Amjad Bashir: EU army ambitions still armed and dangerous

IT is one of the European Union fanatics' favourite myths, repeated so often and with such blind faith that it usually goes unchallenged.
Jean-Claude Juncker's vision for a European Army should be quashed, says MEP Amjad Bashir.Jean-Claude Juncker's vision for a European Army should be quashed, says MEP Amjad Bashir.
Jean-Claude Juncker's vision for a European Army should be quashed, says MEP Amjad Bashir.

They tell us the EU has delivered 50 years of peace in Europe. Along with free movement and the single currency, it is one of the main articles of faith in the Brussels Creed.

Just like the myth that Greece had an economy fit to join the euro, it does not withstand much scrutiny.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Granted, the formation of the European Coal and Steel Trading Community and then the European Economic Community did help heal the wounds of the Second World War, particularly between France and Germany. But in truth that was quickly done. And it is sadly typical of the EU’s sclerosis that, all these years later, it continues to proclaim a raison d’etre that passed its sell-by date before the Betamax video (children, ask your parents).

As my MEP colleague Syed Kamall says, the EU’s elite remain obsessed with looking back to the long-solved problems of the 1950s instead of forward to the challenges of 2050s.

As well as a problem with its premise (try telling people in Kosovo, Mostar or even Belfast they just enjoyed half a century of peace), the 50-year claim muddles cause and effect. The EU of today may be the product of a period of relative calm, but cannot by any stretch claim to be the cause.

That honour truly belongs with Nato. For it is the deterrent provided by the strong arm of the United States – and her global allies – which must claim overwhelming credit for keeping us safe and free. And that is why we should all watch carefully and with concern what Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has to say in his so-called “State of the Union” speech to the Parliament in Strasbourg today.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

If some of the curtain-raiser articles are correct he will use the speech to revive the long-held ambitions of the Brussels ruling class to create a European Army, with its own headquarters and its own command and control structure.

According to the reports, he will cite the creation of an EU military capability as prime example of how the EU can redefine and redirect itself, to rediscover its sense of purpose in response to Britain’s decision to leave.

In truth it has been British Conservatives who have done most to stop this long-cherished federalist dream becoming a reality already.

Every time it has surfaced in its various forms, we have successfully batted it back down. At the last resort, our veto at summits has always been there as a back stop, though never used – our own form of military deterrent, you might say.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

It has, however, remained a gleam in the eye of those bent on creating a United states of Europe, and Juncker’s none-too-subtle message may be this: now the bolshy Brits are out of the way we can finally get on with it.

Now some might say that is far enough. We should stop complaining and let them get on with it. But there are good reasons why not.

Firstly, it is not only a duplication but a confusing distraction. The real load of deterring our enemies will continue to be borne by Nato, with the US as lynchpin.

The total defence budget of all 28 EU nations last year was a modest $230bn. That falls to only $170bn if you remove the UK’s share. It stands rather feebly beside Nato’s $950bn plus, of which about $650bn is down to the US. A popgun alongside heavy artillery.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The second problem is motive. Whatever public rationale they may offer, the true attraction to the Junckers of this world is that a military arm would give the EU yet another of the trappings of statehood they crave so much – along with their flag, their anthem and their costly diplomatic corps. The grandiose label of “State of the Union”, appropriated from Washington, bears witness to this ambition.

Finally, creating an EU military would create confusion and, worse still, could even undermine Nato. The current relationships and lines of responsibility are quite clear and well-tested. An EU armed capability however modest, given its own command and control network, would inevitably cut across Nato’s.

The result at best would be unnecessary duplication and lack of clarity, at worst conflicting responsibilities, rivalry and and an erosion of Nato’s own military muscle.

Just what our enemies would want. Just what we must guard against.

Amjad Bashir is Conservative MEP for Yorkshire and the Humber.

Related topics: