FOR AN EU ARMY

AGAINST AN EU ARMY

1. DETERRENCE

If you want peace, prepare for war. It seems paradoxical but, in an increasingly turbulent and volatile world, building up an independent and effective defence capability is the best way to discourage conflict.

1. LOSS OF SOVEREIGNTY

EU countries have different priorities and ideas about what is worth fighting for. The interests of larger Member States are likely to be given more priority than those of smaller states, giving too much power to larger countries such as France and Germany

2. COST-SAVING

Under the current system, countries waste resources by having parallel structures, equipment and bureaucracies with allied EU nations. Combined, the EU’s military spending will go much further.

2. UNDERMINES NATO

NATO has kept Europe peaceful since 1945. The EU has benefited from NATO membership in a number of ways which are often unmeasurable because of the counterfactual savings resulting from decades of relative stability. Distancing the EU from the US would also mean losing benefits of research sharing and cooperation.

3. SELF-SUFFICIENCY

In the 1960s, Charles de Gaulle pulled France partially out of NATO. He argued that the United States was too dominant within the organisation, and believed France should position itself as a counterweight to US power globally. US interests do not always align with European interests, and an EU with a more independent military capability could help balance a multipolar world.

3. INDECISIVENESS

All EU nations would have to have a say on military decisions such as whether or not to go to war. This takes time which is often not possible in situations which require responsive policy making. The many layers of bureaucracy within the EU make it a bad forum for military policy.

IMAGE CREDITS: (cc) Flickr – European Parliament