Whilst not xenophobic in anyway I have to say that I was more than happy to see the (already illegally implemented) European expansion crumble at M Chirac's feet recently (it'll give me a lot to talk about at my filter int). But let's face it, it's coming anyway and when it does it's going to cause changes to the RAF, namely the EDF.
But finding any in-depth information on the topic is virtually impossible. The EU website, like its father organisation, is impossible to navigate and my cynicism suggests that they haven't made any firm decisions on EDF cause they're not going to sit comfortably with it's member states. How do we all think that it's going to affect the RAF? will it be the various units placed in bases in different EU states - like the good old Cold War NATO plan, or will we be more full integrated with variuos different countrymen in each squadron like one big continental Air Force version of Clancy's R6 -and if so in what language?
I've had to say ugly because it isn't good, it may not be bad, depending on the form it takes, and full intergration simply won't work - though they'll try it anyway
Share This Page:
European Defence Force
The US, China and India of course??? Thinking of the threats of the future. Germany and France feel we need to super globalise against the threat of other continent-size adversaries - and we all know who runs this flattened hierarchy now don't we.
Sorry everyone. I've wrestled with the poll for 20 minutes and it doesn't want to put up 'ugly' as an option (maybe not PC enough). if you want to vote for that stick it in a post.
Sorry everyone. I've wrestled with the poll for 20 minutes and it doesn't want to put up 'ugly' as an option (maybe not PC enough). if you want to vote for that stick it in a post.
-
halloweenjack
- Member
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Sun 08 May, 2005 1:43 am
- Location: Wolverhampton UK
No, the EDF is in essence the armed forces of the United States of Europe. Like the US Georgia light infantry is part of the US Army the 17th - 21st Queen's Royal Lancers would be part of the EDF based in the state of England. Obviously there is no Air Force example as the US Air Force was formed after the Unification so no unit (as far as I know) has specific state ties.
So the EDF would be part of NATO in the place of UK, France, Germany, Spain etc. essentially anyway. That's the way it looks set to go - as I said they really are trying not to give too much away too soon. I think they want Brussels to have full control over its passing bill before they expand the concept too much. It's not so much a treaty of nations like NATO as Nation unified by treaty.
So the EDF would be part of NATO in the place of UK, France, Germany, Spain etc. essentially anyway. That's the way it looks set to go - as I said they really are trying not to give too much away too soon. I think they want Brussels to have full control over its passing bill before they expand the concept too much. It's not so much a treaty of nations like NATO as Nation unified by treaty.
Jx ;)
-
halloweenjack
- Member
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Sun 08 May, 2005 1:43 am
- Location: Wolverhampton UK
STOP PRESS!
I've been reading around the subject and there are a few errors in what I've said so far. I haven't got time to post them now and I want to double up on getting my facts straight before hurling a number of false accusations at Brussels (however justified and almost right/probably their actual plans for the future they are.)
Jx ;)
Sorry it's taken so long to reply, been ill.
Ok, the EDF seems to be one of many names for a number of forces that have been proposed over the last 6 years by Europe. After the poor attempt by the European NATO players to move troops into the Kosovo theatre (the BBC reported only 2% of the needed number were there on time and MOD.uk states that the US made 4/5 of all air sorties) the Council of Europe started to think about better methods for doing things. A number of reports were made about member states' militaries and Europe began coming to many of the conclusions that we had already done in the Strategic Defence Review. Rapid reaction forces, more joint command structures etc. The crux of it was to make the European NATO members non-reliant on a US lead for NATO ops. It is now known either as the European Defence Agency (EDA) or under a thousand project names stemming from the EU's Common Foreign and Security policy. It is not a European Armed Forces as such but an agency of the EU group of nations to help integrate and improve all our armed forces ability to react. It also has a massive role in R&D (the A400M is an EDA baby) European space defence, procurement etc.
The MOD site explicitly states that it is designed to work with NATO and its prime responsibility to NATO under article 5 still stands.
However, whilst this is well and good in current practice, as soon as the European enlargement process is driven through and we do indeed become the United States of Europe the whole thing goes tits up. We will become one country at which time NATO's article 5 runs into difficulties. Technically an attack in 5 years time by say North Korea on the UK is in breach of Article 5 bringing the aid of other nations. However an attack on any USE state that is not a member of NATO would not require a response and various beurocratic hands would be well and truly tied. What's more the problems with NATO are minor compared with those of the UN. Two of all the USE states are permanent members of the Security Council and other members have made it very clear that the likes of Germany are not entirely welcome at the UNSC table.
It has its merits - more money for procurement better R&D etc, but the long-terms cons far outweigh the pros and let's be honest, do we really want the Franco-German Axis having the lion's share of the say in what we'll be flying in 10 years? I don't.
Ok, the EDF seems to be one of many names for a number of forces that have been proposed over the last 6 years by Europe. After the poor attempt by the European NATO players to move troops into the Kosovo theatre (the BBC reported only 2% of the needed number were there on time and MOD.uk states that the US made 4/5 of all air sorties) the Council of Europe started to think about better methods for doing things. A number of reports were made about member states' militaries and Europe began coming to many of the conclusions that we had already done in the Strategic Defence Review. Rapid reaction forces, more joint command structures etc. The crux of it was to make the European NATO members non-reliant on a US lead for NATO ops. It is now known either as the European Defence Agency (EDA) or under a thousand project names stemming from the EU's Common Foreign and Security policy. It is not a European Armed Forces as such but an agency of the EU group of nations to help integrate and improve all our armed forces ability to react. It also has a massive role in R&D (the A400M is an EDA baby) European space defence, procurement etc.
The MOD site explicitly states that it is designed to work with NATO and its prime responsibility to NATO under article 5 still stands.
However, whilst this is well and good in current practice, as soon as the European enlargement process is driven through and we do indeed become the United States of Europe the whole thing goes tits up. We will become one country at which time NATO's article 5 runs into difficulties. Technically an attack in 5 years time by say North Korea on the UK is in breach of Article 5 bringing the aid of other nations. However an attack on any USE state that is not a member of NATO would not require a response and various beurocratic hands would be well and truly tied. What's more the problems with NATO are minor compared with those of the UN. Two of all the USE states are permanent members of the Security Council and other members have made it very clear that the likes of Germany are not entirely welcome at the UNSC table.
It has its merits - more money for procurement better R&D etc, but the long-terms cons far outweigh the pros and let's be honest, do we really want the Franco-German Axis having the lion's share of the say in what we'll be flying in 10 years? I don't.
Jx ;)
France are desperate for a different military alliance instead of NATO. Cuz the French are and always will be desperate for influence and power (probably because they have never had any), they want to make a new EU force that they can have major influence over, cuz its the UK and US that have the major influence in NATO. The Germans dont really like the idea and prefer to stay with NATO, their pretty smart people so I doubt they'd follow this stupid French idea. The EU does nothing, it debates and debates and debates, however it never acts, this is becuase the French have major influence in Europe, simply as that. Tony Blair has made it quite clear that NATO will continue and always will be our major defence intitative, and will always take presidence over EU defence. As we go into the 21st century we need organisations and alliances that are decisive and make tough decisions, especially because of growing power in countries like Iran and N.Korea, which are desperate to get nukes and to become one of "the big boys". Without the UK, the EU defence force would be quite frankly a joke. The UK is by far the most powerful country in the EU, by far. Also many people consider us the only country in the EU that retains a "full spectrum" force and has significant military power. The only other countries in the EU that have any real power are France and Germany and maybe Italy, however there forces are built for self-defence and have little combat experience as well as relativly low budgets (compared to the UK). The UK is the main contributor in the EU defence force and without us it simply woudnt exist. Dont worry, NATO will always come first.
-
Doc
- Guest
2005 Defence Spending (Jane's)Germany spends more on its defence budget than UK does on its, fact.
US - $402bn
UK - $51.41bn
FR - $40.62bn
GER - $29.70bn
RUS - $18.96bn
CHI - $29.58bn
The Pentagon believes these figures in some place are understated though, claiming China is spending 90bn and Russia more than that.
Jx ;)
