It appears that the European Union has
developed their own Military Planning Unit, separate from NATO.
Why would they choose do this when NATO already provides unified control over the military resources of Europe?
While distancing itself from the pre-emptive security thinking of the Bush administration, the document cataloged present threats to peace, including terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, the collapse of government institutions and organized crime. In the post-Cold War era, it concluded, "none of the new threats is purely military, nor can they be tackled by purely military means."
The document sweetened the pill of a common European force long envisioned by European leaders to allow Europe to formulate a defense policy separate from that of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which the United States dominates.
It is difficult enough for one country to rule itself. The 15 member EU's attempts at governing are exponentially more difficult. They are so consensus-minded that it is not possible for them to come to non-unanimous decisions. Now they are going to apply that same bureaucracy to their 'unified' armed forces. The amusing part is that this action is an overt attempt to remove U.S. influence in Europe, yet they continue to deny exactly that.
The moves were preceded by weeks of intense diplomatic effort to diminish American resistance, particularly at meetings this month in Brussels with Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. Both men had opposed such a policy as an unnecessary duplication of NATO, which already pools European military resources under a single command.
President Jacques Chirac of France, a staunch proponent of an independent European defense policy, praised the moves as a "confirmation of European defense, an affirmation of its interests." At a news briefing, he said Europe was "obliged to have organized means of defense." But he was at pains to stress the integrity of NATO, saying the plan was in "perfect conformity with the demands of NATO."
It sounds like they want to control everything themselves, except when there is a real threat within their own borders. At that point, NATO and the United States are welcome to take over. Honestly, after the Iraq situation, it feels as if NATO is broken. Our own allies within the alliance stood against us and attempted to counter our every mood. Even today, elements within them are
aiding those who fight against us.
The strategy paper is not completly discouraging though. Despite deliberate pot shots at the United States...
While distancing itself from the pre-emptive security thinking of the Bush administration, the document cataloged present threats to peace, including terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, the collapse of government institutions and organized crime. In the post-Cold War era, it concluded, "none of the new threats is purely military, nor can they be tackled by purely military means."
...it also has elements of humor mixed in:
The 14-page strategy paper, based on a draft by the chief European foreign affairs official, Javier Solana, emphasized that "the trans-Atlantic relationship is irreplaceable."
"Acting together, the European Union and the United States can be a formidable force for good in the world," the European Union document said. "Our aim should be an effective and balanced partnership with the United States."
This reminds me of 2nd grade math. The only addition table easier than Ones was Zeros. Any number, plus nothing is equal to that number:
- 1 + 0 = 1
- 2 + 0 = 2
- US Military + Eurpoean Union = "A Formidable Force for Good"
