"'Britain Is Not Going To Be Participating In A..." Topic

…. European Army', Says Defence Secretary

"Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson has dismissed suggestions that the UK could join a European army.

Mr Williamson told MPs that NATO remained the "cornerstone" of the UK's defence strategy as he ruled out participating in any continental force….."
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Europe can;t even keep up to snuff in NATO,how can they afford a EURO army..?

1st requirement for an European army: having a common foreign policy. It doesn't exist.

Europe can;t even keep up to snuff in NATO

#Fake News

#Sad

Oh yes, they should totally form a continental European army and while they are at it place it under the command of the Germans. What could possibly go wrong.

No surprise the UK wouldn't be part of any EU army because of Brexit and close ties to the US, but if France and Germany align their policies and cooperate it's not out of the realm of possibility.

Despite claims that a proposed EU army will not compete with NATO, that is a pipe dream because there's simply not enough resources to fund both, which means that the EU army is really intended as an alternative to NATO because the two richest and most influential EU members tire of "Big Brother" constantly telling them they're not spending enough.

According to Fact Check: "NATO said that only four nations met that guideline in 2017: the U.S. (3.57 percent), Greece (2.36 percent), Britain (2.12 percent) and Estonia (2.08 percent). Poland, at an estimated 1.99 percent of GDP, was just shy of the goal."

I note that France and Germany are not on the list.

@pzivh43

As you stated the 2% of GDP is a guideline and not a mandatory requirement, and 0.5 percent of France or Germany's GDP is still much higher than 2% of Poland's or Estonia's. By having their own "EU Army" outside of NATO, they get to decide how much to spend on defense without US meddling.

The bottom line is that the richer nations don't want to subsidize the poorer nations' defense because they thenselves don't feel threatened by Russia. France and Germany had consistently vetoed any further NATO expansion after the red lines drawn in Georgia and Ukraine. They can live with Putin having his sphere-of-influence (i.e. "near abroad") as long as the gas keeps flowing in.

Did I walk into the Blue Fez by mistake?!

This pseudo-strategic stuff on my mainpage is the reason I find TMP less and less interesting for wargaming

Valerio, you know you can unsub from this board, right?

This idea has been floating around for a few years now. It fits in with the goal of "ever closer union" that is in one of the EU treaties ( I forget which… ).

I believe the intent is to combine the current EU member state armed forces into a single integrated entity, not creating a 'new' separate army on top of the current national ones. Neither the French or the Germans or anyone else wants to spend money on TWO armies! If this is the case they will presumably remain within NATO.

Neither the French or the Germans or anyone else wants to spend money on TWO armies! If this is the case they will presumably remain within NATO.

It's kinda vague. Both Macron and Merkel went on record saying such an army would "complement" NATO, whatever that means: link

But a combined EU army would probably be more efficient and cheaper to maintain than separate national ones.

Is an EU army even possible? For the basic soldier, where would his loyalties be, to the EU or home country first. NATO served to prevent Soviet aggression into Western Europe, what would be the mission of an EU army? There are much greater threats within the EU at this point, than external, which will get worse over the next few decades.

There are much greater threats within the EU at this point, than external, which will get worse over the next few decades.

Just what would that be?

The mission of an EU army, you ask?

Right now they would probably like to invade Britain. They seem a bit annoyed with us for some reason…

Probably the other way around with all of this talk of "Britain going out into the world and forging its own destiny"

If I lived in Anjou – or Manhattan – I'd be wondering "didn't I hear this before?"

I suspect any Euro army will suffer the same fate as some of their nation's weaker governments are now, and that military defense funds will invariably be plundered for other, "more important" domestic matters.

Then, someone will invade or attack, and those that plundered the defense budget(s) will point their fingers and say it was someone else's fault.

It will go the way of the "Border Force", everyone will promise money and manoower. Then nothing will happen and the problem will be solved.

1st requirement for an European army: having a common foreign policy. It doesn't exist.

Eeeeyup!

Same reason that the Euro (currency) was in such trouble back in 2011-12. No unified fiscal and monetary policies. I'm amazed that the EU managed to not have a complete currency collapse then.

Would any deployment require the agreement of all 27 (or 28 until 29th March 2019) governments?

I was surprised as a lot of other commentators seem to have been when Merkle jumped in on this one. She seemed to suggest that standardisation was an issue, which I can believe. But I'd also believe that everyone of the 27 with an indigenous defence industry is not going to buy in to an EU army without their own industry being promised a piece of pie! And I dread to imagine just how torturous an EU common defence kit project with 27 contributors would be…

how does the other eu/nato members feel about this eu army