This was a major reversal of British policy, which had always insisted that NATO be the exclusive institution for the common defense in the Atlantic area. The EU s motivation for CFSP, too, is clear, and frequently stated. But the French are not the only ones. As this Committee well understands, such reduced dependence on the United States can be a very good thing, in burden-sharing terms. We were right to take those positions.
European statements are ambiguous, to put it charitably.
But it must also be capable of conducting such action on its own if it wishes. It must therefore have its own arrangements for the provision of advice, analysis and military leadership, which it currently lacks. Defence Ministers must play a direct role, and they must be able to meet as and when the need arises. This EU effort to construct a separate European defense identity comes three years after NATO adapted its own procedures to recognize and promote a European Security and Defense Identity within the Alliance framework. At its ministerial meeting in Berlin in June 1996, the Atlantic allies created new mechanisms whereby the European members of NATO could act on their own, with NATO s blessing and a presumption of being able to use NATO assets.