Sent to me by a friend, has the threat of the EU Army disappeared?
I have just been looking at Michelle Barnier’s speech in Berlin yesterday. Some interesting points which maybe more revealing than we ever get from the UK government and the EU ambition to grow its EU army by 2025 continue to get more extensive everyday to a St Malo Agreement made on 3rd December 1998 to have a defence force under one roof run by the EU.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
For the first time since the failure of the European Defence Community in 1954, we are witnessing an unprecedented effort to establish a Defence and Security Union. This is the roadmap we need to follow between now and 2025!
And this Defence and Security Union will have to be developed without the British, since on 30 March 2019 the United Kingdom will, as is its wish, become a third country when it comes to defence and security issues.
We must draw the appropriate legal and operational conclusions from this:
- The UK defence minister will no longer take part in meetings of EU Defence Ministers; there will be no UK ambassador sitting on the Political and Security Committee.
- The UK can no longer be a framework nation: it will not be able to take command of EU–led operations or lead EU battlegroups (1).
- The UK will no longer be a member of the European Defence Agency or Europol.
- The UK will not be able to benefit from the European Defence Fund the same way Member States will (2).
- The UK will no longer be involved in decision-making, nor in planning our defence and security instruments.
Everything I have just said is the logical consequence of the sovereign choice made by the British. We regret this vote. But we respect the choice that has been made.
There are slippery words here being carefully scripted by Barnier. On the opening section of his speech (in the link below) he insults the UK as if we are cowards to have the temerity to leave the EU at a time when it’s under attack from terrorists, who they invited in, in a an open door policy of its own undoing. They are welcome to them. It is a glaring admission Barnier does not have the first clue as to why the UK is leaving. A decision millions in the UK made to leave the EU long before any Islamic terror groups appeared on the scene. When would be the right time to leave the EU; one has to ask Barnier?
Later in his speech he mentions EU PESCO defence and Security union. In the EU, when they talk about SECURITY they mean the whole nine yards in EU legal obligations, EU treaties, financial commitments, foreign policy jurisdictions, command structure, Headquarter, EU Army, Europol, defence industry, ECJ, EU laws, EU procurement policy, intelligence etc etc. So throughout his speech when he says EU Security it goes much further than, just cooperating on defence, than what we are meant to think it means.
So when Barnier mentions “Theresa May has assured the Member States several times that the UK is committed unconditionally to maintaining European SECURITY.” she is agreeing to commit to keeping abreast of EU laws and follow blindly EU foreign policy, European Arrest Warrant, EU procurement rules, financially committed, promising assets on a permanent basis to be used and abused, the whole nine yards.
Any participation in PESCO as a Third Country would have the same rights as OBSERVER STATUS only, will have no say on where or what our own assets were used if committed on the bequest of the totalitarian regime in Brussels.
1/Not be able “to take command of EU-Led operations or lead EU battlegroups”. Does that mean no involvement of UK Armed Forces in EU led operations and battlegroups or more likely there is still planned involvement in EU-led missions. Any involvement in defence and security should only be from NATO led missions….right according to Theresa May’s government That is the commitment from the government to use NATO, when cooperating on defence and they would NATO led…..right? Not according to Barnier.
2/ “The UK will not be able to benefit from the European Defence Agency (EDA) in the same way Member States will” strongly suggests participation, because the emphasis is on “same way”. So what different way is it? what involvement has the UK in the EDA if not a member of it? For example are we still going to be legally bound by EU Procurement rules on defence and security? Would any new equipment we order, have be determined by the MOD and UK government or by the EDA and EU bureaucrats? Remember as part of EDA rules it will the EU bureaucracy that will dictate who manufactures anything from boots to nukes. It will be the EU who will hold any patents and issue licences to make anything the EDA develops, any military hardware the EDA purchases will be wholly owned by the EU and more importantly if the UK is contributing funding, will that mean the MOD gets lets funding to purchase its own equipment? Theresa Mays firm unconditional commitment to maintain European SECURITY says it is.
Michel Barnier speech in Berlin 29th November 2017