A European Army ?

[doc_bean]

Should we form one, and more importantly, how should it work ?

On the first part, I would say yes. The way things are going now Europe is quickly become a big juicy, defenseless apple. Most North African countries could probably rival us when it comes to military strength. Turkey could certainly kick our collective arses if they wanted to. Though they show no intension of course, then again a revolution is practically a cultural even in Turkey, and as LEN has pointed out, the fundamentalist have real political power these days.
But then I don't suspect they will be the main problem. It's Mother Russia I'm more concerned about. Putin has definitely shown ambition to once again make the country a superpower. They have a vast arsenal of nuclear weapons, manipulated their surrounding countries and have a tight grip on gas supplies to western Europe. While I don't suspect they'll ever make it to a country like Belgium. Several former Soviet countries would probably make a nice target (say Finland).
Of course, perhaps the army should be used for other things than defensive purposes too. We still have this NATO thing going on, and if, say North Korea, decides to bomb the US we are obliged to act (though if we would is another question entirely...). At the moment we wouldn't be able to do much. Most of our armies are pretty untrained for combat, our equipment is often ancient, the amount of actual soldiers is small, and perhaps most importantly, we have very little in the way of coordination.
Kosovo has clearly demonstrated how bad the current system works, afaik no major changes have happened since.

It could be argued that traditional warfare is a thing of the past, that nationalism is all but dead. But I doubt that's the whole story. China, Iran and the US are still pretty big on nationalism, it certainly still exist in Turkey and is probably on the rise in some other countries too. I feel it would be too early to predict that a major war on European soil will never happen again. It feels a bit like the whole dot com hype at the end of the 90s. Everybody said the traditional economy was dead, yet a few years later reality comes crashing in. People rely too much on money being able to fix everything, yet money is, essentially, fake, just like a lot of those dot com businesses, they didn't have any actual capital, any tangible assets.

Now to the other big question. How should be organised ? I'm VERY reluctant to give an army to the commision or the parliament. Mostly because I'm not a federalist (contrary to what is often said about Belgians...). I believe in the free market, not a unified European 'nation'. I'm very thankful that the UK is such a problem maker in the EU because often I find them the voice of reason. But then only the council would have authority over the army, and they're notoriously inefficient (it's like a smaller version of the UN...).
Another point is whether the army should really be 'one' or should exist out of different regiments coming from different countries with their own specialization. That's pretty much how the current system works I guess, with Belgium doing mostly just cargo transport. But then, should it be possible for a member of one country to join the regiment of another ? I'd imagine there'd be quite a few people on the mainland who'd want to join a unit like the Royal Marines. But then, if enough foreigners are in a certain country's armed forces, are they still the armed forces of that country ? Should the nations keep their own army separate from the European one ?(note: in the other case I'd say their contribution to the EU army should be making their forces available, I'm not suggesting disbanding national armies, not a federalist remember ? )

Anyone got any ideas on how this might work ?

[Ice]

As everyone knows, I'm not from Europe, but I believe a European Army would be an excellent idea.

I also think (you guys will never go for this), but if you formed something similar to the US federal state system you could become extremely powerful. Very unlikely I know, but the idea isn't to bad imho.

[InsaneApache]

I'd imagine there'd be quite a few people on the mainland who'd want to join a unit like the Royal Marines.

hahaha..I can't wait until haruch...sorry Banquos Ghost logs on.

Have you any idea of the drop out rate from our peacetime commados?

Sorry old fruit but it won't happen.

[solypsist]

Europe can't even get their UN peacekeeping forces right - how are they expected to operate an actual army?

[Avicenna]

At the very least, propose a way to deal with the language barrier.

[JAG]

As everyone knows, I'm not from Europe, but I believe a European Army would be an excellent idea.

I also think (you guys will never go for this), but if you formed something similar to the US federal state system you could become extremely powerful. Very unlikely I know, but the idea isn't to bad imho.

I completely agree with your post Ice, tis a good 'un.

A European army would not only allow all the nations in the EU to spend less on the military, but also specialise on specific parts of the military. And as many of our Capitalist friends will tell us, specialisation leads to far more efficiency and cohesion. It makes perfect sense.

The only reason against it is petty national interests, which is a pretty dibolical reason not to go with the idea.

Implementation is harder and that is often used as a 'reason' for not starting the process of an EU army in the first place, but I am sure after we got the ball rolling, debated and experimented with implementation things would fall into place.

I think there would have to clearly be a strong command system with as few people at the top as possible, for the system to work properly and it would also need a binding agreement of some sort as for the roles in which it would play, etc. It is a complicated process.

Anyway, a process which would be much easier if we had a far more federal approach to the EU.

[JAG]

At the very least, propose a way to deal with the language barrier.

English.

[Husar]

On the first part, I would say yes. The way things are going now Europe is quickly become a big juicy, defenseless apple. Most North African countries could probably rival us when it comes to military strength. Turkey could certainly kick our collective arses if they wanted to. Though they show no intension of course, then again a revolution is practically a cultural even in Turkey, and as LEN has pointed out, the fundamentalist have real political power these days.

Are you kidding? North African countries? Turkey vs all of Europe?
I don´t doubt that some of them are rather strong, but European armies today aren´t as bad as you say IMO. France and Britain have carriers and nukes and the rest of europe has quite formidable armies as well. Also keep in mind technology and training.

But then I don't suspect they will be the main problem. It's Mother Russia I'm more concerned about. Putin has definitely shown ambition to once again make the country a superpower. They have a vast arsenal of nuclear weapons, manipulated their surrounding countries and have a tight grip on gas supplies to western Europe. While I don't suspect they'll ever make it to a country like Belgium. Several former Soviet countries would probably make a nice target (say Finland).

I still refuse to think that Russia is such an evil country. Putin certainly isn´t a nice guy, but Russia is also very low on money and he gets a lot of money for his gas. Besides he is a good friend of Gerhard Schröder.

Should we form one, and more importantly, how should it work ?

Yes, we should, it could be organized similar to the french foreign legion with mostly volunteers. All european states should donate a certain amount of money and/or bases. If the idea works, we might even abandon local armies and put all the money and technology into one huge army for all of Europe. Because everything would be centered that way, it would be even better and stronger than the individual armies are today since there wouldn´t be rendundant weapon development like there is today. We could try to unite the benefits of all the individual technologies to make one superior weapon, or at least we could/should try.

My two cents.

[Kagemusha]

Im sorry Doc Bean.But have i completely ,misunderstanded you or do you think Finland is former Soviet State? At the moment Finland has conscription army of about 500 000 men of population of 5 million. Finland has never belong into any military alliance after WWII.
Russia and Finland has long tradition of conflicts and i wouldnt worry about Russian invasion against Finland anytime soon.
About European Army.Yes it would be a cost effective solution,but how to create that would be a whole another ball game.Personally i wouldnt mind a military alliance between Nordic countries.Becouse for example Finland and Sweden have mutual military manouvers all the time.

[Al Khalifah]

I think there would have to clearly be a strong command system with as few people at the top as possible, for the system to work properly and it would also need a binding agreement of some sort as for the roles in which it would play, etc. It is a complicated process.

You hit the nail on the head there with the exact reason why this wouldn't work. The EU cannot do anything without the most obscene amount of bureaucracy and deliberating - it would have to be overseen by all nations, probably with some ridiculous equal (or it least inequitable) representation of power. This would be the worst way to try and run an army and would make it a laughing stock. Without some very serious EU reorganisaton this just isn't a viable prospect.

The language barrier is also a great problem with this system. Many terrible mistakes were made in Bosnia due to poor communication between French and English speaking troops. While you can just say they should all speak English I cannot imagine the French accepting this for a second - especially considering that the United Kingdom has the 4th largest military (in terms of personnel) in the EU.

There are also serious differences in the calibre of units between nations - both in terms of training and equipment. If this were to be standardised acrosss the Union then many of our finest units would suffer from the process while pushing to maintain the best units would leave the UK and France looking at very large expenditure to keep their troops (and other nations') battle ready.

Finally, it's a bit pointless having a European Army if there is no standardised European foreign policy. Since the military of a civilised nation can be seen as the final branch of its diplomacy, without a common agreement on how to deal with other nations there could be no cohesion. Would the European Army have had to fight in Iraq? How would the EU feel about the heavy collaboration between the British and American militaries (especially the exchange of secrets)? Would such an army be duty bound to push for a withdrawl of American forces from Germany?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Way too many soveriegnty issues coming up in such an effort -- let alone the soluable but prickly logistic issues.

By-the-by, as France told NATO's unified command effort to go ___ up a rope, however do you think they'll play second fiddle to an EU military without even a cold war to lend a sense of need?

Might try getting an expansion of the role/purpose of Interpol, standardize emergency service providers and the like to build toward this end.

[Kralizec]

By-the-by, as France told NATO's unified command effort to go ___ up a rope, however do you think they'll play second fiddle to an EU military without even a cold war to lend a sense of need?

Traditionally, France has viewed and treated the European Community and later the Union as an extension of their power. (You could argue that with the EU referendum they woke out of this dream like a screaming nightmare)



I don't see how most of the European people, especially the ones with proud military traditions, accepting that the EU tells what their armies should do. A European task force seems like a logical solution.
Military hardware should primarily be bought from EU countries - France, Brittain and Germany mainly- people will feel better about paying for the EU if part of it is pumped back into their industries.
The biggest problem I see for the establishment of such an army is recruitment. Who'd be willing to join a European army rather then their national one? Better payment is an incentive but I think the public feeling about EU troops getting paid better then their own would be less then cordial.

Then there's the problem of getting enough support from member states. I don't see how they'll agree to it being decided by qualified majority. Though in this case, I think it would only be fair to let it depend on the consent of every member state.

[Zalmoxis]

I don't think a single European army should be made.

[IrishArmenian]

It will not work until Europe is a unfifed alliance of states. I can see a couple of countries who get warm and fuzzy thinking about each other making an effort to incorporate both armies, but not on a continental scale. Which brings me to this: where is the borders of Europe?
Good idea though, and it would be great if not for many ignorant politicians.
Why is Russia always the bad guy?

[King Ragnar]

Even if people tried which i wouldnt, it would never work, too many people would complain about how to run it etc. Its not like a merica where we can all become states because too many of the countries in Europe wouldnt want to lose their national identity.

I most certainley wouldnt want Britian to be apart of it, by all means the europeans can try but just leave us out thank you.

[Perplexed]

where is the borders of Europe?

The commonly excepted view is that Europe borders Asia in the east with the Ural Mountains, Caucasus Mountains, and the Straits of Bosphorus. In the south it borders Africa at the Straits of Gibraltar.

[Kralizec]

The commonly excepted view is that Europe borders Asia in the east with the Ural Mountains, Caucasus Mountains, and the Straits of Bosphorus. In the south it borders Africa at the Straits of Gibraltar.

What he said.

Technically Europe is just a peninsula and a part of the Eurasian continent.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

There are several things that need to be considered here, for starters the EU is a treaty Alliance rather than a state, secondly would this mean that the services would swear to the EU, not their contries or monarchs?

For an EU army to work you need the following:

One General Staff with members chosen soley on merit if this means the army is run by the Germans and the British and the Navy is run by the British and French, so be it. Its not going to happen.

Equipment harmonisation, everybody uses German rifles, British tanks and French planes. Its not going to happen.

Every country provides to all three services, no specialisation. It might be cheaper but its stupid. Lets say the British and French provide 75% of the sea power and then in an EU v USA war Britain goes with the US. The EU is screwed, lets say Germany provides all the infantry, they get nuked and everyone else is screwed.

There will be an EU Army when the EU becomes an actual country. That isn't going to happen because unlike the US we are already established entities with our own identies and beliefs. Look at the way Louis and I snipe at each other when the EU comes up, that goes back a thousand year.

[King Ragnar]

So Technically Britian isnt apart of it..

[Big_John]

lots of islands, including the british isles, are considered part of europe.

[Perplexed]

So Technically Britian isnt apart of it..

Britain has always been part of the European subcontinent, just like all the Mediterranean lislands like Sicily and Sardinia, and like all the other Atlantic (not including those islands off the east coast of North America) islands like Ireland and Iceland.

[King Ragnar]

We arent connected to the mainland part of it so i wouldnt really count us part of it, but ....

[doc_bean]

Im sorry Doc Bean.But have i completely ,misunderstanded you or do you think Finland is former Soviet State?

My mistake, I was looking for a country that people could identify with and would possibly be under Russian threat if they decided to try that old world domination thingie again

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Britain has always been part of the European subcontinent, just like all the Mediterranean lislands like Sicily and Sardinia, and like all the North Atlantic islands like Iceland.

The British have always felt themselves to be somewhat seperate, as have the Scandanavians.

[King Ragnar]

The British have always felt themselves to be somewhat seperate, as have the Scandanavians.

Because we are an independant island nation, which isnt part of the mainland, i will never see my self as European, only as British or English, and i wouldnt really want to be part of an army that we dont really need to be part off.

[Perplexed]

Because we are an independant island nation, which isnt part of the mainland, i will never see my self as European, only as British or English, and i wouldnt really want to be part of an army that we dont really need to be part off.

If you want to entertain these feeble isolationist ideals be my guest, but we British have never been able to distance ourselves from mainland Europe like the Americans have, simply because we are part of Europe, and there's no way to escape that. We've always been involved in issues of the mainland, and we always will be.

[Sirex1]

Could you say that modern Europe is like The Holy Roman (German) Empire was?
Same coheasion.

[doc_bean]

It will not work until Europe is a unfifed alliance of states.

Well, that's part of what I was wondering, could a confederate army work ?

I would loathe for Europe to become like the US with useless state parliaments, an ever growing federal government and that constant conflict of interests bewteen state and federal politicians leading to a decrease of personal liberty instead of the protection is was supposed to provide (seperate discussion, and no offence to the Americans meant).

Also, I simply can't see France and England being part of the same country. The Scots and the English barely manage to share one, a lot of Northern Irish would certainly rather be actual Irish, the Basques keep demanding independence and Catalonia is becomming its own state within Spain. I don't believe we can unite Europe, there's too much history for that ever to happen. I do hope that we can live together and work together. Because seperatly, we're small peas...

I can see a couple of countries who get warm and fuzzy thinking about each other making an effort to incorporate both armies, but not on a continental scale. Which brings me to this: where is the borders of Europe?

Different question really. For the record I don't think Turkey is a part of Europe. I also believe most Turks would agree with me on this.

Good idea though, and it would be great if not for many ignorant politicians.

Well, an army costs money, war is very (VERY) unpopular in most of mainland Europe. It would be a tough sell even for a good politician.

Why is Russia always the bad guy?

They're big, they've got nukes, they follow their own path (they don't even want to be in our little club !), they have 'media wars' with the EU over countries like Ukraine and Belarus. They've got Putin, who I find by far the scariest leader in the modern world. Bush just appears clueless, Kim Jong Il seems caught up in the cult like politics of NK, but Putin, he's smart.

[doc_bean]

Are you kidding? North African countries? Turkey vs all of Europe?I don´t doubt that some of them are rather strong, but European armies today aren´t as bad as you say IMO. France and Britain have carriers and nukes and the rest of europe has quite formidable armies as well. Also keep in mind technology and training.

Hyperbole. But if Kosovo has shown us anything its that we are very slow to react, and generally won't even. Now the Turkey thing was purely hypothetical, considering current global politics, but their army is far better than most European ones, with the exception of France and the UK perhaps. They are generally considered one of the most valuable NATO partners.

So while I don't see them (or any other country) as an immediate threat I am concerned about the 'gap' widening. If Europe continous down this road a lot of our neighbouring countries could pose a serious threat (military wise, not talking politics here) within a few decades. Since I plan to live a few more decades I am really concerned wiht the long term effect of our pacifism.

[scotchedpommes]

If you want to entertain these feeble isolationist ideals be my guest, but we British have never been able to distance ourselves from mainland Europe like the Americans have, simply because we are part of Europe, and there's no way to escape that. We've always been involved in issues of the mainland, and we always will be.

I'm glad that those sympathetic to the BNP can't purport to speak for all Britons
here. I can't see any European force being made to work, but also wouldn't want
to attempt to predict the future for the continent.