Debate: Recommendation to the Council and the VPC/HR concerning the Implementation and governance of Permanent Structured Cooperation
Date: MONDAY, 19 OCTOBER 2020
Speaker: Josep Borrell Fontelles
Language: EN

PESCO is a key tool for Member States willing to cooperate more in the field of defence within the Union – for those who want to cooperate more in the field of defence. It has three main objectives: first, to enhance the European Union’s capacity as an international security actor; second, to maximise the effectiveness of our spending on defence; and third, and above all, to contribute better to the protection of the population of the countries of destination and, hence, European Union citizens. I think that we can be proud of what has been done in such a short time frame because, let’s not forget, PESCO projects were launched just a couple of years ago in 2018 and 2019. A large-scale PESCO project requires between 10 and 25 years to see the light of day. Whether carried out within the framework of PESCO or not, it takes 10 years. However, 15 PESCO projects could be operational as early as 2025, including in the cyber domain (the cyber rapid response teams), the field of medical support (the European Medical Command) and the area of land battlefield missiles. Other projects, such as those in the anti-missile defence field – the European Patrol Corvette or the TWISTER project – will need more time, but they are already producing concrete and variable results and reinforcing our European Union and our Member States’ military capacity to act and enhance their strategic autonomy. Today, everybody is talking about ‘strategic autonomy’, but there is also a big debate about what these words that everybody is using actually mean. I know that there are strong differences of opinion on the meaning of these two words. However, I think that we can already see good coherence between PESCO and the European Defence Fund. In fact, 50% of the actions that will receive funding from the European Defence Industrial Development Programme, the precursor of the European Defence Fund, are related to PESCO projects. We will keep working together with the Commission, with my friend Commissioner Breton, to ensure such coherence and synergies.  Let me also highlight that 38 of the 47 PESCO projects are fully coherent with NATO priorities. The need to avoid overlap with NATO priorities is considered when selecting new PESCO projects. The other nine projects are more of an operational nature, combining existing capabilities, or they specifically contribute to the development of European technological sectors. This is the case, for instance, with the project ‘material and components for technological EU competitiveness’, which will develop highly technological electronic components. At the same time, one of the key goals put forward for the next phase of PESCO is to focus more on operational projects. We should prioritise projects where Member States stand ready to deploy joint forces on the ground and which deliver concrete and visible results. I think this is the kind of project that we have to prioritise – several Member States deploying joint forces on the ground – as this is something visible that makes it easy to understand what it means to have a common European security policy.  PESCO has great potential, and it is only just starting. Of course, we are still on a learning curve and there is room for improvement, as I stressed in my assessment report this year and as you point out in your recommendation. More binding commitments are at the heart of PESCO. We have seen progress in many areas, including on the need to regularly increase defence budgets. That said, I think there is scope for Member States to better fulfil their commitments. Allow me to give a couple of examples. I think that there is scope for them first to provide substantive support to cover security and defence policy missions and operations – as I said, deploying forces on the ground through our missions and operations should be a priority – and, second, to make more systematic use of the European Union defence tools in national planning and decision-making. As I stated in my recent letter to EU defence ministers, the PESCO strategic review should serve to set up clear milestones for the next phase. I can assure you that many topics raised in your recommendation will be reflected in this review.  Wrapping up this review offers an opportunity to reaffirm PESCO’s main political objective for the next five years, to highlight the projects that will deliver concrete results before 2025 and, last but not least, to identify concrete incentives that will help Member States to fulfil their commitments, in particular when it comes to operational projects. We will discuss these issues with defence ministers in November and I sincerely hope that our Member States will decide on an ambitious next phase for PESCO.