Is an EU army not a good thing?

[Snowy111]

With China, US and Russia growing increasingly powerful, and the worlds resources depleting, I think we are in danger of being picked off in some way, if we are “on our own”. Not in the next 30 years perhaps but beyond that. I know brexiteers cite the EU army as a reason to leave, but would we not be safer allied militarily to our closest neighbours?

amp.ft.com/content/ff92106c-e8e0-11e9-85f4-d00e5018f061?segmentID=24f917f5-d77e-c653-da9d-130af278fd26&__twitter_impression=true

Can only think that trump wants one less superpower to worry about . But is he our biggest threat? Russia, China and the US all seem to think they can do whatever they want, invade countries, human rights abuses. The EU is going to be much less powerful without is and I’m not sure that’s a good thing.

amp.ft.com/content/ff92106c-e8e0-11e9-85f4-d00e5018f061?segmentID=24f917f5-d77e-c653-da9d-130af278fd26&__twitter_impression=true

Yes I agree.

If it ever happened it would be a very cost effective force and, if we had been in the EU, we would have been the leading light helping manage it.

It has seemed to slip under the radar but our own military capacity has been reduced hugely. Remember those recruitment ads for the TA- that was part of the plan replace trained permanent staff who were paid off with reservists!

The very experienced retired maritime chief Rear Admiral Alex Burton said on the BBC that years of austerity, budget cuts, redundancies etc meant the defence budget needed to be increased urgently.
"If you do not spend more on defence than we currently are as a percentage of GDP, then we put at risk the fact that we are currently a credible military power, and from that we put at risk our position on the global stage."

He said that military threats were increasing from countries like Russia, from cyber warfare and from terrorist organisations.

I've made the point many times in other threads the Brexit brigade fearmonger about Brussels! Brussels with is limited power to lay down basic standards in food and consumer rights!

The real fear - regular Russian recces into our air and sea space are ignored even by the xenophobic Brexiteers. Polish plumbers are a threat to rant and rave about but Russian boats and planes which are regularly escorted out of our territories are never mentioned.

Even the gov report that was released about Russian interference in elections is completely ignored.

I never understand why the Union Jack brigade mistrust the Belgians and Dutch etc but think Putin is to be trusted.

publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmcumeds/1791/179109.htm

Well, we are actually member of NATO.

I don't see how a European-wide armed force could work on any practical level. Every member state has their own agenda geopolitically.

And I don't think Russia is the ultimate threat tbh. I think China is the real issue.
The Uighur people's rights are enshrined in the constitution of the PRC, they are one of the five colours of the nation of China, but look at what is happening to them.
China are poised to sweep westwards and southwards all the way through Asia into Africa by careful placement of key geographical nodes of control.

I realise that sounds completely tinfoil hat territory, sorry!

We are members of NATO which is larger armed forces wise than the E.U. The USA currently gives 4% GDP to defence whilst most of E.U. does about 2% that results in USA funding about a third of NATO defences and beats even France’s contribution.
Politically, I think it would be good but logistically a nightmare and require a complete overhaul of the military. Do we or don’t we have conscription? Many European nations do but I don’t see it being a vote winner on Mumsnet. Do we have a single training process? Currently the U.K. has some of the best and most specialised training in the world. U.K. policy is lower numbers higher effectiveness.
We work very very closely with our allies. At the moment there is one of the biggest exercises ever going on with all NATO countries actively involved. Our operations centre has a multinational team working together. British warships are controlling French fighter jets.
Not sure what a joined up military would mean. Obviously, it couldn’t just be an army either.

Phil I realise that sounds completely tinfoil hat territory, sorry! Sorry, yes it is. There is absolutely no evidence China is seeking anything but economic influence. What is happening in Xinjiang, tragic as it is, is if anything proof of that, Xi is trying to assert iron control over the territory he does have. He has enough on his plate doing that.

The EU army was never a thing. It was simply a proposal to achieve greater efficiency through shared procurement, training etc. NATO, even before Trump, had passed its sell by date so, with NATO blessing the EU were making some sensible proposals to pick up where it left off so they could mobilise more effectively to trouble spots. Much as Putin and Trump are a worry in a lot of ways I see no evidence we need to mobilise Europe against them. We were never for instance going to go in and defend the Crimea?

If NATO is going to become increasingly dysfunctional then European military cooperation seems like a no brainer to me. It would not need to be a European army, any more than there is a NATO army.

Most of the arguments against are based on blatant scaremongering, eg about conscription. Where conscription still exists in Europe it appears to be highly selective, civic or symbolic. France is often cited as having conscription but it is extremely symbolic at present - my son is doing his one compulsory day this month, which will consist of being shown around the local barracks, given talks about taking drugs and driving safety, and being fed copiously. Even Macron's plan to extend this is primarily about civic service. Modern armies do not want or need unwilling, unskilled cannon fodder.

What stops us joining forces with other countries, as allies, should the need arise? It worked during WW2 didn't it? Why do we need a European army?

Do you think that national militaries should only cooperate once war has broken out, rather than work strategically to defuse military threats?

There is no EU Army.
There is not going to be an EU Army.
Four members of the EU are neutral: Ireland, Finland, Sweden, Austria.
There are proposals to improve EU defence co-operation.
That's all.

Russian boats and planes which are regularly escorted out of our territories are never mentioned.

Russian aircraft have regularly been escorted out of UK airspace for decades - it's not a recent phenomena by any stretch of the imagination

It's rarely mentioned because it's always been such a common occurrence

If it ever happened it would be a very cost effective force
As cost effective as the EU parliament?

Yes. It is not a good thing.

I personally suspect a day will come in the not so distant future when we're going to wish we were part of an 'EU Army', with a resurgent Russia and an increasingly isolationist USA.

The EU bureaucracy is cheap compared to national civil services. If expect the same to be true of European military cooperation, where there would undoubtedly be significant potential for synergies.

That is exactly the point of the proposals, to reduce costs by exploiting synergies. If there is an expensive military organisation it is NATO which has outgrown its original Cold War purpose. FIL was a NATO general and even then he was frustrated with the inefficiency and outdated processes. Full on Thatcherite Tory though he was he welcomed the EU proposals for greater common process as common sense that was a long time coming.

Why is it that nobody questions the obvious value of common security processes but not military? It is just more knee jerk emotive nationalism.

The Trump presidency has shown we shouldn't assume we can rely on the USA. I think some increased defence/military co-operation on a European level will become inevitable and I should think the UK government will be keen to participate regardless of what happens with Brexit.

I'm broadly in favour of European military cooperation.

I think (I need to think about it more though) that I agree with Macron on this. Did anyone read his Economist interview?

Four members of the EU are neutral: Ireland, Finland, Sweden, Austria.

"The Dáil has approved Ireland’s participation in a German-led EU battlegroup next year."

"The force will include troops from countries including Austria, the Netherlands and Finland–and will be on standby for six months from July of next year."

"Sinn Féin spokesperson on defence Aengus Ó Snodaigh said the decision would further undermine Irish neutrality noting that when it comes to battlegroups, “the key is in the name.”

“Sending 1,000 soldiers to take sides in any conflict, anywhere in the world is a battle,” he said.

“Europe would have two such groups on standby with 3,000 battle-ready soldiers to send into an area to disarm one side or the other.

“That is taking sides and we are a neutral country.That is not our role; has never been our role and should never be in the future.”

People Before Profit TD Richard Boyd Barrett said the decision marked another step in Ireland support for the creation of a European Army. Calling it a “huge mistake” and warning that “it is not what the Irish people want.”

www.newstalk.com/news/irish-troops-eu-battlegroup-876402

I'm broadly in favour of European military cooperation.
I think (I need to think about it more though) that I agree with Macron on this.
This will not be popular in the UK. It will ensure that you lose you a 2nd Referendum.

I think most people believe that security cooperation is a good idea.

The Irish Army have seen a fair bit of overseas action in UN Blue Helmets, notably Jadotville where they were sold out by The Cruiser. It would be nice to think Srbrecinca might have turned out differently with them.

This new proposal sounds very dodgy, particularly coming from the Germans who distinguished themselves so well in Afghanistan when British and Danish troops died because the German rescue helicopters weren't allowed out in the dark or anywhere dangerous.

Perhaps we'll become a platoon of the US Army.
I think it's too difficult to meld a European Army. Let alone get agreement on when and where to deploy.

I think there would need to be one EU army from the start and train together, not train in separate countries then be expected to suddenly work as a team.