European Army
I’ve heard about the EU carrier.
The Bulgarians are supplying the steel, the Italians are taking Friday off to build it and the French will design it, alongside the Latvians. The Dutch will write the ROE, and the Slovakians will design the galley, and the flight deck will be operated by both the Austrians and Luxembourg.
Romanians will do the budget and accounting, Spain and Portugal and Greece will jointly design the bunks. Hungary will map out the force protection elements and a mixed group of Germans, French and Maltese manufacturers will design the aircraft.
The USE Bismark is expected to enter service in 2029
The Bulgarians are supplying the steel, the Italians are taking Friday off to build it and the French will design it, alongside the Latvians. The Dutch will write the ROE, and the Slovakians will design the galley, and the flight deck will be operated by both the Austrians and Luxembourg.
Romanians will do the budget and accounting, Spain and Portugal and Greece will jointly design the bunks. Hungary will map out the force protection elements and a mixed group of Germans, French and Maltese manufacturers will design the aircraft.
The USE Bismark is expected to enter service in 2029
The Bulgarians are supplying the steel, the Italians are taking Friday off to build it and the French will design it, alongside the Latvians. The Dutch will write the ROE, and the Slovakians will design the galley, and the flight deck will be operated by both the Austrians and Luxembourg.
Romanians will do the budget and accounting, Spain and Portugal and Greece will jointly design the bunks. Hungary will map out the force protection elements and a mixed group of Germans, French and Maltese manufacturers will design the aircraft.
Romanians will do the budget and accounting, Spain and Portugal and Greece will jointly design the bunks. Hungary will map out the force protection elements and a mixed group of Germans, French and Maltese manufacturers will design the aircraft.
melmothtw:-
No doubt, if we're still trapped in the EU while having endless Peoples Votes....
and the British will moan about it.
No doubt, if we're still trapped in the EU while having endless Peoples Votes....
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK on a crosswind
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With a Brexit crash out as may now be possible, the real negotiations will begin the next day as the EU spurred by all the German-French major manufacturers. Then it will become interesting as reality sets in on both sides. As far as the EU Army-Navy-Air Force is concerned, we are best off out of it. Personally I think we would be better off out of NATO too.
Federica being an Italian communist of course..
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-m...t-involvement/UK, US could take part in EU military projects under draft plan
A post-Brexit U.K. and the United States could take part in projects under the EU's new military pact while leaving China — and possibly Turkey — on the outside, according to a new draft proposal.
The draft, seen by POLITICO, was put forward by the Finnish presidency of the Council of the EU and is on the provisional agenda of a meeting of EU ambassadors on Wednesday. The document appears intended to respond to EU members with close military ties to the U.K. and U.S., who want to see those countries involved in projects, while also addressing concerns from other members anxious to exclude others including China and Turkey.
The five-page document proposes that a non-member of the EU's military pact, known as Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), could be invited to take part in a project on condition that “it shares the values on which the EU is founded” — referring to an article in the Treaty on European Union that spells out values such as the respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights.
In May, Washington wrote to the EU expressing concerns that PESCO risks shutting American companies out of defense contracts and undermining NATO. The latter argument has always been rejected by PESCO's leading advocates, such as France and Germany, who contend that the pact is complementary to NATO rather than a rival.
According to a diplomat taking part in the discussions, it's unclear whether the language in the draft would be enough to stop Turkey from taking part — a key concern of EU member Cyprus, in particular — but it should be sufficient to keep out China. The draft spells out many other conditions for a so-called third state to take part in a PESCO project, including that “its participation must not lead to dependencies on that third state.”
To take part, the third state would have to submit a request to a country in charge of one of the 34 PESCO projects launched so far. The country would also need to secure unanimity from all the governments involved in the project.
The document also sets out conditions that would allow the participation of the third country to be "reassessed.” If one or more EU members consider that the country no longer meets the conditions for participation, they can refer the issue to the Council. The third country “may also be heard” and the member states concerned along with the EU's high representative for foreign and security policy will “seek adequate solutions within a period of two months,” the draft says........ (more)
A post-Brexit U.K. and the United States could take part in projects under the EU's new military pact while leaving China — and possibly Turkey — on the outside, according to a new draft proposal.
The draft, seen by POLITICO, was put forward by the Finnish presidency of the Council of the EU and is on the provisional agenda of a meeting of EU ambassadors on Wednesday. The document appears intended to respond to EU members with close military ties to the U.K. and U.S., who want to see those countries involved in projects, while also addressing concerns from other members anxious to exclude others including China and Turkey.
The five-page document proposes that a non-member of the EU's military pact, known as Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), could be invited to take part in a project on condition that “it shares the values on which the EU is founded” — referring to an article in the Treaty on European Union that spells out values such as the respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights.
In May, Washington wrote to the EU expressing concerns that PESCO risks shutting American companies out of defense contracts and undermining NATO. The latter argument has always been rejected by PESCO's leading advocates, such as France and Germany, who contend that the pact is complementary to NATO rather than a rival.
According to a diplomat taking part in the discussions, it's unclear whether the language in the draft would be enough to stop Turkey from taking part — a key concern of EU member Cyprus, in particular — but it should be sufficient to keep out China. The draft spells out many other conditions for a so-called third state to take part in a PESCO project, including that “its participation must not lead to dependencies on that third state.”
To take part, the third state would have to submit a request to a country in charge of one of the 34 PESCO projects launched so far. The country would also need to secure unanimity from all the governments involved in the project.
The document also sets out conditions that would allow the participation of the third country to be "reassessed.” If one or more EU members consider that the country no longer meets the conditions for participation, they can refer the issue to the Council. The third country “may also be heard” and the member states concerned along with the EU's high representative for foreign and security policy will “seek adequate solutions within a period of two months,” the draft says........ (more)
Why would an organisation founded on "the respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law, and respect for human rights" need an Army? To defend itself from outside threats? It already has that in the form of NATO, for which it has a thinly disguised contempt. To defend itself from internal insurrection? Far more likely, and if the UK and USA have any sense they won't have any part in it.
Union Armies are there for one principal reason, to protect and defend the Union against threats from within. I imagine we will be seeing an ever increasing number of those arising as Le Grand Projet moves inexorably onwards to an ever closer unity.
Union Armies are there for one principal reason, to protect and defend the Union against threats from within. I imagine we will be seeing an ever increasing number of those arising as Le Grand Projet moves inexorably onwards to an ever closer unity.
Don't be silly, Chugalug. The EU does not have "contempt" for NATO - the EU exists as a collective of 28 member nations,. many of which are members of NATO. So for your premise to hold any water, the EU would have to have contempt for itself.
You would include the UK army in that then?
Union Armies are there for one principal reason, to protect and defend the Union against threats from within.
Don't be silly, Chugalug. The EU does not have "contempt" for NATO - the EU exists as a collective of 28 member nations,. many of which are members of NATO. So for your premise to hold any water, the EU would have to have contempt for itself.
You would include the UK army in that then?
You would include the UK army in that then?
What the present UK Govt plans are for the British Army wrt to the EU may well change after the dust has settled over Brexit, never mind following the upcoming election. We live in interesting times! As for our own Union, may I recommend a study of the history of its formation and the aftermath?
If the EU 28 collectively take responsibility for their own security they are damned for 'raising an army'. If they don't and leave it up to the Americans they are damned for not pulling their weight. Can't really win either way.
You don't have to recommend any studies for me, thanks.
You don't have to recommend any studies for me, thanks.
If the EU 28 collectively take responsibility for their own security they are damned for 'raising an army'. If they don't and leave it up to the Americans they are damned for not pulling their weight. Can't really win either way.
You don't have to recommend any studies for me, thanks.
You don't have to recommend any studies for me, thanks.
Everyone should study and learn from History. When they don't they tend to be faced by unexpected consequences...
Partial quote from the article Orac has posted.
What was truly meant was that Germany nor Europe want to spend the money to effectively defend themselves. NATO is an anachronism of a time past and some fundamental restructuring is needed. If Germany/Europe wanted to, they could effectively manage any threat to Europe, it’s just easier to rely on the hired gun instead.
“undermine NATO,” adding that neither Germany nor Europe would be able to effectively defend themselves without the support of the U.S.
