"EU needs defence force 'under Union command' "

[jhungary]

Wasn't the eurocorp serve their purpose, and now they wanted more??

My wife used to serve in NORBAT and she told me the EU military is in Shiite situation then, country either depend on NATO or completely ignore NATO...

IMO, you can't really set up a EU military and folded all, try to have the French under German commands

 

[Anubis]

You would be better qualified in responding to this question seeing that you come from a more developed country in the EU,a country that has to absorb immigrants from a less developed countries, like mine.The only entity i would not like to see in the EU from that list is Kosovo as I ,and oficialy my country, don't recognise it as a legitimate state.



Fingers crossed for the UK to leave us in 2017 as for the americans,well,under all the facade smiles,ofcourse they oppose the ideea but we shouldn't care about that.Time for them to deal with Asia Pacific drama and for europeans to secure their own faith,different from the USA.

You will need a leading country to lead the force.Two candidates are France and Germany(troubled marriage relationship)...besides we have 50,000 soldiers in Germany.Besides being in two coalitions at the same time will pose a problem for most of the countries.The US will need Germany/France/Italy(the giants) in Korea.And when we need our friends and they tell us they are busy fighting pirates in Somalia we will be sad....you get the idea...if this plan is materialized we will see a huge shift in global politics and the US might loose some good friends!

Wasn't the eurocorp serve their purpose, and now they wanted more??

My wife used to serve in NORBAT and she told me the EU military is in Shiite situation then, country either depend on NATO or completely ignore NATO...

IMO, you can't really set up a EU military and folded all, try to have the French under German commands

Germany-France will see a power struggle here....Germany in recent times seem a little puritanical....while France loves to go guns blazing in Africa.Besides corporate interests are also to be accounted for....Both France and Germany are very good weapons manufacturer....who will be the lucky one to arm the new military and bring home billions of Euros??

 

[flamer84]

Wasn't the eurocorp serve their purpose, and now they wanted more??

My wife used to serve in NORBAT and she told me the EU military is in Shiite situation then, country either depend on NATO or completely ignore NATO...

IMO, you can't really set up a EU military and folded all, try to have the French under German commands

This is not about someone in command but about integration of european armies.The EU battlegroups are a good ideea but they are not implemented properly and mostly they're a force on paper.
First thing we need is defence forces standardization,this standardization,as i've said it many times must be made with european weapons as much as possible and with reasonable budgets that must be respected by every member.As far as i know the NATO rule is 2.38% of GDP but many don't respect it.

When i mean standardization i'm thinking in the lines of :

fighter jets for EU members:Gripen,Eurofighter,Rafale.
Tanks:Leopard 2ax
etc.

European countries like mine for example,or Poland,Italy shouldn't go for F16's,F 35,etc.This level of integration will help defence industries across Europe to as the manufacturers could open off set programs throughout Europe,if demand is out there ofcourse.The general command of all EU battlegroups should be on a rotation period ,let's 6 months in command for each member.

As an example:

Norway (altough not a EU member)+ Sweden+Denmark+Finland=Nordic Battle Group
Baltic states +Poland+ Germany=Eastern Battle Group
Romania+Bul+Gre=South East Battlegroup
Slo+Hun+Czech Rep+Slovakia+Austria+Cro=Central Battle group
France+Ireland+Lux+Netherlands+Bel=Western Battle Group
Spain+Por+Italy=Southern Battle Group

Ofcourse it will be needed for these battle groups to share a commonality in equipments and this will require serious investments in their current militaries.

 

[flamer84]

Germany-France will see a power struggle here....Germany in recent times seem a little puritanical....while France loves to go guns blazing in Africa.Besides corporate interests are also to be accounted for....Both France and Germany are very good weapons manufacturer....who will be the lucky one to arm the new military and bring home billions of Euros??

Sharing my friend.Let's say the Leo2A7 is chosen as the tank for european armies.You open factories in Spain,France to produce these tanks.You open factories for parts in Romania,Bulgaria to.When the demand is out there you can't manufacture them only in Germany,and this goes for other products.

 

[Anubis]

Sharing my friend.Let's say the Leo2A7 is chosen as the tank for european armies.You open factories in Spain,France to produce these tanks.You open factories for parts in Romania,Bulgaria to.When the demand is out there you can't manufacture them only in Germany,and this goes for other products.

That is where France will refuse to make any Leo parts...they will stick to Leclerc .And we see this kind of problems in the US...with the F22 we tried to incorporate many states and giving different states different parts to make.It turned out to be a blunder.Even if you reach your ultimate goal it is going to be incredibly difficult.Leo vs Leclerc,HK vs Famas....Since UK will leave BAE systems will also leave Eurofighter....then you will need Germany to buy up the 33% of Eurofighter owned by BAE...then it will be Eurofighter vs Dassault.

 

[Dillinger]

That is where France will refuse to make any Leo parts...they will stick to Leclerc .And we see this kind of problems in the US...with the F22 we tried to incorporate many states and giving different states different parts to make.It turned out to be a blunder.Even if you reach your ultimate goal it is going to be incredibly difficult.Leo vs Leclerc,HK vs Famas....Since UK will leave BAE systems will also leave Eurofighter....then you will need Germany to buy up the 33% of Eurofighter owned by BAE...then it will be Eurofighter vs Dassault.

It doesn't end there. If Britain leaves and there is an exit from or conflict with NATO then the nuke weapons sharing goes out of the window leaving only France with an established nuclear arsenal and delivery platforms in the mix, also France would be the only nation with the experience of operating/building capital surface platforms and nuke boats. Sweden will NOT give up its aerospace and naval industry, Germany most definitely will not let its share of the SSK pie slip by. Any equipment standardization will bite the dust. As for command and control, one need only look at the loops NATO has to jump through to keep the egos satiated and on board. Unless there comes a day when America sinks and a resurgent Russia threatens Europe in a manner akin to the Soviets- this union is not possible.

 

[flamer84]

That is where France will refuse to make any Leo parts...they will stick to Leclerc .And we see this kind of problems in the US...with the F22 we tried to incorporate many states and giving different states different parts to make.It turned out to be a blunder.Even if you reach your ultimate goal it is going to be incredibly difficult.Leo vs Leclerc,HK vs Famas....Since UK will leave BAE systems will also leave Eurofighter....then you will need Germany to buy up the 33% of Eurofighter owned by BAE...then it will be Eurofighter vs Dassault.

Nobody said it would be easy,it's damn hard.
The Leclerc is a dead project anyway,few manufactured and very expensive.France won't loose anything if it will manufacture some Leo's right now.As for the fighters,the european market is big enough for EF and Rafale,even for the Gripen.

 

[Dillinger]

Nobody said it would be easy,it's damn hard.
The Leclerc is a dead project anyway,few manufactured and very expensive.France won't loose anything if it will manufacture some Leo's right now.As for the fighters,the european market is big enough for EF and Rafale,even for the Gripen.

A uniform and centralized defense force will require fleet standardization which most definitely will not leave room for a multitude of platforms in the same category, unless someone wants to court the mother of all MRO related nightmares, not to mention the difference in TBOs for example on all these platforms adding to logistics and maintenance complexities.

 

[flamer84]

A uniform and centralized defense force will require fleet standardization which most definitely will not leave room for a multitude of platforms in the same category, unless someone wants to court the mother of all MRO related nightmares, not to mention the difference in TBOs for example on all these platforms adding to logistics and maintenance complexities.

If India has some 4 fighter platforms right now ,you can't distribute 3 amongst 27 european nations and make it work?

 

[Dillinger]

If India has some 4 fighter platforms right now ,you can't distribute 3 amongst 27 european nations and make it work?

Nope, not when the rafale and EF and Gripen-NG fall in the same segment. You need to understand they are all MRCAs, which means that they cannot occupy different roles within the operational doctrines- again unless someone wants to engage in expensive duplication of capabilities.

 

[-SINAN-]

There are 8 promising candidates being stated in the report, including Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Iceland, Kosovo, FYR Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey.

They will be all members except Turkey.

 

[flamer84]

Nope, not when the rafale and EF and Gripen-NG fall in the same segment. You need to understand they are all MRCAs, which means that they cannot occupy different roles within the operational doctrines- again unless someone wants to engage in expensive duplication of capabilities.

Most european air forces only have 1 fighter type as a multi role fighter.There's nothing stoping us distributing these 3 fighters amongst our nations.Poorer nations like mine could go for the Gripen while others for the EF/Rafale.I fail to see how this will block integration in a common war scenario,especially because all 3 are western manufactured and mostly use the same ammo.

They will be all members except Turkey.

You're such a pesimist

 

[Zabaniyah]

Hmm....an EU Military without NATO? Sounds a bit redundant if you ask me. I mean, why fix something that isn't broken? I agree though that NATO mostly addresses US interests, and not individual European interests in matters relating to security.

The French and the Malians did a decent job in Mali...............unlike some others I could name.

Anyhow, an EU Military sounds really cool! It's just cool....

 

[Dillinger]

Most european air forces only have 1 fighter type as a multi role fighter.There's nothing stoping us distributing these 3 fighters amongst our nations.Poorer nations like mine could go for the Gripen while others for the EF/Rafale.I fail to see how this will block integration in a common war scenario,especially because all 3 are western manufactured and mostly use the same ammo.



You're such a pesimist

Then MRO and BRD will have to be kept separate, which will lead to a lack of cohesion. A fighting force isn't meant to serve the purpose of just being there- but to be efficient and effective- as effective as possible. Now the good thing is that NATO has left the nations in question with vast experience in the inter-operability and there are indeed common munitions. But a unified command will then have to be a copy of the NATO minus the US for this to work- leaving very little space for any radical changes.

 

[-SINAN-]

You're such a pesimist

Mate, i made a calculation just now.

All other candidates combined population = 17.5 million Turkey = 80 million.

All other candidates combined GDP = $115 Billion Turkey = $780 Billion (Estimated to reach $850 Billion 2 months later.)

I think we are really big for integration. We should go for a strategic partnership instead (Free Trade, etc..)