus increasingly on other parts of the world.” Olekas said. “Therefore, Europe will need to rethink its global role, including the role of military force within its strategy.”


He added that cybersecurity and energy security “are conspicuous by their absence in the current strategy,” and yet “are the ones which are currently the most pressing for Lithuania and a number of other European countries.”


NATO has a Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence in Tallinn, Estonia, and an Energy Security Centre in Vilnius, Lithuania.


“The establishment of these centers is a reflection of the growing security threats in our region and beyond,” he said.


Olekas said he wants to see EU leaders discuss cybersecurity and energy security issues in greater depth at the EU summit in December.


“Their distinguishing feature is complexity. This means that the response to threats of this nature must also be complex — ranging from regulation, standard-setting and targeted investments to active diplomacy, deterrents and responses,” he said.


“The European Union, with its expertise, political and economic leverages, and with its institutions, is currently better placed than anyone to take the lead in dealing with such non-military issues as cyber threats and energy insecurity.” he said. “Naturally, problems of this kind can only be solved in close cooperation with other countries and organizations, not least NATO. … I would like to hope that also in this area, the December European Council will set ambitious guidelines for the European Union.”


With regard to EU partnerships in the field of security and defense, he bemoaned the fact that “there is no regular security dialogue between the European Union and its neighbors, let alone military cooperation programs.”


In this context, he described the use of the paid services of private companies to compensate for capability shortfalls without turning to partners first as “another deeply flawed practice in EU operations.


“Thus, the European Union Training Mission in Mali recently hired medical evacuation helicopters, at a cost of €2.5 million for six months. Next year, we are likely to pay over €5 million for this service,” Olekas said. “And yet, the European Union has not once approached its partners who have such capabilities and who might be able to provide them on much better terms.”


Referring to European Defence Agency data that says EU defense spending dropped by 10 percent from 2005 to 2010 and by as much again from 2010 to 2013, he warned that “left unfettered, this process will have profound and far-reaching consequences not just for the European defense industry, but also for Europe’s position in the world. There is no getting away from the fact that the December European Council will have to pay considerable attention to defense funding issues.”


Olekas also played down expectations in terms of new projects arising from the December EU summit.


“These days, when European countries [including Lithuania] refer to the ‘development of military capabilities,’ we are actually talking not so much about development, but rather about the management of decline. Therefore, any talk of, and calls for, the December meeting of EU national leaders to announce new, ambitious projects and initiatives cannot be really taken seriously.


“Countering the decline in actual defense spending could be an ambitious enough objective for national leaders to set themselves for the moment,” he added.


The Lithuanian defense minister also argued energy costs could be sharply reduced through more efficient technologies and processes.


“Savings made in the more efficient running of military barracks, using less fuel-thirsty vehicles or renewable resources, could be invested into the required military capabilities,” he said.

Partager cet article
9 septembre 2013 1 09 /09 /septembre /2013 16:50
The Implementation of the Common Security and Defence Policy - 10 July 2013

09-09-2013 SEDE

Please find below the proceedings of the Workshop on "The Implementation of the Common Security and Defence Policy" on 10 July 2013.

Partager cet article
4 septembre 2013 3 04 /09 /septembre /2013 07:50
EU Parliament Members Call for 'Rewrite' of Defense Priorities

Sep. 3, 2013 - by JULIAN HALE – Defense News


BRUSSELS — A group of center-right members of the European Parliament (MEPs) is calling for the European Union to define its security and defense priorities in the run-up to a key EU defense meeting in December.


In a joint policy paper made public here on Tuesday, the European People’s Party group coordinator in the European Parliament’s Subcommittee on Security and Defence, Michael Gahler of Germany, demanded a comprehensive defense review with the aim of pooling key procurement projects by EU member states. The paper also was signed by Subcommittee Chairman Arnaud Danjean of France and Vice Chairman Krzysztof Lisek of Poland.


Among a slew of proposals, the paper calls for EU heads of state to commit themselves to launching the preparation of an EU White Book on Security and Defence in defining the union’s security interests, prioritizing its strategic objectives and linking these with operational deployments.


“A European white book is the No. 1 priority to allow capability and defense planning processes. It would amount to a rewrite of the European security strategy, including the EU member states that joined the EU in 2004,” said Martin Michelot, a research and program officer at the German Marshall Fund think tank in Paris. The countries that joined the EU in 2004 include the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Malta and Cyprus.


France is keen on it, he added, as are the 2004 EU entrants because the strategy was written without their strategic priorities in mind.


“The European security strategy needs to be revised before there can be any agreement on European defense planning processes,” he said.


Although Michelot said he does not expect a consensus at the December summit on the need to have a white book, he argued that a European defense planning process is needed and that there should be incentives, whether positive or negative, for EU countries to report their defense planning processes in Brussels.


“The best thing to come out of the summit would be a compromise to revise the European security strategy,” he said. “EU heads of state need to recognize the EU as a security provider, and not as a security consumer.


“There are a lot of emerging security challenges for Europe that the US is no longer willing to shoulder alone,” Michelot said. “European strategic independence is required if the EU wants to preserve its autonomy in the current strategic context.”


One passage in the paper hints at the possibility, raised before, of a two-speed defense policy in which some EU countries go ahead without the others, known in the Brussels jargon as “permanent structured cooperation.”


“Despite continued initiatives and projects in the field of European capability developments, no real progress is visible,” Michelot said. “All loose ends of different capability development initiatives have to be put under one overarching umbrella.


“Therefore, it is high time that the heads of state and government activate the ‘permanent structured cooperation,’ ” he said. “Such activation should lead to a European defense review process and to the coordination of the national defense planning processes at EU level. From a European perspective, it is not efficient if member states cut defense budgets and reform their armed forces [while] unilaterally disregarding parallel efforts of European partners.


“France is willing to be the engine of European defense cooperation, but it needs others to follow it,” Michelot added.


Asked which countries might follow, he said, “The number one country is Poland, which is looking to sign a bilateral defense treaty with France; the number two is Germany; and then come the Scandinavian countries, which have shown willingness to support French operations. The UK has stronger affinities with NATO.”

Partager cet article
15 juin 2013 6 15 /06 /juin /2013 16:50
Le programme américain de surveillance électronique Prism était au coeur d'un débat en plénière ce mardi.

Le programme américain de surveillance électronique Prism était au coeur d'un débat en plénière ce mardi.

Ce week-end, le Guardian et le Washington Post ont révélé l'existence du projet américain de surveillance Prism. Les implications de ce projet pour la vie privée, la protection des données et la collaboration de sécurité UE-USA ont été débattues en plénière mardi. La plupart des intervenants ont fermement condamné le programme et ont été particulièrement critiques envers les promesses du Président Obama que seuls les non-américains sont ciblés, tout en soutenant la collaboration de sécurité.


Réaction de la Commission européenne


Le Commissaire Tonio Borg, chargé de la santé et de la politique des consommateurs, a parlé au nom de la Commission européenne. « Des programmes tels que le soi-disant Prism et les lois sur base desquelles ces programmes sont autorisés mettent potentiellement en danger le droit fondamental à la vie privée et à la protection des données des citoyens européens», a-t-il déclaré.


Tonio Borg a ajouté que la Commission européenne soulèvera la lors de la réunion ministérielle UE-USA qui se tiendra vendredi à Dublin, soulignant que dans une démocratie, les organismes d’application de la loi devraient suivre les règles.


Réactions des groupes politiques


«Mes données m’appartiennent, c’est la pierre angulaire de la pensée européenne sur la protection des données», a déclaré le député démocrate chrétien allemand Manfred Weber, Vice-président du PPE. «Même s’il est totalement inacceptable que les Etats-Unis aient des lois différentes pour les citoyens américains et les citoyens d’autres pays, nous réaffirmons haut et fort notre partenariat. L’approche américaine n’est pas notre approche, mais nous travaillons ensemble en tant que partenaires » a-t-il ajouté.


Le député démocrate socialiste britannique Claude Moraes a parlé «d’une violation majeure de la confiance, non conforme avec la loi sur la protection des données dans l’Union européenne», avertissant que « l’équilibre vital entre la sécurité et la nécessité de protéger les données doit être préservé». «La confiance a clairement été rompue. Nous devons garantir que le traitement des données des citoyens européens par les autorités publiques américaines est fait selon nos normes», a-t-il ajouté.


«Nous décevons les citoyens européens et nous devrions avoir honte» a déclaré la députée démocrate libérale néerlandaise Sophie In ‘t Veld, critiquant la Commission européenne et le « double discours » des Etats membres. «Obama a déclaré à ses citoyens : ‘Ne vous inquiétez pas, nous ne vous espionnons pas en tant que citoyens, nous n’espionnons que les étrangers’ mais ça, c’est nous. Quel genre de relation spécifique est-ce donc ?», a-t-elle ajouté.


« Il ne s’agit pas seulement de la protection des données, mais aussi de la démocratie et de la primauté du droit, qui ne peut être conforme avec la surveillance massive des citoyens à travers le monde», c’est ce qu’a déclaré le député vert allemand Jan Philipp Albrecht, également en charge du rapport sur la nouvelle régulation de protection des données. « Je voudrais trouver un accord avec les Etats-Unis sur des normes, mais nous avons besoin de changements législatifs de l’autre côté de l’Atlantique aussi», a-t-il déclaré.


«Les entreprises dénoncées ont jusqu’à présent nié avoir agit en dehors de la loi… Pourtant, nous sommes là à pointer du doigt, certains d’entre vous tenant déjà un discours anti américain ou anti commission», a déclaré le député anglais Timothy Kirkhope, membre du groupe des Conservateurs et Réformistes européens.


Le député slovaque Jaroslav Paska, membre du groupe Europe libertés démocratie, explique : « Nous devons adopter les mêmes sanctions contre ces entreprises que celles qu’on applique aux autres entreprises qui violent nos lois. Le comportement paranoïaque de nos partenaires américains est regrettable ».


La députée française Marie-Christine Vergiat, membre du groupe confédéral de la Gauche unitaire européenne et de la Gauche verte nordique, a expliqué que le souci principal est que « les citoyens européens ne bénéficient pas des mêmes droits que les citoyens américains.

Partager cet article
12 juin 2013 3 12 /06 /juin /2013 11:50
Draft agenda - 19 June 2013 - Subcommittee on Security and Defence

12.06.2013 Source : © European Union, 2013 - EP


1. Adoption of agenda


2. Approval of minutes of meeting of:

24-25 April 2013 PV – PE510.500v01-00

16 May 2013 PV – PE510.826v01-00


3.  Chair’s announcements

With the Council and Commission and EEAS


4. The European Defence Technological and Industrial Base

Rapporteur: Michael Gahler (PPE)

· Exchange of views


5. Academic reflections on the White Book on EU Security and Defence

Exchange of views with:

- Pr. Irnerio Seminatore, President, "Institut Européen des Relations Internationales" (IERI)

- General Eric Dell'Aria

- Ambassador Pierre Morel

- Ambassador Joachim Bitterlich

- Daniel Keohane, Head of Strategic Affairs, European Think Tank for Global Action (FRIDE)


6. Cybersecurity Strategy of the European Union: an open, safe and secure cyberspace

Partager cet article
11 juin 2013 2 11 /06 /juin /2013 18:50
Exchange of Views with SEDE Members
Brussels | Jun 10, 2013 European Defence Agency
Claude-France Arnould, Chief Executive of the European Defence Agency and General Jean-Paul Paloméros, Supreme Allied Commander Transformation, NATO were invited to jointly brief the members of the European Parliament’s security and defence subcommittee on 3 June. 

In her introduction, Claude-France Arnould stressed the need for greater effectiveness of defence cooperation in the context of defence budget cuts. She specified that investment in Research & Development, attention to security of supply and increased synergies between community and defence policies were crucial. Claude-France Arnould also mentioned some of the Agency’s Pooling & Sharing initiatives which successfully close European defence capability gaps in areas such as air-to-air refuelling, governmental satellite communications and traffic insertion of remotely piloted aircraft systems. General Paloméros stressed the strategic ties between EDA and NATO SACT in improving defence capabilities; key areas of common interest were air-to-air refuelling and future solutions for remotely piloted aircraft systems. He also insisted that Europe needed to increasingly become a security provider rather than just a security user.

Members of the European Parliament were in the following exchange of views interested in the state of preparation for the upcoming European Council dealing with defence topics; Arnaud Danjean, chairman of the subcommittee, highlighted the importance of Pooling & Sharing and showed concern for the involvement of all Member States in cooperative programmes and the full commitment of Member States to defence cooperation. 


More information:

Claude-France Arnould, directeur de l'AED et Le général Palomeros, NATO SACT reçus en sous-commission Sécurité et Défense EP - source AD

Claude-France Arnould, directeur de l'AED et Le général Palomeros, NATO SACT reçus en sous-commission Sécurité et Défense EP - source AD

Partager cet article
7 mai 2013 2 07 /05 /mai /2013 18:50
Draft agenda - 16 May 2013 - Subcommittee on Security and Defence


Meeting Thursday 16 May 2013, 10.00 – 13.00

Brussels - Room: Altiero Spinelli (1G-2)

1.         Adoption of agenda

2.         Chair’s announcements


With the Council and Commission and EEAS

Jointly with the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Development

3.         Exchange of views with Dioncounda TRAORÉ, Interim President of Mali

* * *

Jointly with the Committee on Foreign Affairs

4.         Presentation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs' and the Subcommittee on Security and Defence's study on the positions of Russia and China in the UN Security Council in the light of recent crisis

* * *

5.         EU's military structures: state of play and future prospects




Marietta Giannakou (PPE)

PR – PE506.335v01-00
AM – PE508.239v01-00



  • Further consideration of draft report
  • Consideration of amendments

6.         Any other business

7.         Next meeting(s)

  • 20 May 2013, 19.15 – 20.45 (Strasbourg)
Partager cet article
15 janvier 2013 2 15 /01 /janvier /2013 13:50




The SEDE subcommittee will exchange views on the future options for improved European defence capabilities in the EU and NATO with General Klaus Naumann, former Chairman of the NATO Military Committee.
When : 23 January 2013, 15:00-16:30         

Further information  meeting documents
Partager cet article
15 novembre 2011 2 15 /11 /novembre /2011 08:35
Afghanistan : on dépense sans compter


14 novembre 2011 par Nicolas Gros-Verheyde (BRUXELLES2)


L’Afghanistan = 2 milliards d’euros depuis 2002


L’aide versée à l’Afghanistan par l’Union européenne n’est, en effet, pas négligeable. Le pays fait même partie des principaux bénéficiaires de l’aide civile au titre du budget européen : plus de 2 milliards d’euros ont ainsi été engagés et plus de 1,8 milliard d’euros déjà versés depuis 2002 au titre de l’aide au développement et d’aide humanitaire. Le problème est que ces fonds sont, dans une large mesure, acheminés par des organisations des Nations unies. Or, celles-ci jusqu’à peu étaient plutôt réticentes à la communication.


Peu de contrôle, peu d’audit, ou alors peu accessible


Ce n’est que récemment que quelques agences de l’ONU ont décidé d’octroyer l’accès de ces rapports d’audit interne aux institutions de l’Union européenne, mais seulement dans les locaux des agences. « ce qui complique toute tentative de les utiliser correctement », souligne le rapporteur Jens Geier (socio-démocrate allemand).


La commission parlementaire s’est montrée particulièrement préoccupée par l’absence d’indépendance du bureau afghan de contrôle et d’audit, qui est étroitement lié à l’administration afghane, ce qui entrave sérieusement l’octroi d’une aide budgétaire directe. « Le gouvernement américain a appris ses leçons à ses dépens. Aujourd’hui, après avoir mis en place des systèmes de gestion et de contrôle dans certains ministères afghans, l’aide budgétaire directe commence à porter ses fruits », a déclaré le rapporteur. Pourquoi pas l’Europe, pourrait-on dire.


Des conditions sévères requises


La commission parlementaire appelle la Commission européenne à fixer des conditions rigoureuses et clairement définies ainsi que des objectifs clairs et mesurables, pour le versement de l’appui budgétaire. « Un soutien budgétaire direct permettrait au gouvernement de la République islamique d’Afghanistan de se doter des capacités à long terme dont il a besoin d’urgence », plaide le rapporteur.


Quant à aller vérifier sur place comment l’argent est dépensé, c’est une illusion… On doit donc croire sur parole que tout a été bien dépensé. Ce qui est tout le dilemme de l’engagement international en Afghanistan : continuer de donner pour soutenir le pouvoir, quitte à avoir une déperdition (plus ou moins importante), aller vérifier sur place (au risque de la vie) ou cesser les financements.


(*) ce rapport devrait être débattu et voté à la session plénière en décembre

Partager cet article


  • : RP Defense
  • : Web review defence industry - Revue du web industrie de défense - company information - news in France, Europe and elsewhere ...
  • Contact


Articles Récents