5 février 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

Brexit turns up the heat on access rules to EU defense coffers

By: Sebastian Sprenger

COLOGNE, Germany — European leaders should modify rules to include Britain and the United States in their defense-cooperation efforts, ending a simmering dispute that could turn toxic over time, according to the director general of the European Union Military Staff.

“We will find a way [on] how to engage the United States and other third-party states,” Lt. Gen. Esa Pulkkinen told Defense News in an interview in Washington last week. But he cautioned that the unresolved issue could become a “permanent” thorn in the side of relations with the United States, in particular.

At issue are the conditions for access to the multibillion-dollar European Defence Fund and its associated collaboration scheme, the Permanent Structured Cooperation, or PESCO. The funds are meant to nurse the nascent defense capabilities of the continent's member states, with the idea that NATO would be strengthened in the process.

Officials have left the door open for the U.K., which recently left the EU, as well as its defense companies to partake in individual projects, given the country's importance as a key European provider of military capabilities. But the exact terms have yet to be spelled out, requiring a balancing act between framing member states as primary PESCO beneficiaries while providing a way in for key allies.

Defense officials in Washington previously criticized the EU initiative, complaining that it would needlessly shut out American contractors. European leaders countered that the program is first and foremost meant to streamline the bloc's disparate military capabilities, stressing that avenues for trans-Atlantic cooperation exist elsewhere.

“EDF and PESCO isn't everything in the world,” Pulkkinen said in Washington. “We are not going to violate any U.S. defense industrial interests.

“The defense industry is already so globalized, they will find a way [on] how to work together.”

While European governments have circulated draft rules for third-party access to the EU's defense-cooperation mechanism, a final ruling is not expected until discussions about the bloc's budget for 2021-2027 are further along, according to issue experts.

Officials at the European Defence Agency, which manages PESCO, are taking something of a strategic pause to determine whether the dozens of projects begun over the past few years are delivering results.

Sophia Besch, a senior research fellow with the Centre for European Reform, said the jury is still out over that assessment. “The big question is whether the European Union can prove that the initiatives improve the operational capabilities,” she said.

Aside from the bureaucratic workings of the PESCO scheme, the German-French alliance — seen as an engine of European defense cooperation — has begun to sputter, according to Besch.

In particular, Berlin and Paris cannot seem to come together on operational terms — whether in the Sahel or the Strait of Hormuz — at a time when Europe's newfound defense prowess runs the risk of becoming a mostly theoretical exercise, Besch said.

The EU members' ambitions remain uneven when it comes to defense, a situation that is unlikely to change anytime soon, according to a recent report by the German Marshall Fund of the United States.

“The dispute around the concept of strategic autonomy has not led to any constructive consensus, and it will likely affect debates in the future,” the document stated. “Member states and the EU institutions will continue to promote different concepts that encapsulate their own vision of defense cooperation.”

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/02/04/brexit-turns-up-the-heat-on-access-rules-to-eu-defense-coffers

Sur le même sujet

  • US Should Pull Drones From Missile Control Regime: Mitchell Institute

    4 juin 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    US Should Pull Drones From Missile Control Regime: Mitchell Institute

    "I have great hopes that this administration, with its bold unilateral actions on so many fronts, would take unilateral action with this regime on UAVs," says Keith Webster, former DoD head of defense cooperation. By THERESA HITCHENSon June 03, 2020 at 12:48 PM WASHINGTON: The Trump administration should unilaterally declare that it will no longer subject drone sales to export control restrictions under the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), says a new Mitchell Institute study. And Congress should use the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) to redefine unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) as aircraft, which not only remove them from MTCR restrictions but also would ease US domestic export controls, asserts the paper, “”Modernizing UAV Export Policy for Effective Coalition Forces,”. “The US Congress should craft language in the 2021 NDAA that defines UAVs as aircraft, not cruise missiles, but as aircraft, and subject to the same export considerations as any other military aircraft,” said Heather Penny, senior resident fellow at Mitchell and the paper's author, during a webinar today. “We believe that this language, a statute, would be sufficient to be able to remove UAVs from being subject to the MTCR guidelines.” The 35-nation MTCR agreement requires a “strong presumption of denial” for sales of so-called Category 1 drones — those that can carry a 500 kilogram payload more than 300 kilometers. The Category 1 definition is considered as the minimum capability a missile needs to carry a nuclear warhead. Smaller unmanned aerial vehicles also are covered under MTCR's Category 2 rules, but those export restrictions are less stringent. Even the treaty-hating Trump administration sees the MTCR — a political agreement rather than a treaty — as a key tool in preventing the proliferation of ballistic and cruise missiles. This is despite its long-standing efforts to ease drone sales to allies, including through revamping US domestic law to allow “Direct Commercial Sales” by companies, rather than requiring all sales to go through the formal Foreign Military Sales process that requires approval by DoD, the State Department and Congress. Indeed, over the past year the administration tried — and failed — to convince its MTCR partners to revamp the rules to allow drones flying less than 800 kilometers per hour to slip out from under the Category 1 rules, said Penny. Washington is now expected to try again at the annual MTCR signatories meeting, she said, instead suggesting a 600 kph speed limit as the line of demarcation between the two categories of export restrictions. (The meetings are usually held in the fall, although there has yet to be an announcement of the 2020 dates.) But, Penny argued, even if this new effort comes to fruition, it would fail to fix the underlying problem of allowing allies to buy high-end US combat drones — and preventing them from fully integrating with US operations. Secondly, she asserted, complying with MTCR rules “distort the market” in favor of Chinese sales, she said, since China is not a member of the MTCR and has few formal restrictions on arms exports. “Continuing to adhere to and apply MTCR guidelines to UAVs facilitates Chinese strategic interests,” Penny said. “It's working against US interests.” Keith Webster, former DoD head of defense cooperation, agreed — calling efforts to revise the MTCR as a “Band-Aid” that would soon loose viability because of the rapid pace of technology improvement. “I wish we would act unilaterally,” he told the Mitchell Institute webinar. “We have the ability to act unilaterally. And I would like to see us do so very soon. I have great hopes that this administration, with its bold unilateral actions on so many fronts, would take unilateral action with this regime on UAVs.” That doesn't mean, Webster hastened to add, pulling out of MTCR itself. “Stay in the MTCR,” he said. “It served its purpose.” The experts acknowledged that a unilateral US move to exempt UAVs from MTCR could spur other nations to do the same for their own weapons systems that could exacerbate nuclear proliferation. Penny stressed that it was key for the US to renew its commitment to nonproliferation of ballistic and cruise missiles, and support MTCR's rules for those systems. Saying that “we need to be honest with ourselves about the implications” while seeking “creative solutions” to the UAV issue, Webster seemed to suggest that ultimately the US may decide the MTCR itself isn't worth the trade off. “There are challenges with compliance within the regime with at least one member,” he warned. As Breaking D readers know, US military leaders and Congress have sounded the alarm on the proliferation of cruise missiles by Russia (an MTCR member) and China that can more easily slip through US ballistic missile defense systems. This is especially true for hypersonic missiles, which have speeds above Mach 5 and while visible on radar are extremely hard to target. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/06/us-should-pull-drones-from-missile-control-regime-mitchell-institute/

  • Thales Alenia Space signs contract with European Commission and announces kickoff of EuroHAPS Project for demonstration of stratospheric platform

    10 mars 2023 | International, Aérospatial

    Thales Alenia Space signs contract with European Commission and announces kickoff of EuroHAPS Project for demonstration of stratospheric platform

    EuroHAPS was selected by the European Commission on July 20, 2022 after a call for collaborative defense research and development projects from the European Defense Fund (EDF).

  • DoD and Australia ink first-ever cyber training partnership

    9 décembre 2020 | International, C4ISR, Sécurité

    DoD and Australia ink first-ever cyber training partnership

    Mark Pomerleau WASHINGTON — The U.S. military and Australia announced a first-of-its-kind agreement to develop a virtual cyber training range together. U.S. Cyber Command will incorporate Australian Defence Force feedback into the Persistent Cyber Training Environment (PCTE), per a Cyber Training Capabilities Project Arrangement signed Nov. 3. This agreement is valued at $215.19 million over six years and provides the flexibility to develop cyber training capabilities for the future, Cyber Command said in a release Dec. 4. PCTE is an online client that allows Cyber Command's warriors to log on from anywhere in the world to conduct individual or collective cyber training and mission rehearsal. In the physical world, military forces regularly go to a training facility, such as the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, to work on particular concepts or rehearse before deploying. But a robust environment has not existed for the Department of Defense's cyber warriors, creating readiness gaps. The program is run by the Army on behalf of the joint cyber force. “Australia and the U.S. have a strong history of working together to develop our cyber capabilities and train our people to fight and win in cyberspace,” said Australian Army Maj. Gen. Marcus Thompson, the Australian signatory and head of Information Warfare for the Australian Defence Force. “This arrangement will be an important part of the ADF's training program, and we look forward to the mutual benefits it will bring.” In the past, the two countries created cyber training ranges separately, which could take months and stymied cooperation efforts, Cyber Command noted. U.S. officials have long held that the military will never fight alone, and this extends to cyberspace. “This project arrangement is a milestone for U.S.-Australian cooperation. It is the first cyber-only arrangement established between the U.S. Army and an allied nation, which highlights the value of Australia's partnership in the simulated training domain,” said Elizabeth Wilson, U.S. signatory and Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Defense Exports and Cooperation. “To counter known and potential adversarial threats, the Army has recalibrated our strategic thinking; we've made smart decisions to refocus our efforts to invest in the new, emerging and smart technologies that will strengthen our ability to fight and win our nation's wars.” Gen. Paul Nakasone, head of Cyber Command and the National Security Agency, has made partnerships — with other nations, private sector actors and academia — a key pillar of his tenure. Cyber Command has deployed personnel to other nations to conduct what it calls hunt forward missions, which serve the dual role of helping shore up defenses of partners while allowing U.S. cyber personnel to potentially uncover tools used by adversaries to better understand their techniques. Congress, in the annual defense policy bill for fiscal 2021, also authorized a pilot program with Vietnam — which many cyber experts assert is rapidly growing its cyber capabilities — Thailand and Indonesia to enhance their cybersecurity, resilience and readiness of military forces. https://www.c4isrnet.com/cyber/2020/12/04/dod-and-australia-ink-first-ever-cyber-training-partnership/

Toutes les nouvelles