Nato and Europe a gradual split?

**cyppok** · 18 Nov 12,, 12:41

I wrote on this a while ago a few years perhaps. That sooner or later there would be signs of Europe trying to ascertain more geopolitical weight on its' own and thus would try to go native on its' own military alliance.

It does seem that it will be very slow in coming but you can see the horizon a bit.

from this year
EUobserver.com / Defence / Five EU countries call for new military 'structure'

Five EU countries call for new military 'structure'
16.11.12 @ 09:26

BRUSSELS - Five leading EU countries, but not the UK, have said the Union needs a new military "structure" to manage overseas operations.

The foreign and defence ministers of France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain issued the call in a joint communique after a meeting in Paris on Thursday (15 November).

The paper says: "We are convinced that the EU must set up, within a framework yet to-be-defined, true civilian-military structures to plan and conduct missions and operations."

It adds: "We should show preparedness to hold available, train, deploy and sustain in theatre the necessary civilian and military means."

The reference to new "civilian-military structures" comes after the UK last year blocked the creation of a new operational headquarters (OHQ) in Brussels for EU military missions.

Britain's Telegraph newspaper earlier this week cited a "senior French source" as saying that EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton supports the idea of an OHQ, which will become a "ripe fruit" in the "long-term" as EU military operations multiply.

I found this a bit 'revanchist', especially if you consider the "Sometimes we must use force to back our diplomacy" line, very acute. My feeling is that if the elections in Ukraine don't go the way we like we should be able to force change via military means. Perhaps he thought about other things as well.

For his part, Polish foreign minister Radek Sikorski said: "If the EU wants to become a superpower, and Poland supports this, then we must have the capability to exert influence in our neighbourhood ... Sometimes we must use force to back our diplomacy."

He called for an "ambitious" EU budget for 2014 to 2020 to help with defence co-ordination.

Speaking in a separate interview in UK newspaper The Times also on Thursday, Sikorski blamed British "nostalgia" for past greatness as a reason why it is pulling back from EU integration and why it wants to cut the EU budget.

He touched on historic sensitivities by describing EU spending as a kind of "Marshall plan."

He said Poland and other former-Soviet-controlled EU countries missed out on the plan - a massive injection of US money to rebuild Europe after World War II - because UK and US leaders at a summit in Yalta in 1945 gave the Soviet Union control of eastern Europe.

"We fought Hitler alone, giving you [the UK] valuable time to prepare for fighting. But we did not enjoy freedom after World War II ... Because of Yalta, we could not benefit [from the Marshall plan]. European cohesion funds are our Marshall plan for catching up with Europe," he noted.

from last year
'Big five' tell Baroness Ashton to bypass Britain over EU military HQ - Telegraph

If the EU cracks in my view Nato splits and we get a new geopolitical military alliance actor. Spain going through Gibraltars water territory, and Poland getting antsy, does not bode well.

I expect Norway to stay in Nato, same with Ireland and UK.
Curious what Sweden and Finland do as well.

My guess is first there will be political wrangling over whom dominates asset use agenda and then there is an open split and a new alliance seperates from the old one. However there is a possibility of simply Nato-Eu reorganizing along Countries+Block route ergo Eu countries in Nato can go into Eu while it would be the umbrella for them under Nato with others having a direct Nato subordination without joining Eu military.

**snapper** · 19 Nov 12,, 14:06

Depends if 'Europe' survives which is a moot point at present...

Quick note about 'Baroness' Ashton... who is she?

"Baroness Ashton was Treasurer for the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), 1980-1982.

CND was notoriously secretive about its sources of funding and did not submit its accounts to independent audit; however, after public pressure they were audited for the first time in 1982-1983 (Godfrey Lord & Co). It was found that 38% of their annual income (£176,197) could not be traced back to the original donors.

The person responsible for this part of CND fund-raising, from anonymous donors, was Will Howard, a member of the Communist Party of Great Britain.

The Russian dissident and internationally respected figure Vladimir Bukovsky, has shown from his research that the nuclear disarmament campaigns across Europe were largely funded by the Soviet bloc. Mr Bukovsky has proven with hundreds of top secret documents from Soviet archives that the worldwide disarmament campaign in the 1980s was covertly orchestrated from Moscow. The money was channelled through communist parties or other pro-Soviet organisations and individuals.

If therefore seems very likely that the unidentified income came from the Soviet bloc." UPDATE Baroness Ashtons suitability for EU's Foreign minister role challenged - Hotnews Mobile

The sad irony of it all is that is from a letter from an MEP to Manuel Barroso.... a former Maoist.

**Double Edge** · 19 Nov 12,, 14:21

Originally Posted by cyppok

I found this a bit 'revanchist', especially if you consider the "Sometimes we must use force to back our diplomacy" line, very acute. My feeling is that if the elections in Ukraine don't go the way we like we should be able to force change via military means. Perhaps he thought about other things as well.

Poland is upset about the election result in Ukraine ?

**cyppok** · 19 Nov 12,, 15:27

Originally Posted by Double Edge

Poland is upset about the election result in Ukraine ?

Centre for Eastern Studies

Possibly I do not know what the foreign minister referred to when he said about intervention to force diplomacy thing.
No clue which country he meant because Belarus has a mutual defense treaty with Russia so that would be WW3, that's why I figure its' Ukraine.

For his part, Polish foreign minister Radek Sikorski said: "If the EU wants to become a superpower, and Poland supports this, then we must have the capability to exert influence in our neighbourhood ... Sometimes we must use force to back our diplomacy."

That line is very disturbing if you think about it in Europe.

**Double Edge** · 19 Nov 12,, 15:55

'Our neighbourhood' could do with some more explanation. Any takers ?

**dave lukins** · 19 Nov 12,, 16:03

Radek Sikorski: "We fought Hitler alone, giving you [the UK] valuable time to prepare for fighting. But we did not enjoy freedom after World War II ... Because of Yalta, we could not benefit [from the Marshall plan]. European cohesion funds are our Marshall plan for catching up with Europe,"

I hope when WW3 starts Poland fights the enemy alone once again just to give us Brits time to leave the pub to get our guns as a month (about as long as they lasted) is far too long to prepare. Thanks Poland, for without your 'delaying tactic' we would have been in the cr*p.

**1979** · 19 Nov 12,, 18:02

Originally Posted by Double Edge

'Our neighbourhood' could do with some more explanation. Any takers ?

Kaliningrad.

**cyppok** · 20 Nov 12,, 04:32

Originally Posted by dave lukins

Radek Sikorski: "We fought Hitler alone, giving you [the UK] valuable time to prepare for fighting. But we did not enjoy freedom after World War II ... Because of Yalta, we could not benefit [from the Marshall plan]. European cohesion funds are our Marshall plan for catching up with Europe,"

I hope when WW3 starts Poland fights the enemy alone once again just to give us Brits time to leave the pub to get our guns as a month (about as long as they lasted) is far too long to prepare. Thanks Poland, for without your 'delaying tactic' we would have been in the cr*p.

You mean if they start WW3? since that is apparently the point once you go superpower you get to enforce your will by military means. Based on his perception.

Apparently only Poland existed in the East, no other countries mattered to win WW2, I seem to remember USSR being there but I am sure it has been edited out of the European history books.

**Rommel** · 04 Dec 12,, 00:15

you were spared! honestly the coin flipped and it was Russia instead of you. Hesitation stopped the Germans.Just run through Dunkirk facts for starters. I mean no disrespect to your heroes. I am not even from Poland. The Polish lasted to the end, my friend and won! They defended the British skies with their own lives. Ask RAF about it. Along with many more pilots from many other countries, along with your flying heroes ofcourse. Exagerated, not elegantly put but still the Polish has a true point. the Europeans have a point I dare to say, if we bring up the scale. Its about time to give up that ironic posh style of attitude.It will get you nowhere and I truly believe that the "team" will not be the same without you. Honestly. But you are not doing us any favour either. Other than that, kind and honest regards from Greece.

**Rommel** · 04 Dec 12,, 01:17

Gosh...the topic! Ehm, no they will not! The US has spent billions in NATO infrastructure, also lets not forget the US bases located in EU countries, Greece for example. You can form an EU military organization which if I am not wrong there is already. Something like "immediate response EU force". Nothing to be compared to NATO ofcourse. So the thing is we can do that yes but we can't withdraw from NATO or from US military influence to be more accurate (US base in Crete island,Greece). 30 years ago my country broke loose from NATO, not the US military grab though. Returned, to put it elegantly. France also was for many years out of the loop. Not anymore. So here goes the sovereignity of any EU attempt on this matter. I was stationed in NATO FOB Aktion, Greece. Fire Brigade Department, for nine months. What else can I say?

**Officer of Engineers** · 04 Dec 12,, 03:20

Who the fuck are you?

**USSWisconsin** · 04 Dec 12,, 05:07

Originally Posted by Rommel

Gosh...the topic! Ehm, no they will not! The US has spent billions in NATO infrastructure, also lets not forget the US bases located in EU countries, Greece for example. You can form an EU military organization which if I am not wrong there is already. Something like "immediate response EU force". Nothing to be compared to NATO ofcourse. So the thing is we can do that yes but we can't withdraw from NATO or from US military influence to be more accurate (US base in Crete island,Greece). 30 years ago my country broke loose from NATO, not the US military grab though. Returned, to put it elegantly. France also was for many years out of the loop. Not anymore. So here goes the sovereignity of any EU attempt on this matter. I was stationed in NATO FOB Aktion, Greece. Fire Brigade Department, for nine months. What else can I say?

It's customary here to introduce yourself before joining the discussion

Introduction Thread for All New Members

**Monash** · 04 Dec 12,, 06:11

Originally Posted by Rommel

you were spared! honestly the coin flipped and it was Russia instead of you. Hesitation stopped the Germans.

And here I was thinking the English Channel had something to do with it. Silly me.

**Rommel** · 04 Dec 12,, 09:55

Of course it had something to do with it. Picking Russia and Nothern Africa as "playgrounds" and the sad action of bombing cities like Nottingham and London instead of delivering the coupe de grace to a heroic but short on everything RAF had something more to do with it. Thats my point. I m not German friendly. Dont get my alias wrong.

**Rommel** · 04 Dec 12,, 10:01

Customary or compulsory sir? My will to contribute positively to this forum, my posts and my advanced apologies for my poor English as it is not my mother language is all you need to know until I feel like otherwise. That goes for you "Officer of Engineers", fuck you too sir and have a good day, night, whatever.