WRITTEN QUESTION E-0334/03 by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Council. NATO enlargement and the European Union's defence policy.
Date: 2003-02-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, NATO, United States, Western European Union, common security and defence policy, enhanced cooperation, enlargement of an international organisation, rapid reaction force

21.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 280 E/49

For reasons of efficiency and effective use of resources, the Commission relies on Article 10 of the EC
Treaty only as a secondary basis. It is used as the main legal basis only in the event of repeated lack of
cooperation. That has not been the case with Ireland during the last three years.

(1) COM(2002) 324 final.

(2003/C 280 E/050)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0334/03

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Council

(10 February 2003)

Subject: NATO enlargement and the European Union’s defence policy

The summit of heads of state and government of
the 19 NATO countries held in Prague on
21/22 November 2002 in the presence of the leaders of the organisation’s 27 partner countries meeting
in the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council was primarily concerned with two fundamental issues: upgrading
NATO’s strategic capabilities and the enlargement of NATO, three years after the accession of the first
three former Soviet bloc members.

The need to overhaul the North Atlantic Alliance’s political and strategic structure arises from the
proliferation of potential sources of instability and insecurity (in contrast with the Soviet threat which
previously predominated) and the extension of the tasks entrusted to NATO by the Strategic Concept of
1991 and 1999, which included opposition to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and action
to combat international terrorism and organised crime. It appears from the results achieved in Prague that
the North Atlantic Alliance is still the political and military linchpin of Europe’s new security, even if the
summit did not succeed in solving all the outstanding political and institutional issues to be resolved by
the Alliance.

Can the Council answer the following:

1. Does it regard NATO as an alliance in the traditional sense, or as a new and more effective system of

collective security in embryo?

2. Within NATO, how are relations between the European Union and the United States progressing and

developing?

3.

In military terms, what will be the relationship between European Union’s Rapid Reaction Force and
NATO’s Response Force, given that 17 of the 19 NATO states are European?

4. What role is played by the WEU in this connection?

5.

Is it conceivable that the ‘enhanced cooperation’ approach could give the participating countries the
effectiveness required to ensure an autonomous defence policy?

Reply

(21 July 2003)

The Council would remind the Honourable Member that evaluating the nature or the effectiveness of
another international organisation such as NATO does not lie within the Council’s sphere of competence,
and that relations between the European Union and the United States are the subject of a direct bilateral
dialogue, which is ongoing and at all levels, in the context of the New Transatlantic Agenda.

Similarly, the Council would point out that the States which are members of both NATO and the EU may
declare their forces for one or the other or for both. Units intended for rapid reaction may be declared for
both organisations, and if necessary put into action according to their own procedures.

C 280 E/50

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

21.11.2003

As concerns the Rapid Reaction Elements of the EU, the Council agreed to task its preparatory bodies and
to finalise work as soon as possible on the basis of the following general principles:

(cid:1) reaction within 5 to 30 days or less;

(cid:1) streamlining of crisis management procedures according to the operational requirements of rapid

response;

(cid:1) advance planning based on illustrative scenarios;

(cid:1) specific identification of rapid response elements in the Headline Force Catalogue;

(cid:1) modalities for the use of the agreed framework nation concept and other concepts as may be agreed.

In accordance with the conclusions of the European Council in Nice on 7, 8 and 9 December 2000 and of
the meeting of the WEU Council of Ministers in Marseilles on 13 November 2000, the Council adopted
decisions of principle on the inclusion by the EU of the appropriate functions in the field of the Petersberg
tasks.

The Treaty of Nice introduced a new Article 27(b) into the Treaty on European Union, stipulating that the
enhanced cooperation established by the Treaty shall not relate to matters having military or defence
implications. The examination of any modification to these provisions would in any event fall within the
remit of the current proceedings of the Convention on the future of Europe.

(2003/C 280 E/051)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0345/03

by Hans-Peter Martin (PSE) to the Council

(5 February 2003)

Subject: HGV transit problems

After the so far very unsatisfactory attempts to solve the Europe-wide HGV transit problem, which has
extremely serious repercussions, particularly in the Alps, with their special environmental and geographical
characteristics, there are now a great many protest campaigns in the offing, organised by outraged citizens
in the areas concerned.

Can the Council understand the protesters’ motivation, and what specific steps is it currently thinking of
taking?

Reply

(21 July 2003)

The Council is very well aware of the problems relating to the Europe-wide transit of heavy goods vehicles,
including that of the transit through the Alps. This awareness stems from the discussions and negotiations
devoted during the year 2002 to this overall problem and in particular to the closely linked proposed
Regulation aiming to establish a transitional transit system through Austria for the year 2004 (COD 2001/
0310), not only at numerous Council meetings but also at the European Council in Copenhagen, including
the Council meeting (‘Transport’ formation) in Brussels on 31 December 2002 dedicated to this very issue.
On this basis, the Council is well informed on the protesters’ motivation referred to by the Honourable
Member.

As regards future steps which the Council
intends to undertake, the Council informs the Honourable
Parliamentarian that it is now considering the opinion of the European Parliament on the proposed
Regulation in question. Furthermore,
is awaiting the
Commission’s initiatives with respect to the charging of infrastructure. Such a system, when applied to the
different modes of transport on a Community-wide basis, and when applied in a more transparent way
taking into account the external cost by the traffic, should constitute the appropriate framework for
addressing the overall problem of the HGV transit throughout the Community, including the particular
situations such as the transit through the Alps, as referred to by the Honourable Member.

it should be borne in mind that

the Council