Wing Commander Christopher Luck MBE MA RAF
Deputy Director, Strategy & War,
Department of International Security & Military Studies,
USAF Air Command & Staff College,
Maxwell AFB
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, 1780-1831, from ‘On War’
Another way of looking at it …
Grand
Strategy
Ways
Ends
National
Objectives
Means
Diplomacy
Information
Military
Economic
THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A DISCUSSION
DISCLAIMER
My Views, not those of my Service
or Government
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
The Historical Drivers for the
EU
Violence
Another Quote…
"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 1802-85
"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".
"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".
"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".
"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".
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
“…a united states of Europe...”
The EU today
…and how does it work?
Paris – 1951
Rome – 1957
France
Germany
Italy
Belgium
Netherlands
Luxembourg
European
Council
1974
United Kingdom
Ireland
Denmark
Greece
Common
currency
€
Spain
Portugal
Maastricht - 1992
(East Germany)
€ launched
2002
Sweden
Finland
Austria
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
Estonia
Latvia
Lithuania
Poland
Czech Rep
Slovakia
Hungary
Slovenia
Cyprus
Malta
Future
Croatia
Rumania
Bulgaria
Turkey
Level of integration
KEY DATES & HISTORIC STEPS
States delegate parts of national
sovereignty to shared institutions
Constitution
‘The Euro’
ESDP 1999 – security policy
Maastricht 1992 - integration
Rome 1957 – beginnings of EEC
Paris 1951 – coal/steel community
Churchill 1946
Time
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
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 1977
1986 (2/17 Luxembourg and 2/28 Hague )
The Single European Act. This paves the way for creating the single market by 1993
1990 (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
EU-US Data
EU
Area, 1,000 Square Miles
US
1,537
3,718
Population (Millions)
455
291
Population Density/Square Mile
296
75
Unemployment Rate %
9.1
5.6
12767
10881
Inflation (GDP Price Deflator %)
1.9
2.3
Defense expenditure (Billions $)
174
383
Development aid (Billions $)
36
12
Total active duty personnel (Millions)
1.6
1.4
Gross Domestic Product (Billions $)
FY2003
“If I want to talk to Europe,
who do I phone?“
Henry Kissinger 1970s
EU Council
Pre-Constitution
Javier Solana
Council
Council of
of Ministers
Ministers
Constitution Ratified
2 ½ year President
Commission
Executive
Judiciary
Court of Justice
Legislative
Parliament
BACKGROUND SUMMARY
• Peace & stability based
• European regeneration
• Organization of sovereign states
– Confederation
– Increasing integration
• “How deep a Union?”
• Constitution
EU - USA
Same, but different
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)
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
KEY THREATS
• Threats
– Terrorism
– Proliferation of WMD
– Regional Conflicts
– State Failure
– Organized Crime
Perception & Approach
different than
in USA
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
PERCEPTION GAP
• EU does not consider
itself at war
• USA considers itself
at war
– “Europe has never
been so prosperous,
so secure nor so free”
• Europe old
Vulnerability
• New US Vulnerability
– Terrorism already in
70s
Source: vanHerpen, Six Dimensions of Growing Transatlantic Divide
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
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
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)
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
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
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?
EU’s FUTURE AND THE
IMPACT ON THE USA
An EU drifting apart
or
An EU more unified
DISINTEGRATING EU
• Constitution fails and the EU will gradually
disintegrate.
• Consequences
– Diplomatic
– Informational
– Military
– Economic
DIPLOMATIC CONSEQUENCES
Multiple actors vs One EU
INFORMATIONAL CONSEQUENCES
• No strong actor with long experience in
world affairs.
European influence 1938
INFORMATIONAL CONSEQUENCES
• Loss of soft power around the globe
• Slows spreading of common values
MILITARY CONSEQUENCES
• Weaker NATO alliance
– Incapacity to support US in global ops
– Technology gap
• Lack of will to commit national forces to
global operations
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
INTERDEPENDENT WORLD
Historical GDP growth per capita
30,000
25,000
20,000
$ / capita
Western Europe
15,000
Australia
United States
10,000
China
Japan
5,000
0
1
1908
1918
1928
1938
1948
1958
1968
1978
1988
1998
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
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
UNIFICATION THROUGH THE EU CONSTITUTION
• 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.
EEC Signing Ceremony, Rome 1957
• Less bureaucratic due to
common agreements.
• EU expansion will enhance the
level of integration
EU Meet, Rome October 2004
source: http://www.epp-ed.org/Press/photogallery/
CFSP AND ESDP
ENHANCE SECURITY POLITICS
•
•
•
•
•
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.
source: http://www.epp-ed.org/Press/photogallery/
THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF EUROPE –
THE DIME
“…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 –
DIPLOMATIC
• 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: http://www.epp-ed.org/Press/photogallery/
THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF EUROPE –
INFORMATION
• Strong soft power around the globe.
• Cultural experience in world affairs.
• Common future IO standards.
Galileo GPS
THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF EUROPE –
MILITARY
• ESDP will shape, equip, and train coalition forces over the full
spectrum of operational needs.
TIGER
NH 90 EUROCOPTER
EUROFIGHTER
AIRBUS 400 M
THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF EUROPE –
MILITARY
• Employs and if necessary leads coalition operations abroad
Operation ARTEMIS
Operation CONCORDIA
source: http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/europe/
THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF
EUROPE – ECONOMIC
• Prosperity and Stability through
common shared open markets.
• Multiple Markets enhance global
competition and stability.
George C. Marshall
• Competition towards US
necessary.
Konrad Adenauer and Charles de Gaulle
EU SECURITY AND DEFENSE
PERSPECTIVES AND US INTERESTS
• 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
• 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
THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF EUROPE –
CONCLUSION
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
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSION
• Peace and security wanted - economic cooperation was
the first step. It has kept the peace.
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”
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
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?
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
“When I first mentioned I might be traveling in France and Germany it
raised some eyebrows.
One wag said it ought to be an interesting trip after all that has been said.
'Oh, that was the old Rumsfeld’ ”
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)
THOUGHTS TO PONDER
1.
2.
Ratification of Constitution
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
QUESTIONS?