EU Army - would you support it?

[Aldgarkalaughskel]

At present, there is no military of the European Union, only minor joint projects such as the Eurofighter, forums for armaments cooperation, French-German joint operations etc.

However the new Treaty of Lisbon says:

'The common security and defence policy shall include the progressive framing of a common defence policy. This will lead to a common defence, when the European Council, acting unanimously, so decides'. (TEU, Article 27).

So if the Treaty comes into force, the further development of this article would be to finally establish a regular EU army with both peacekeeping and operational capabilites. In previous years both French President Sarkozy and German Chancellor urged to create the unified EU army at once.

Would you support an EU army?

[removeduser_487563287433]

Not currently.

[Quink.NL]

No. My vision of the EU is that it's primarily an economic co-operation. I dislike the idea of a further cultural integration.

The military cost an awful lot of money, I don't want the EU to decide how much tax I have pay to support an army.

I think the EU has way too much influence and power already, affecting daily life, and sucking Dutch coin into some corrupt Balkan black hole.

I'm not an EU fan obviously. Although I do feel European, and agree we've got to co-operate in order to keep up with the U.S. and China Inc., let's keep it economic.

[ShockBlast]

There will be no big fonds for the EU army.
Some parts of the national armies will be united and a part of national defence budget will go to the EU army.
And this will mean less money because we will have common prjects no more french,british,german tanks....i have a feeling that the EU army will end up with german equpment but this is another discussion.
EU it`s not a simple economical block and what don`t you guys like that we have the biggest economy in the world? that EU is very ecological? that we will have a very good army?

[Razor]

No. My vision of the EU is that it's primarily an economic co-operation. I dislike the idea of a further cultural integration.

The military cost an awful lot of money, I don't want the EU to decide how much tax I have pay to support an army.

I think the EU has way too much influence and power already, affecting daily life, and sucking Dutch coin into some corrupt Balkan black hole.

I'm not an EU fan obviously. Although I do feel European, and agree we've got to co-operate in order to keep up with the U.S. and China Inc., let's keep it economic.

The way military is governed in present Europe is very but VERY inefficient. This is because all seperate countries have their own program and ideas and research and although there's some cooperation we're wasting way too much money while streamlining it and cooperation would cut in the costs significantly.

I'm not a fan of the EU either, atleast at this point. They shouldn't interfere in our daily lives, I think countries should mow their own grass in their own backyard. However economical and a unified foreign policy is definitely something we need. Therefore also a European army.

[LoZz]

no way in hell, couldnt trust half the countries that would be involved.

[Aldgarkalaughskel]

no way in hell, couldnt trust half the countries that would be involved.

Specify the countries please and tell us why wouldn't you trust them.

[wilpuri]

What doesn't matter what countries are involved when the peoples' of those respective nations are not. The EU is project that is firmly in the hand of the Eurocrats, the EU political class, not their electorates.

[ShockBlast]

What doesn't matter what countries are involved when the peoples' of those respective nations are not. The EU is project that is firmly in the hand of the Eurocrats, the EU political class, not their electorates.

In every country in EU has political parties that don`t want in EU if the want to get out they could vote that party.
The people we vot represent us it`s much and easy to acuse EU then to support it because the political class in almost any country when it has to do something that it`s not loked by the population says it`s becasue EU orderd.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Specify the countries please and tell us why wouldn't you trust them.

Well any of them. You can't share you armed forces with other sovereign states, it would be disasterous. There's currently talk of France and the United Kingdom sharing a joint navy - what the hell would have happened during the invasion of Iraq when the two states took opposing views? Plus, there's absolutely no way I would want to integrate something as overwhelmingly essentially as military force with the corruption, poverty and instability of the Balkans and the East or even Italy.

[wilting]

...instability of the Balkans

...is one of the major reasons for the impetous for defence cooperation. The pathethic European response to the Balkans Wars and the reliance on US convinced many of the necessity of an independent common European foreign and defence policy. Europe couldn't do anything about a genocide in it's own backyard.

Personally, I'd rather the Union's institutional mess was sorted out before deeper defence cooperation, but that isn't a very likely scenario. What I mean by that is, saying 'no, because I don't want to share military power with x country' is looking at the issue backwards. The first question is whether we need it, and the second question is how to do it. If the Nation-State centric stucture is in the way of needed policy, then it should be ...reformed.

Ultimately, necessity is the mother of invention, especially when it comes to European integration. Defence cooperation will always occur in slow steps until compelling reasons arise for it. Of course, one would prefer if such circumstances didn't arise.

I think a common power-projection/deployment capacity would be a good step in the current context. Only the UK, France and the US have the resources that are so necessary in the modern context for rapid deployment to distant operations - usually peacekeeping. These resources are overstretched as it is. Developing a common European sets of assets to support these kind of operations, which take place in cooperation between various States anyway, would be of great value.

besides we already have NATO, why spend money on pararel international defence structure?

Because NATO is US dominated, and US and European interests do not always align.

Who would control it and who pay for it?

Would this involve mixed nationality units?

our political views (and even how our armies function) are vastly different to each other.

These are examples of secondary issues, the primary issue is whether or not we need it. If we don't, all the better. If we do, then these are issues that should be overcome.

[Aldgarkalaughskel]

Well any of them. You can't share you armed forces with other sovereign states, it would be disasterous. There's currently talk of France and the United Kingdom sharing a joint navy - what the hell would have happened during the invasion of Iraq when the two states took opposing views? Plus, there's absolutely no way I would want to integrate something as overwhelmingly essentially as military force with the corruption, poverty and instability of the Balkans and the East or even Italy.

Of course you wouldn't want to integrate into anything "continental", as a British you're expected to oppose everything that makes the continent too powerful. No offense.

BTW, sovereignity is becoming myth (and a worn out argument) in the age of globalization, even when some countries still believe in the principle of absolute sovereignity.

Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden

our political views (and even how our armies function) are vastly different to each other.

False argument, think about NATO, the members have not just utterly different political views (f.e. on Iraqi wars), but utterly differenc cultures, societies as well. Think about Turkey and Canada.

[wilpuri]

BTW, sovereignity is becoming myth (and a worn out argument) in the age of globalization, even when some countries still believe in the principle of absolute sovereignity.

Sovereignty has become an abandoned ideal, not a myth.

It is an ideal most Europeans hold dear, yet it has been forsaken by the political class. If our politicians would be honest about the implications for national sovereignty, the EU wouldn't live a day longer.

[LoZz]

Specify the countries please and tell us why wouldn't you trust them.

Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden

our political views (and even how our armies function) are vastly different to each other.

[Blau&Gruen]

There is NATO and no need for an EU army. Beside NATO there are several defence cooperations between NATO partners which are within the EU. What purpose should an EU army have? Who would control it and who pay for it?

[Draco Borealis]

Hell no, it will be another step towards European super state, besides we already have NATO, why spend money on pararel international defence structure?

[Sven788]

Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden

our political views (and even how our armies function) are vastly different to each other.

I understand why you don't trust East-European countries, but countries like Belgium, Denmark, France, the Netherlands etc...
They are your best allies!

I don't like a European army, it would be that the Dutch and all of the west have to pay even more for the hole in the east.

[Philos Sophos]

I understand why you don't trust East-European countries, but countries like Belgium, Denmark, France, the Netherlands etc...
They are your best allies!

I don't like a European army, it would be that the Dutch and all of the west have to pay even more for the hole in the east.

Yeah,we drain money from ya...we are TEH evil bloodsuckers that everyone hates...we are constructing our economies now,it's obvious we can't spend our money on military...and also,before WW2,Estonia spent 20-25% of it's national budget on military

[jankren]

Nice, why not just start another WW1 already?

[Serious Spamurai]

Would this involve mixed nationality units? Can't imagine that working too well, unless they all had a common language, but everyone would argue over what to use, and communication would still be less than if they were all from the same country. Nations would also complain about some nations not contributing enough etc. The EU is a joke as it is, an EU army would be like a band of circus clowns.