Assoc. Prof. Grzegorz Sobolewski
1
Dr Dariusz Majchrzak
2
National Defence University Warsaw
Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP)
-
Is the EU ready to take
action?
Speaking with one voice
We can observe that the European Union (EU) is seeking a way to consolidate
actions in order to speak with one voice about the international environment and the
European (territorial) security. History shows that the idea of integration with the purpose
of creating common possibilities for protection is nothing new. In 1950, a French politician
R. Pleven presented a project of European Defense Community (EDC), which assumed to
create a common security system, i.e. the European army. In August 1954, the
supranational project failed to gain support from the majority of the French National
Assembly.
In the early 90-ties, the Western European Union (WEU) decided to strengthen its
activities in the area of external policy and security. The main reason was provided by the
changing (rebuilding) world order and collapse of the bipolar balance of power between
the West and the East. The new processes have had great influence on the appearance of
new types of threats such as asymmetric conflicts, including terrorism, uncontrolled mass
destruction weapons proliferation, organized crime or unstable uncontrolled countries.
Redefining the role of NATO proved very important. It found its expression in Maastricht
Treaty of 1992, which was the act establishing the European Union (EU). The treaty
introduced Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), where all the EU states
expressed their will to reinforce national civil and military potentials to take action in the
future areas of possible crisis operations.
In the following years the EU developed possibilities to integrate foreign and security
policies of the member nations. In the early nineties, the EU requested of the WEU to
1
Deputy Dean of National Security Faculty of National Defence Academy.
2
Manager of Crisis Management Branch in State Security Institut NDU.
2
become its military arm in the security policy. It was the next step which realized the need
for new mechanisms of cooperation between the EU states in order to increase their role in
the European zone of safety as the substitution for the United States. In June 1992, at the
meeting of the WEU Council at the Petersberg Hotel near Bonn, Germany, the Member
States agreed to deploy their troops and resources from across the whole military spectrum
under the authority of the WEU. The so-called “Petersberg Tasks” declaration was signed,
which empowered military units to carry out a great range of military operations:
•
humanitarian and rescue tasks;
•
peacekeeping tasks;
•
tasks of combat forces in crisis management, including peacemaking.
The Treaty of Amsterdam, signed in 1997, included “Petersberg Tasks” as a part of
the EU security policy. In addition, the document included articles declaring the protection
of common values, independence and integrity of the EU while fully respecting the UN
Charter.
In further integration of the security area, the EU decided to strengthen military
cooperation. The member states wanted to gain independent defense possibilities in an
attempt to build conditions for military dimension of the EU. This idea was discussed at
the EU Council in Cologne in June 1999, where the Member States decided that the EU
should be able to conduct military operations together or without NATO. There were also
created political and military structures, but the turning point in establishing the EU
security policy was the EU Council meeting held in Helsinki in December 1999, where the
European Headline Goal – EHG was adopted and a new element, the European Security
Defense Policy (ESDP) was introduced enabling the EU to take action of both political and
military nature on the grounds of the “Petersberg Tasks”. The political and military
structures were redefined (Political Security Council - PSC, Military Committee - MC,
European Union Military Staff - EUMS).
The Treaty of Nice, which was signed in 2001, introduced important changes to
ESDP. All the connections with WEU were eliminated, giving the EU the responsibility
for development of operational capabilities. The role of the Secretary-General of the EU
and High Representative of CFSP has been strengthened. The Treaty of Nice provides
greater possibilities for cooperation within the EU, but not in the military and defense
fields.
We could list much more initiatives in connection with ESDP. It will be enough to
mention the European Security Strategy of 2003 or Headline Goal of 2010 from 2004,
3
where the European Council decided to build capabilities in the area of crisis response
military operations, by building the EU battle groups. In recent years, the EU has been
moving towards further integration. It was introduced by the Lisbon Treaty, 2007
3
which
extended powers of the EU to take actions within foreign policy and Common Security
Defense Policy (CSDP) instead of ESDP. (Figure 1)
Figure 1 Develop of CSDP
Source: authors’ elaboration
3
The Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European
Community was signed in Lisbon on 13 December 2007 by representatives of 27 Member States. As
provided in Article. 6 of the Treaty of Lisbon, this document was ratified by the Member States in
accordance with their respective constitutional requirements. It was assumed that the Treaty enters into force
on 1 January 2009, if by that time all the instruments of ratification will be made. The procedure of
ratification was protracted and was completed in November 2009. Thus, the Treaty entered into force on the
first day of the month that followed the last instrument of ratification.
4
The Lisbon Treaty
The most recent development in connection with the CFSP is the already
mentioned Lisbon Treaty. The document introduced profound changes in the
organizational structure and the pillar system concerning areas of activity as well as new
positions and services. Previously, there were three pillars constituting the EU:
1.
Common areas – included most politics of the EU, where decisions were based
on the "Community method" - with the engagement of the European
Commission, European Parliament and Council of the European Union or the
European Council.
2.
The European Security Defense Policy, where decision were made mostly by
the European Council.
3.
Police and court cooperation in criminal matters – decisions were made by the
European Council as well.
The records of the current Lisbon Treaty, known as the Reform, gives the legal
personality to the European Union and introduces abolition of the pillars’ system, however
some distinct second and third pillars have been maintained, and significant of the
Common Foreign and Security Policy expanded. This is reflected in the establishment of
the position of the President of the European Council and also of High Representative for
Foreign and Security Policy. As a result of the Treaty, the European Union shall conduct
its activities in:
1.
Matters solely related to the functioning of the Community: the movement of
goods and services, monetary policy in the Euro zone, the rules of competition,
international agreements, commercial and other economic functions.
2.
Shared issues where the EU law is still paramount to the rights of member
states, and the matters not regulated by the Union remain in the competence of
Member States.
3.
Matters within the exclusive competence of the Member States.
A new organization within CFSP, introduced by Lisbon Treaty, is the European External
Action Service, that supports the High Representative.
Taking into account the above content we could point that the essence of CSDP is
cooperation between the EU states under control of common EU institutions in order to
increase the role of EU in the European zone of safety by deploy troops and resources of
5
Member States to build conditions for political, military, inner and external reaction and to
prepare military structures to take action of both political and military nature.
The European safety
The European activity within safety areas can be described as a balance between four
factors:
1.
Inertial dimension.
2.
External dimension.
3.
Military dimension.
4.
Non-military dimension.
Let’s consider how the European system of security within CSDP works. All matters
are based on multinational agreement. A modern position of the EU demands to have
possibilities to respond in case of various threats. In the European Strategy of Security we
can find such threats as
4
:
−
terrorism;
−
proliferation of weapon of mass destruction;
−
regional conflicts;
−
state failure;
−
organized crime.
It is not a closed collection of phenomena which has bad influence on safety space in
Europe. It is collection of social and economical threats causing crisis situations. The
Member States must be ready to response against natural and technical threats as well, thus
it demands coherent activity of all the EU institutions beginning from the European
Council up to particular cell in the department of European Commission.
The assumptions of CSDP became the main base for the creation of a common EU
foreign policy. At its base, a common EU position on the international stage is created.
This is an essential subsystem of the security policy system, where all decisions are taken
in matters of security of the European Union including military action in the field of
emergency response.
In all areas of CSDP a cooperation between the Member States is required. The
institutions in CSDP include:
4
European Security Strategy, A secure Europe in a better world, Brussels, nr 15895/03, 8 December 2003,
6
−
The European Council (the Heads of State and the Government of Member
States);
−
The European Parliament;
−
The Council of the European Union (especially Foreign Affairs Council) at
the level of Foreign Ministries;
−
The European Commission with a leading role of the Secretary General and
High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy;
−
The Political and Security Committee of Ambassadors (political directors);
−
The EU Military Committee;
−
The Military Staff (EU MS);
−
The Situation Centre (SITCEN).
−
The Civilian Crisis Management Committee;
The EU’s most significant body of decision makers on CSDP, is the European
Council. In practice, this is a meeting of heads of states and governments (presidents and /
or prime ministers) of all the EU countries with the European Commission President. The
European Council meets, in principle, two times a year to agree the overall EU policy and
to assess the progress of its implementation. Often the meetings are called "peaks". The
European Council in its competence affects the requests from the European Commission
and takes binding decisions by 'qualified majority', consensuses and unanimously,
especially in matters of CFSP police, as well as the judicial cooperation in criminal
matters, but each state has the right veto. This is the reason for main problems and
misunderstanding between the Members States. It is very difficult to find common interest
in foreign policy among states form different regions, and what is more significant, it is
extremely difficult to justify unpopular decision to public opinion in own country. The
European Council takes decisions in all the dimensions.
Within a few years, there have been attempts to improve the way decisions are made
within the framework of ESDP. The key decisions, however, still require an unanimous
vote, which was not easy since the time when the EU had 15 members,
and now when there are 27 is even more difficult. Despite the involvement of members of
governments of each state in ESDP, they sometimes find that a change in national policy in
the name of the EU solidarity is not easy. To see how difficult the task is sometimes, it is
enough to look at the deep divisions among the EU Member States that formed in spring
2003 against the approval of the UN Security Council led by the United States war in Iraq.
7
The Council of the European Union, formerly called the Council of Ministers,
includes the ministers of the governments of all the EU countries. The council meets
regularly to take detailed decisions and to adopt the EU law. Council’s main tasks include
enacting EU legislation, coordinating the broad economic policies of the EU Member
States, signing agreements between the EU and other countries, approving the annual EU
budget, developing the Foreign And Defense Policy and coordinating the cooperation
between courts and police forces of the Member States. The EU Council is a very
important body that deals with the matters of CFSP and CSDP. The special role in the area
of foreign policy and external dimension has the Foreign Affairs Council which replaced
the Council for General Affairs and External Relations (GAREC), and it is the meeting of
foreign ministers of the Members State.
The European Commission is the politically independent institution that represents
and promotes the interests of the European Union as a whole. It formulates draft
legislation, political projects, programs and is responsible for implementing the decisions
of Parliament and the Council. In the matter of security, the Commission is responsible
mainly for the inertial and external dimension of all activities of the EU. The
Commission's task is to represent and protect the interests of the whole Union. The
Commission oversees and implements the EU’s policies in particular areas by presenting
proposals for new legislation to Parliament, the Council, and the management of the EU’s
budget. It also allocates resources, enforces the EU’s law (together with the Court of
Justice), represents the EU internationally, for example by negotiating agreements
between the EU and other countries.
In addition, within the Commission there are the mechanisms located, which are
helpful and responsible for internal safety: the Instrument for Stability, Civil Protection
Mechanism and Financial Instrument for Civil Protection. On 15
th
November 2006, there
was established the so-called Instrument for Stability
5
which replaced the rapid reaction
mechanism (the external dimension). The instrument was established to allow the EU to
take organized action against crisis situation in foreign countries. This initiative gives
abilities to the EU to form long term strategies in the scope of external relationship. The
strategies take measures in the development of financial, economic and technical
cooperation with countries outside the EU, first of all in a crisis situation or the beginning
of a crisis situation - to restore properly the conditions for cooperation and implementation
5
Regulation (EC) No 1717/2006 of the European Parliament and the Council of 15 November 2006
establishing an Instrument for Stability.
8
of common regional politics. The second case is when the conditions are stabile. In that
case the EU builds potential to fight against the global and transregional threats
destabilizing international order and ensures the stabile condition before and after crisis
situation. The catalogue of tasks to define engagement of the EU is created within the
Instrument for Stability. The catalogue contains: help in a crisis situation; help in a stabile
conditions; extraordinary measures to intervene, and reaction programs.
The Civil Protection Mechanism was established on 19
th
December 1997
6
. The role
of the Mechanism is to increase the level of coordination within the European
Communities, the Member States and the European Commission through procedures and
organizational structures. The Mechanism is a typical project in the inertial dimension.
This cooperation allows the European Commission carrying out the tasks to protect the
environment and sustain social development. The Civil Protection Mechanism is a subject
to the Unit of Civil Protection (Civil Protection Unit, the CPU), which is a subject to the
Directorate General for the Environment.
To improve the coordination of civil protection, there was an action undertaken in
cases of natural disasters, technological, radiological contamination in the marine waters
and the effects of terrorist attacks that could have happened in the European Union and
beyond. On 8
th
November 2007, a new Mechanism Civil Protection formula was given.
Within this Mechanism, there has been created, among others, the Monitoring and
Information Centre (MIC) and the Common Emergency Communication and Information
System, CECIS.
The support element of both initiatives is the Financial Instrument for Civil
Protection, which gives public the protection by providing financial assistance. The
instrument was established on 5
th
March 2007 by the European Union at the request of the
European Commission, taking into account the European Parliament
7
. Its purpose is to
raise effectiveness of the European Union to respond in the event of an emergency
situation such as natural disasters and disasters caused by man, acts of terrorism, including
chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear terrorism, and technical disasters. The
instrument allows to improve all preventive and preparatory measures in case of any
emergency situation.
6
Council Decision 98/22/EC of 19 December 1997 establishing a Community action programme in the field
of civil protection.
7
Council Decision of 5 March 2007 establishing Civil Protection Financial Instrument, Official Journal L
071, 03/10/2007 P. 0009-0017. It covers the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013.
9
The European Parliament is the only Community institution that is elected in
general election. Depending on the population, the number of seats for each Member State
is predicted. The Members of Parliament sit in political groups rather than national.
Parliament directs the work of the President, who is elected by the plenary. The Parliament
meets in session mode, and the sessions last for a year. The European Parliament has three
main functions:
−
legislative (debates over the European law and adopts it together with the
Council);
−
budget (debates over the EU budget and adopts it with the Council);
−
control (supervises other EU institutions, in particular the Commission, to
ensure that they operate in a democratic way).
The first permanently functioning body of the ESDP is the Political and Security
Committee (PSC) established by the Council Decision of 22 January 2001, consisting of
ambassadors, permanent representatives of the Member States who meet two or three times
a week in Brussels. The Committee is responsible for monitoring the international
situation. It is a key element of the ESDP. In the event of a crisis, the PSC plays a decisive
role in the explicit expression of a coherent EU response and is responsible for political
oversight and decision-making at the strategic level about the use of troops. The
Committee in its activities provides, within the framework of ESDP, a platform for the
operation and cooperation of numerous EU institutions, NATO and non-EU countries. In
addition, the responsibilities of the Committee is to monitor the progress of the military
operation carried out by the militant groups and to exercise political control over the
compliance of the objectives in their operational activity and inform the Council about the
course of action. The Committee provides its activity in the external, military and non
military dimension.
The highest military body within the framework of ESDP is the EU Military
Committee (MC), which is composed of the Chiefs of Defense of the Member States,
represented by their military representatives. The Committee operates on the principle of
arrangements and agreements in the framework of the Political and Security Committee.
Its primary purpose is to make arrangements and coordinate the work of the military
among the EU countries, according to the direction set by the Standing Committee of
Safety, and to direct all military projects. In addition, the Military Committee sets the
directions of transformations in the activities of the military community. Moreover, the
Military Committee directs the military activities of the UE battle groups. The Military
10
Committee Chairman shall attend the EU council, where final decisions on the use of battle
groups are taken. MC functions in the military dimensions of safety politic.
Directly subordinate to the Military Committee is the EU Military Staff (EU MS),
which is responsible for the conduct of military expertise in the framework of ESDP. The
Staff in coordination with the Military Committee (as its subordinate body) evaluates the
current situation to establish urgently a mechanism for immediate response, strategic
planning within the framework of the “Petersberg Tasks”, including the possibility of
determining the national and international forces in accordance with the provisions of the
Military Committee. The Military Staff is involved in strategic planning concerning
quantity, location and time of use of the combat groups. EU MS is strictly engaged in the
military dimensions of safety politic.
The combined Situation Centre (SITCEN) plays a leading role in getting
information to the other EU institutions, especially those taking part in crisis management.
The Department of Analysis of the Situation Centre collects and provides intelligence
analysis from all sources. The classified intelligence reports are provided to the main
decision-makers of ESDP. The tasks in this area are strongly supported by the EU Satellite
Centre and the Intelligence Directorate of the EU Military Staff
8
. The analysis made by the
centre concerned the military and non military dimension.
The Committee for Civilian Aspects of Crisis Management is a body set by the
EU Council Decision of 22
nd
May 2002. Its mission is: to analyze the situation crisis, and
prepare proposals on how to deal with a crisis situation through the means at the disposal
of the EU planning civilian operations in the CFSP. This authority shall forward the
Political Security options and proposals of capabilities for civilian use in EU-led
operations
9
.
The above-mentioned main institutions and organizations of CFSP have not
fulfilled all the list. Among these we can mention the European Defense Agency, which
provides research programs in the area of safety, or the Member States with own security
systems. Taking into account the definition of national defense system, as an internally
coordinated set of elements of organizational, human and material inter-related and up to
defend the state
10
, and also the definition given by the Dictionary of National Security - a
8
J. Gryz, Respond system of European Union, Toruń 2010, p. 101.
9
Ibidem, p. 98.
10
On the base
definition by
P. Sienkiewicz, Engineering of systems, Warsaw 1983, s. 27, “System - Every
complex object highlighted from the rest of reality, which is all created by a set of elementary objects
(elements) and links (relationships) between them”.
11
set of internally structured and interrelated elements, people, organizations, facilities,
working to preserve military security (military) of state
11
, one can conclude by analogy
that the European security system is the coordinated internally set of organizational
elements (states and organizations), human and material inter-related and up to
defend the European Union.
Between the elements that create a security system there should work such a
relationship, which will culminate in ensuring consistency of the entire system. Given the
above, please assume that the essence of the European security system are the individual
international and national elements, which exist in many subsystems, together with
links between them and the information center for decisions - IT (management
subsystem). This center is designed to direct the work of the whole system, and also
coordinate the activity of its individual components in order to prevent threats, the possible
fight in crisis situations and crises (Figure 2).
Figure 2 Crisis response system of EU
Source: authors’ elaboration
The military aspect of CFSP, as an expression of CSDP, are the battle groups of the
EU. What are this military elements? As it was mentioned, as a result of Headline Goal
11
B. Balcerowicz, J. Pawłowski, Dictionary of National Security, Warsaw 2002, p. 141.
12
2010, the EU decided to have possibilities to respond for crisis situation in practical
military way. The battle groups, in essence, are the combat units that have significant
military potential (from 1,500 to 2,500 soldiers). The core of these forces is a subdivision,
the potential of the battalion, reinforced by the units of support and security operations,
capable of rapid response in areas affected by the crisis at a considerable distance from the
borders of the EU, often in extreme environments, including desert, high mountains,
tropical conditions.
The European Union stipulates that the ability to make decisions about military
action in crisis management will be able to achieve within 5 days of the endorsement
concept of crisis management by the Political and Security Policy, and the ground forces
will be able to begin operation no later than 10 days from the date of the decision taken on
their use. This means that the battle groups should have the ability to achieve readiness and
develop their skills in a period of 5 to 10 days from the decision on their use. (Fig. 3). In
addition, the battle groups should be able to conduct independent operations for 120 days
with adequate security logistics
12
. They are provided for rapid response to emergency
situation anywhere on Earth (assumed to be 6.000 km from Brussels).
Fig. 3. Readiness to develop skills of the bat the group
Source: European Union Batlegroup Concept, p. 9
The battle group seems to be an answer for the contemporary threats. According to
author’s research
13
conducted in 2008, it is shown that asymmetric threat is most probably
to affect security of the EU. As most likely to happen, the risks associated with the global
economic crisis and terrorism have occurred (Figure 4). The respondents indicated these
two categories as the most significant problems to face for the European Union. The results
indicate the greater importance of economic risks. It is significant that all the threats can
12
Jan Joel Andersson, Armed and Ready? The EU Battlegroup concept and the Nordic Battlegroup, Swedish
Institute for European Policy Studies, March 2006, p. 23.
13
Research was conducted for dissertation work and before global financial crisis. The responders were
military specialists.
EU action
appropriate
Council Decision to
launch op
Forces start implementing
mission in JOA
NOT
FIXED
Approval
CMC
NLT 5 days
NLT 10 days
13
very easily turn into a military actions, because economy and finance issue are often the
reasons of the outbreak of conflicts and even wars.
Figure 4. Threats for the EU
Source: own researches.
For both civil and military environment, the modern asymmetric threats are the
challenge that influences the international security. This means that the possibility of
effective use of the troops will fulfill a key role not only in times of crisis, but also during
development of the situation before the crisis and after it.
In case of CSDP, in the decision making process concerning military action in the
framework of ESDP the primary role plays the European Council. This Board sets policy
directions of the Union authorized to take certain policy actions, and decides to take
military action or mission. The European Council meets regularly or ad hoc, creating the
basis for further implementation of administrative procedures. Such an ad hoc meeting was
convened on 1
st
September 2008, when the meeting of the European Council by the then
Presidency of the EU – France was held. The applicant convening this meeting was
Poland. The armed conflict in Russia and Georgia were then discussed. During the summit
it was decided to send observers to the conflict area.
The decisions of the European Council to take military actions were implemented by
the Council of the European Union. Its powers include making binding decisions in the
CFSP and ESDP, in line with the guidelines and the European Council decisions. The EU
Council takes the political control of all the EU military operations, and its activity is
supported by the High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy, which is
14
responsible for implementing policy decisions of the European Council and also plays a
central role in the EU’s foreign relations.
CSDP in the Libyan case
To see how CSDP works in practice, it is possible to consider action led by the EU
during Libya conflict, the so-called Libyan Uprising. In spring 2011, people in most of the
Arabic countries rose own rights to change state system, that was dominated by dictators,
who had ruled for many decades. All those events were called Arab spring, and its effects
are visible even today. The Libyan Uprising officially began on 17
th
February. Six months
and several days later, the rebels occupied the capital of the country. The Uprising was
directed against over 42-year regime of Muammar Gaddafi. The severest battles took place
in Misrata (east of Tripoli) and Zawija (west of Tripoli). These cities would often pass
from hand to hand. In the country there are thousands of mercenaries who were fighting
with the rebels, and even finished them off wounded in hospitals. According to Human
Rights Watch, since the outbreak of protests at least 223 people were killed. The fightings
were continued in another cities: Breg, Syrte (where Gaddafi came from), Ras Al-Nuf and
others.
On 17
th
of March, the UN Security Council adopted resolution nr 1973 on the closure
of the airspace over Libya. The resolution allowed to take "all necessary measures" to
protect the civilian population against attacks of the armed forces faithful to the Libyan
leader, Muammar Gaddafi. At the beginning, the UE strongly supported the resolution. The
European Council President Herman Van Rompuy and the EU Foreign Policy Chief
Catherine Ashton stated together that The European Union is ready to implement the
adopted UN Security Council Resolution on Libya. Ashton and Van Rompuy also
highlighted the important role of the Arab League and Arab partners. At this moment the
EU seems to be ready to speak with one voice within CSDP through the institutions
responsible for this.
Thus, the international community decided to undertake conversation about Libya. In
Paris, on 19th March began a summit of the EU (the European Council), with the Arab
League, the Organization of African Unity, as well as Canada and U.S. In an extraordinary
meeting, hosted by the French President Nicolas Sarkozy, among others, the heads of the
Arab League and UN Secretary General, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the
representatives of Canada took part. The main topic of the summit concerned the problem
15
how to introduce the resolution nr 1973 of the UN Security Council. Most states decided to
take military action against Gaddafi regime to support rising forces. It was decided that
France and Great Britain would deal with air attacks, and the other NATO countries would
observe if the UN resolution no-fly zone was effective. It was fixed, that U.S. Navy and
Air Force would not participate in a first strike against Libya, but would participate in the
entire mission. It was a significant moment when the EU took the military action alone
with the battle group, under own command. According to “Petersberg Tasks”, the EU
battle group could be used to conduct peacekeeping tasks and tasks of combat forces in
crisis management, including peacemaking. Despite the lack of unity in terms of directing
military action among the Member States, all countries decided to fulfill the resolution of
the UN Security Council. Thus, on 19
th
of March the Odyssey Dawn operation was
launched led by some EU and coalition countries mainly by France, UK, Spain, Italy, US
and Canada. US, French and British planes bombed the military airfields and other
regime’s strategic points in Tripoli, Misra and Benghazi. Spain and Italy offered to make
available military bases. The "general headquarters of the coalition" of the countries
involved in this operation were placed in Naples. There were continued raids on the
regime’s strategic military points. The insurgents were fighting, among others of Misratę
and Adabiję. Unfortunately, it turned out very quickly that the Coalition had no organized
command and control system. Accept of Germany and Poland, Norway (as a non EU
country) suspended its participation in military operations in Libya. On 21
st
of March Italy
wanted NATO to took control over all military operation, taking into consideration its own
national business. Simultaneously, The European Union decided to extend sanctions
against Libya. The Council of the European Union (Foreign Affairs Council)
Community, entered in the "black list" nine Libyan oil and gas companies. Furthermore,
the financial assets of those companies have been frozen in the European banks. The
European Union underlined that the Community does not intend to engage militarily in
Libya. It offers assistance in the evacuation of refugees and humanitarian support.
On 24
th
of March, during the Meeting of North Atlantic Council (NAC) it was
decided that NATO, despite earlier opposition of Turkey, would take on the responsibility
for enforcing the flight ban on Libya and for the defense of civilians against the forces of
the regime of Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi.
It was the end of military action led by the EU countries, which were able to establish
Coalition. It turned out that the EU had no operational capabilities to take control on such
complicated military action. It must be said, that the EU could show unity on political level
16
with the idea to support insurgents, but it was absolutely impossible to gain consensus in
military aspect of CSDP. The EU seems to be ready to be an effective player on
international area; to develop own possibilities to have common opinion about
international issue; take part in military operations as a part of multinational community,
especially in cooperation with NATO and US. But as example shows, the reality is giving
plenty of doubts in area of efficiency of own actions. A very complicated decision making
process, which demands consensus among the Member States’ authorities, and quite
different national interest puts question marks in the subject of the EU’s common voice. It
was especially seen during the Libyan conflict, which was an opportunity to take common
military and political action as a one coherent body. In this context, the next questions is
what is the future of CSDP and integration of the EU in the area of foreign policy, and
what should be the next step to increase security in Europe?
SUMMARY
Security of the European Union in terms of possible emergencies and crises is based
on the security of the Member States. Nowadays threats to individual states have the
character that fit the problems of crisis response (response to terrorism, impact and
influence of unstable regional powers, local ethnic clashes or conflicts over natural
resources). Now, the open conflict, which can be transformed in a conventional warfare is
highly unlikely and highly improbable to turn into Great War. The present international
order - both globally and in the European dimension - although regarded as a transitional
governance is posing a relatively high level of security.
In the recent years, the European Union is trying increasingly not only to integrate its
voice on the international stage, but also to formulate a foreign policy, and to hold a
common position. This is not a process that takes place without interference. Individual
countries, in many aspects of self-interest, often submit to the Community. This
phenomenon is understandable, and it seems impossible to be eliminated completely. It
also weakens the Union as a single entity in the international arena. These threats make it
necessary to provide common defense mechanisms. The response to the demand for the
security of the Union is the adoption and implementation of the Common Security and
Defense Policy (the European Security and Defense Policy - ESDP), which is a platform
for the implementation of joint projects that integrate the Union on the international stage,
17
maintain a united front in safety and makes it possible to react to emerging crises and
crises.
According to thesis and facts contained in the article, it seems that the EU has no
other way to provide security in Europe. CSDP in not an ideal system for sure, but it
creates a platform to dialogue among the Member States and not only. All the procedures
should be improved, and despite the national interest of particular countries, they should
ensure as coherent activity as it is possible.