European Union–NATO relations

The European Union (EU) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) are two main treaty-based Western organisations for cooperation between member states, both headquartered in Brussels, Belgium. Their natures are different and they operate in different spheres: NATO is a purely intergovernmental organisation functioning as a military alliance whose primary task is to implement article 5 in the North Atlantic Treaty on collective territorial defence. The EU on the other hand is a partly supranational and partly intergovernmental sui generis entity akin to a confederation[1][2] that entails wider economic and political integration. Unlike NATO, the EU pursues a foreign policy in its own right - based on consensus, and member states have equipped it with tools in the field of defence and crisis management; the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) structure.

European Union–NATO relations

EU
NATO

The EU and NATO have 27 and 30 member states, respectively — of which 21 are members of both. Another four NATO members are EU applicants—Albania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Turkey. Two others—Iceland and Norway—have opted to remain outside of the EU, but do participate in the EU's single market as part of their European Economic Area (EEA) membership. The memberships of the EU and NATO are distinct, and some EU member states are traditionally neutral on defence issues. Several EU member states were formerly members of the Warsaw Pact. Denmark has an opt-out from the CSDP.[3]

The EU has its own mutual defence clause in Articles 42(7) and 222 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), respectively. The CSDP command and control structure is however much smaller than the NATO Command Structure (NCS), and the extent to which the CSDP should evolve to form a full defence arm for the EU that is able to implement the EU mutual defence clause in its own right is a point of contention, and the United Kingdom (UK) has objected to this. At the UK's insistence in the negotiations leading to the Treaty of Lisbon, Article 42.2 of TEU also specifies that NATO shall be the main forum for the implementation of collective self-defence for EU member states that are also NATO members.

The 2002 Berlin Plus agreement and 2018 Joint declaration provide for cooperation between the EU and NATO, including that that NCS resources may be used for the conduct of the EU's CSDP missions.

History
Further information: History of NATO and History of the Common Security and Defence Policy

1948-1951: Common origins, where NATO cannibalises intra-European initiatives
Main articles: Treaty of Brussels, Western Union (alliance), and North Atlantic Treaty

The Western Union, established to implement the 1948 Treaty of Brussels signed by France, the Netherlands, the Benelux countries and the United Kingdom, represents a precursor to both NATO and the EU's defence arm, the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). WUDO's organisational chart as of November 1948, in which solid and dashed lines indicate control and liaison lines, respectively:[4]

Consultative Council
(foreign or prime ministers)
Permanent Commission (4 ambassadors in London
plus Foreign Office representative)		Defence Committee (defence ministers)
Military Supply Board
Chiefs of Staff Committee (WUCOS)
Finance Committee
UN General Assembly Special CommitteeSecurity CommitteeMilitary Committee and Combined Staff of WUCOSCommanders-in-Chief Committee and its Chairman
C-in-C Western Europe Land ForcesC-in-C Western Europe (Tactical) Air ForceFlag Officer Western Europe

Since the end of World War II, sovereign European countries have entered into treaties and thereby co-operated and harmonised policies (or pooled sovereignty) in an increasing number of areas, in the so-called European integration project or the construction of Europe (French: la construction européenne). The following timeline outlines the legal inception of the European Union (EU)—the principal framework for this unification. The EU inherited many of its present responsibilities from the European Communities (EC), which were founded in the 1950s in the spirit of the Schuman Declaration.

Legend:
  S: signing
  F: entry into force
  T: termination
  E: expiry
    de facto supersession
  Rel. w/ EC/EU framework:
   de facto inside
   outside		                   European Union (EU) [Cont.]  
European Communities (EC) (Pillar I)
European Atomic Energy Community (EAEC or Euratom) [Cont.]      
/ / / European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC)  
(Distr. of competences)
    European Economic Community (EEC)    
            Schengen Rules European Community (EC)
'TREVI' Justice and Home Affairs (JHA, pillar II)  
  North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) [Cont.] Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters (PJCC, pillar II)

Anglo-French alliance		 [Defence arm handed to NATO] European Political Co-operation (EPC)   Common Foreign and Security Policy
(CFSP, pillar III)
Western Union (WU) / Western European Union (WEU) [Tasks defined following the WEU's 1984 reactivation handed to the EU]
     
[Social, cultural tasks handed to CoE] [Cont.]                
    Council of Europe (CoE)
Dunkirk Treaty¹
S: 4 March 1947
F: 8 September 1947
E: 8 September 1997
Brussels Treaty¹
S: 17 March 1948
F: 25 August 1948
T: 30 June 2011
London and Washington treaties¹
S: 5 May/4 April 1949
F: 3 August/24 August 1949
Paris treaties: ECSC and EDC⁶
S: 18 April 1951/27 May 1952
F: 23 July 1952/—
E: 23 July 2002/—
Rome treaties: EEC² and EAEC
S: 25 March 1957
F: 1 January 1958
WEU-CoE agreement¹
S: 21 October 1959
F: 1 January 1960
Brussels (Merger) Treaty³
S: 8 April 1965
F: 1 July 1967
Davignon report
S: 27 October 1970
Single European Act (SEA)
S: 17/28 February 1986
F: 1 July 1987
Schengen Treaty and Convention
S: 14 June 1985/19 June 1990
F: 26 March 1995
Maastricht Treaty², ⁴
S: 7 February 1992
F: 1 November 1993
Amsterdam Treaty
S: 2 October 1997
F: 1 May 1999
Nice Treaty
S: 26 February 2001
F: 1 February 2003
Lisbon Treaty⁵
S: 13 December 2007
F: 1 December 2009
¹Although not EU treaties per se, these treaties affected the development of the EU defence arm, a main part of the CFSP. The Franco-British alliance established by the Dunkirk Treaty was de facto superseded by WU. The CFSP pillar was bolstered by some of the security structures that had been established within the remit of the 1955 Modified Brussels Treaty (MBT). The Brussels Treaty was terminated in 2011, consequently dissolving the WEU, as the mutual defence clause that the Lisbon Treaty provided for EU was considered to render the WEU superfluous. The EU thus de facto superseded the WEU.
²The treaties of Maastricht and Rome form the EU's legal basis, and are also referred to as the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), respectively. They are amended by secondary treaties.
³The European Communities obtained common institutions and a shared legal personality (i.e. ability to e.g. sign treaties in their own right).
⁴Between the EU's founding in 1993 and consolidation in 2009, the union consisted of three pillars, the first of which were the European Communities. The other two pillars consisted of additional areas of cooperation that had been added to the EU's remit.
⁵The consolidation meant that the EU inherited the European Communities' legal personality and that the pillar system was abolished, resulting in the EU framework as such covering all policy areas. Executive/legislative power in each area was instead determined by a distribution of competencies between EU institutions and member states. This distribution, as well as treaty provisions for policy areas in which unanimity is required and qualified majority voting is possible, reflects the depth of EU integration as well as the EU's partly supranational and partly intergovernmental nature.
⁶Plans to establish a European Political Community (EPC) were shelved following the French failure to ratify the Treaty establishing the European Defence Community (EDC). The EPC would have combined the ECSC and the EDC.

1954: Failure to establish an autonomous European pillar in NATO
Further information: Treaty establishing the European Defence Community

Had its founding treaty not failed to acquire ratification in the French Parliament in 1954, the European Defence Community would have entailed a pan-European military, divided into national components, and had a common budget, common arms, centralized military procurement, and institutions. The EDC would have had an integral link to NATO, forming an autonomous European pillar in the Atlantic alliance.

Diagram showing the functioning of the institutions provided for by the Treaty establishing the European Defence Community (EDC), the placing of Member States' armed forces (European Defence Forces) at the disposal of the Community, and the link between the EDC and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO).

1996-present: Tensions and mutual interests as EU gains autonomous defence structures
Main article: Berlin Plus agreement

Following the establishment of the ESDI and the St. Malo declaration, US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright were among others who voiced concern that an independent European security pillar could undermine NATO, as she put forth the three famous D's:

Our [...] task is working together to develop [the ESDI] within [NATO], which the United States has strongly endorsed. We enthusiastically support any such measures that enhance European capabilities. The United States welcomes a more capable European partner, with modern, flexible military forces capable of putting out fires in Europe's own back yard and working with us through [NATO] to defend our common interests. The key to a successful initiative is to focus on practical military capabilities. Any initiative must avoid preempting [NATO] decision-making by de-linking ESDI from NATO, avoid duplicating existing efforts, and avoid discriminating against non-EU members. [...]

— US Secretary of State Albright, North Atlantic Council (8 December 1998)[5]

Eastern enlargement
Further information: Enlargement of the European Union and Enlargement of NATO

Present cooperation
Main articles: Berlin Plus agreement and Joint declaration on EU-NATO cooperation
Change of command for the post of Supreme Commander Allied Forces Europe (SACEUR) at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE), the main headquarters of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation’s Allied Command Operations (ACO). SHAPE’s main building also flies the EU flag, reflecting the Berlin Plus agreement.

The Berlin Plus agreement enables EU operations to be planned and conducted at the military strategic and operational level with recourse to assets and capabilities in the NATO Command Structure (NCS). In such an event, an Operational Headquarters (OHQ) would be set up within NATO's Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) in Mons, Belgium. SHAPE is the main headquarters of Allied Command Operations (ACO).

When the NCS provides the OHQ, the Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe (DSACEUR) acts as Operation Commander (OpCdr).

The Berlin Plus agreement requires that the use of NATO assets by the EU is subject to a "right of first refusal", i.e. NATO must first decline to intervene in a given crisis,[6][7] and contingent on unanimous approval among NATO states, including those outside of the EU. For example, Turkish reservations about Operation Concordia using NATO assets delayed its deployment by more than five months.[8]

The European External Action Service's (EEAS) Military Staff (EUMS), situated in the Kortenberg building in Brussels, has a permanent NATO liaison team and runs a permanent EU cell at NATO's Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) in Mons.

Comparison

Command structures

The CSDP entails collective self-defence amongst member states. This responsibility is based on Article 42.7 of TEU, which states that this responsibility does not prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain member states, referring to policies of neutrality. See Neutral country§European Union for discussion on this subject. According to the Article 42.7 "If a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other Member States shall have towards it an obligation of aid and assistance by all the means in their power, in accordance with Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. This shall not prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain Member States." Article 42.2 furthermore specifies that NATO shall be the main forum for the implementation of collective self-defence for EU member states that are also NATO members.

The EU does not have a permanent military command structure similar to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's (NATO) Allied Command Operations (ACO), although it has been agreed that ACO resources may be used for the conduct of the EU's CSDP missions under the Berlin Plus agreement. The Military Planning and Conduct Capability (MPCC), established in 2017 and to be strengthened in 2020, does however represent the EU's first step in developing a permanent military OHQ. In parallel, the newly established European Defence Fund (EDF) marks the first time the EU budget is used to finance multinational defence projects.

European Union
Main article: Command and control structure of the European Union
Location of alternative OHQs for EU-led military operations: EU headquarters, NATO headquarters and national OHQs offered by member states are shown with red, blue and yellow marks, respectively

The EU command and control (C2) structure, as directed by political bodies which are composed of member states's representatives and generally require unanimous decisions, as of April 2019:[9]

Liaison:       Advice and recommendations       Support and monitoring       Preparatory work     
Political strategic level:
ISSEUCO Pres. (EUCO)Chain of command
Coordination/support
SatCenCIVCOMHR/VP (FAC)
INTCENHR/VP (PMG)HR/VP (PSC) (******)

CEUMC (EUMC)
CMPD

DGEUMS (***) (EUMS)
Military/civilian strategic level:


Dir MPCC (***) (MPCC)		JSCCCiv OpCdr CPCC(*)
Operational level:
MFCdr (****) (MFHQ)HoM (*)
Tactical level:
CC(**) LandCC(**) AirCC(**) MarOther CCs(**)
ForcesForcesForcesForces


*In the event of a CSDP Civilian Mission also being in the field, the relation with the Civilian Planning and Conduct Capability (CPCC) and its Civilian Operation Commander (Civ OpCdr), as well as the subordinate Head of Mission (HoM), are coordinated as shown.
**Other Component Commanders (CCs) and service branches which may be established
***The MPCC is part of the EUMS and Dir MPCC is double-hatted as DGEUMS. Unless the MPCC is used as Operation Headquarters (OHQ), either a national OHQ offered by member states or the NATO Command Structure (NCS) would serve this purpose. In the latter instance, Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe (DSACEUR), rather than Dir MPCC, would serve as Operation Commander (OpCdr).
****Unless the MPCC is used as Operation Headquarters (OHQ), the MFCdr would be known as a Force Commander (FCdr), and direct a Force Headquarters (FHQ) rather than a MFHQ. Whereas the MFHQ would act both on the operational and tactical level, the FHQ would act purely on the operational level.
*****The political strategic level is not part of the C2 structure per se, but represents the political bodies, with associated support facilities, that determine the missions' general direction. The Council determines the role of the High Representative (HR/VP), who serves as Vice-President of the European Commission, attends European Council meetings, chairs the Foreign Affairs Council (FAC) and may chair the Political and Security Committee (PSC) in times of crisis. The HR/VP proposes and implements CSDP decisions.
******Same composition as Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER) II, which also prepares for the CSDP-related work of the FAC.

NATO
Main article: Structure of NATO
Locations of NATO's two strategic commands—Allied Command Transformation (ACT; yellow marks) and Allied Command Operations (ACO; red marks)—the latter of which has Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) as its headquarters. The subordinate centres of ACT and subordinate commands and joint force commands of ACO are also shown.

The NATO Military Command Structure consists of two strategic commands and is directed by the International Military Staff:[10]

The commands under SACEUR - Allied Joint Force Command Brunssum, Allied Joint Force Command Naples and Joint Force Command Norfolk are Operational Level Commands, while Headquarters Allied Air Command, Headquarters Allied Maritime Command and Headquarters Allied Land Command are Tactical Level Commands.[11] SACEUR also has operational command of the Joint Support and Enabling Command.[12]

Liaison:       Provides advice and support to the NAC
Political strategic level:
NA Council
NATO SG
Brussels, BE		IS
Brussels, BE
Military strategic level:


CMC (NATO MC)
 DGIMS (IMS)
Brussels, BE


SACEUR
(ACO, SHAPE)
Mons, BE

SACT
(ACT, HQ SACT)
Norfolk, US
Operational level:
 JFCBS Brunssum, NL JWC Stavanger, NO
 AIRCOM Ramstein, DE JALLC Lisbon, PT
 MARCOM Northwood, GB JFTC Bydgoszcz, PL
 LANDCOM İzmir, TR
 CIS GP Mons, BE
 JFCNP Naples, IT
JFC-NF Norfolk, Virginia, US

Memberships
Map showing European membership of the EU and NATO
  EU member only
  NATO member only
  member of both
The emblem of the Belgian Armed Forces, in which the twelve stars and compass rose reflect Belgium's EU and NATO membership

Out of the 27 EU member states, 21 are also members of NATO. Another four NATO members are EU applicants—Albania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Turkey. Two others—Iceland and Norway—have opted to remain outside of the EU, however participate in the EU's single market. The memberships of the EU and NATO are distinct, and some EU member states are traditionally neutral on defence issues. Several EU member states were formerly members of the Warsaw Pact. Denmark has an opt-out from the CSDP.[3]

  Non-European countries
National participation in the principal European and trans-Atlantic defence arrangements
State  European Union  NATO Organisation for
Joint Armament
Cooperation
Membership Common Security and Defence Policy
General
participation		 Permanent Structured
Cooperation
 Albania Candidate No No 2009 No
 Austria 1995 Founder Founder No No
 Belgium Founder Founder Founder Founder 2003
 Bosnia and Herzegovina Candidate No No Membership Action Plan No
 Bulgaria 2007 2007 Founder 2004 No
 Canada No No No Founder No
 Cyprus 2004 2007 Founder No No
 Croatia 2013 2013 Founder 2009 No
 Czech Republic 2004 2004 Founder 1999 No
 Denmark 1973 No No Founder No
 Estonia 2004 2004 Founder 2004 No
 Finland 1995 Founder Founder No Partial
 France Founder Founder Founder Founder Founder
 Germany Founder Founder Founder 1955 Founder
 Greece 1981 Founder Founder 1952 No
 Hungary 2004 2004 Founder 1999 No
 Iceland No No No Founder No
 Ireland 1973 Founder Founder No No
 Italy Founder Founder Founder Founder Founder
 Kosovo No No No No No
 Latvia 2004 2004 Founder 2004 No
 Lithuania 2004 2004 Founder 2004 Partial
 Luxembourg Founder Founder Founder Founder Partial
 Malta 2004 2004 No No No
 Montenegro Candidate No No 2017 No
 Netherlands Founder Founder Founder Founder Partial
 North Macedonia Candidate No No 2020 No
 Norway No EDA partnership No Founder No
 Poland 2004 2004 Founder 1999 Partial
 Portugal 1986 Founder Founder Founder No
 Romania 2007 2007 Founder 2004 No
 Serbia Candidate EDA partnership No Individual Partnership Action Plan No
 Slovakia 2004 2004 Founder 2004 No
 Slovenia 2004 2004 Founder 2004 No
 Spain 1986 Founder Founder 1982 Founder
 Sweden 1995 Founder Founder No Partial
  Switzerland No EDA partnership No No No
 Turkey Candidate No No 1952 Partial
 Ukraine No EDA partnership No No No
 United Kingdom No No No Founder Founder
 United States No No No Founder No

See also

References
  1. Kiljunen, Kimmo (2004). The European Constitution in the Making. Centre for European Policy Studies. pp. 21–26. ISBN 978-92-9079-493-6.
  2. Burgess, Michael (2000). Federalism and European union: The building of Europe, 1950–2000. Routledge. p. 49. ISBN 0-415-22647-3. "Our theoretical analysis suggests that the EC/EU is neither a federation nor a confederation in the classical sense. But it does claim that the European political and economic elites have shaped and moulded the EC/EU into a new form of international organization, namely, a species of "new" confederation."
  3. Defence Data Portal, Official 2012 defence statistics from the European Defence Agency
  4. "Memorandum by the Joint Chiefs of Staff 1 to the Secretary of Defense (Forrestal)". Office of the Historian. Retrieved 14 May 2020.
  5. "12/8/98 Albright Statement to the North Atlantic Council". 1997-2001.state.gov.
  6. "EU Operations Centre".
  7. Heritage Foundation report, March 24, 2008.
  8. Bram Boxhoorn, Broad Support for NATO in the Netherlands, 21-09-2005, "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2007-02-18. Retrieved 2007-08-19.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  9. EU Command and Control, p. 13, Military Staff
  10. "Command Structure" (PDF). NATO. Retrieved 19 October 2019. and "Military Command Structure". shape.nato.int. Supreme Head Allied Powers Europe. 12 February 2020. Retrieved 12 February 2020.
  11. "MILITARY COMMAND STRUCTURE". shape.nato.int. NATO. 7 October 2020. Retrieved 7 October 2020.
  12. Boeke, Sergei (13 January 2020). "Creating a secure and functional rear area : NATO's new JSEC Headquarters". nato.int. NATO. Retrieved 9 October 2020. JSEC is part of the NATO Force Structure and under the operational command of the Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR).
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.