France and Germany plan' more active' EU defence

[randomradio]

And what was the purpose of forming the EU?

Ultimately form a single superstate.

 

[Taygibay]

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Euro...pean-Union-need-a-common-military-force-video

Junkers wants mil headquarters for a force that doesn't exist yet ...

... how very Brussels of him!

Tsssk, Tay.

 

[randomradio]

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Euro...pean-Union-need-a-common-military-force-video

Junkers wants mil headquarters for a force that doesn't exist yet ...

... how very Brussels of him!

Tsssk, Tay.

This would actually save the world, or we are looking at a new Cold War.

 

[randomradio]

@Taygibay @Penguin @mike2000 is back @halloweene

@Picdelamirand-oil we have been discussing this here. Looks like what you've wanted is coming through.

The EU is going through with it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/06/europe-forges-ahead-with-plans-for-eu-army/

Europe is planning to forge ahead with plans for an EU Army that some fear could eventually displace Nato, with senior officials in Brussels urging EU member states to capitalise on the “political space” left by Britain’s decision to vote to leave.

Federica Mogherini, the EU's foreign policy chief, is preparing to forward a timetable setting out steps to create EU military structures “to act autonomously" from NATO.

Europe’s top diplomat reportedly told colleagues that the military plan - billed by some countries as the foundation of a “European army” - represented a chance for the EU to relaunch itself after the "shocking" Brexit vote.

“We have the political space today to do things that were not really doable in previous years,” Ms Mogherini told EU ambassadors, according to a report in The Times.

The military plan foresees countries such as France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Poland creating permanent military structures to act on behalf of the EU and for the deployment of the EU's battle groups and 18 national battalions.

It could also comprise an EU military planning and operations headquarters in Brussels that could be a rival to NATO. Last week, the Czech Republic and Hungary backed the plan as the basis to "setting up a joint European army.”

The idea has also reportedly been backed by Matteo Renzi, the Italian prime minister, who is pushing for more defence co-operation, according to an article in La Repubblica.

His ideas, which are mirrored in the EU plans, include exempting defence equipment manufacturers from paying VAT, and applying EU research grants to the sector – a move which could conflict with EU Treaty restrictions on using EU budget for military expenditures.

A timetable for the plan will be discussed at a meeting of 27 EU leaders — excluding Theresa May — at a summit in Bratislava on 16 September.

UK governments have previously opposed the creation of a fully-fledged European army but the European Commission, France, Germany and Italy see Brexit as a new chance to press ahead with deeper EU military integration.

Nato officials have expressed concerns that the proposals will create rivalry and challenge the alliance's primacy as the main defence structure.

Conservative MEP Geoffrey Van Orden, his party’s defence spokesman, said that the “worrying” implications of the EU's defence ambitions were being overlooked in the debate on Brexit and the UK’s future relationship to the EU.

“We can all see that the EU might play a useful role in conflict prevention and in some civil aspects of crisis management. But its ambitions go beyond that. The EU motive is not to create additional military capability but to achieve defence integration as a key step on the road to a federal EU state.

“The US and indeed the UK are being misled if they imagine that such moves will enhance Nato – the key guarantor of our collective defence. On the contrary, creation of EU defence structures, separate from Nato, will only lead to division between transatlantic partners at a time when solidarity is needed in the face of many difficult and dangerous threats to the democracies."

Mike Hookem, UKIP defence spokesman, said that his party had been warning about the dangers posed by the EU army concept for years.

“I'm pleased to see people are finally waking up. An EU army is not some Eurosceptic fantasy, there are many in Brussels hell-bent on making it happen.”

 

[Taygibay]

^^^​

LOL
The French defense budget will have to grow by 50% at least then.​

Good evening, Tay.

 

[randomradio]

^^^​

LOL
The French defense budget will have to grow by 50% at least then.​

Good evening, Tay.

The French budget is good enough as is. You can save a lot of money by decommissioning bases and moving major assets elsewhere with other countries paying for it. The removal of VAT would save 20% from your weapons purchases.

Most of the F-35 sales can stop, and the budget for that could go into restructuring and reequipping the armed forces of all the countries. Take the example of Czech and Hungarian armed forces, most of their equipment is old and obsolete. They can be decommissioned, and their budget can be added to the EU budget.

 

[Picdelamirand-oil]

Defense budget could be removed from deficit rule to create an incentive and some activities.

 

[Norge Stronk]

So this is going to be another initiative where Denmark opts out and Norway opts in like with the EU's existing Common Security and Defence Policy - also known as the EU's Military?

This type of framework already exists... and it hasn't worked out too well.

 

[Norge Stronk]

True the Canadians are our brothers and sisters.

Canada is ours. Hands off @waz !!

Don't make me rally the fleet

 

[Penguin]

The removal of VAT would save 20% from your weapons purchases.

Explain again why a government would pay VAT (tax) to itself?

 

[Taygibay]

The French budget is good enough as is. You can save a lot of money by decommissioning bases and moving major assets elsewhere with other countries paying for it. The removal of VAT would save 20% from your weapons purchases.

VAT appart [ we do P, sadly we do ], the French budget is nowhere near adequate
to support the EU armed forces proposition. It's just-in-time activity as things are!

The apparition of such a force would require more troops from us than from most
unless specific conditions are met :

If that EU army is immediately able to provide what France alone can, you're right.
If grand opening of EU army is concomitant with dissolution of NATO, you're right.
If the treaty that created it was accompanied by constitutional changes, you're right.

Unless the 3 conditions above are met sequentially, our defense budget would grow.
Because we have a situation and commitments other don't share in the EU.

After Brexit, we alone have nuclear deterrence and projection, we alone pemanently
sit at the UN Security Council. As before Brexit, we alone head a NATO command &
we alone have a Joint bi-national force ( with UK ). We alone will have a carrier and
project diplomacy the world over. And Africa *cough* might not be ready to fend for
itself quite yet by then.

The scope of our means and of our involvement have to walk hand in hand ...
and they have nothing in common with those of Hungary, Latvia or Belgium.

We are Franks, we honour our commitments and we have many which costs money.

That's all folks, Tay.

 

[randomradio]

Explain again why a government would pay VAT (tax) to itself?

French forces pay 19.6% VAT on the Rafales.

VAT appart [ we do P, sadly we do ], the French budget is nowhere near adequate
to support the EU armed forces proposition. It's just-in-time activity as things are!

The apparition of such a force would require more troops from us than from most
unless specific conditions are met :

If that EU army is immediately able to provide what France alone can, you're right.
If grand opening of EU army is concomitant with dissolution of NATO, you're right.
If the treaty that created it was accompanied by constitutional changes, you're right.

Unless the 3 conditions above are met sequentially, our defense budget would grow.
Because we have a situation and commitments other don't share in the EU.

After Brexit, we alone have nuclear deterrence and projection, we alone pemanently
sit at the UN Security Council. As before Brexit, we alone head a NATO command &
we alone have a Joint bi-national force ( with UK ). We alone will have a carrier and
project diplomacy the world over. And Africa *cough* might not be ready to fend for
itself quite yet by then.

The scope of our means and of our involvement have to walk hand in hand ...
and they have nothing in common with those of Hungary, Latvia or Belgium.

We are Franks, we honour our commitments and we have many which costs money.

That's all folks, Tay.

Those are not insurmountable hurdles.

Hungary, Latvia, Belgium etc don't have to agree with France, but they won't have a choice after the system is setup. The decisions will be led by France, Germany, Spain and Italy anyway. France has more to worry about Germany than Estonia.

The French presence in the UNSC, its nukes etc will give the superstate the same powers.

 

[Taygibay]

The French presence in the UNSC, its nukes etc will give the superstate the same powers.

Dream on!

 

[Norge Stronk]

The French presence in the UNSC, its nukes etc will give the superstate the same powers.

Wait, are you talking about the formation of a single European nation?

 

[randomradio]

Wait, are you talking about the formation of a single European nation?

Me, and Juncker and the leaders of the EU.

https://defence.pk/threads/france-and-germany-plan-more-active-eu-defence.448683/page-5#post-8697281