Greece Blocks EU Defence Force

Greece is standing firm against EU plans to declare its rapid reaction force operational at a summit this week. Though independent of NATO, the special European force will have access to NATO facilities. This requires the consent of all NATO allies, including Greece's arch-rival, Turkey.

European leaders will have a busy agenda at their Summit in the Belgian city of Laeken at the end of this week. Italy has been blocking an accord on a European arrest warrant, which forms an important part of Europe's response to terrorism. And this week began with deadlock over another issue that should have been solved well before the Summit: plans for a rapid European intervention force.

Europe's leaders had intended to give the formal go-ahead this weekend to the creation of this special force of 60,000 troops that can be deployed at short notice. But it seems it won't come to that yet. Europe currently lacks the resources to mobilize and deploy a force of this size to a potential flashpoint. As it is, the European intervention force will be made up of no more than a handful of EU observers.

Sensitive Issue
The plans may be modest at present, but they are sensitive enough to have sparked a heated political debate in Europe. The future intervention force will be able to use NATO facilities such as planning and command centres, air bases, intelligence facilities and means of transport. This requires prior consent from non-EU members of NATO. One of these countries is Turkey and it's been withholding its approval. Greece and Turkey have long been at odds over territorial and minority issues as well as the divided island of Cyprus. Only five years ago, the two countries nearly went to war over a small island off the Turkish coast. Turkey doesn't want the future European force to be deployed in the Aegean or in Cyprus, where Turkish forces are occupying the northern part of the island.

Turkey, which itself is not a member of the EU, has blocked an agreement with NATO, demanding a say in any EU security operation. But this is unacceptable to Greece and all other EU governments as it amounts to giving Ankara veto-power.

Deal with Turkey
Turkey eventually withdrew its demand following mediation from the United States, Britain and the Netherlands. Details of the deal with Turkey haven't been made public yet, but it's clear that Ankara's voice will be heard in decisions on EU military operations that concern Turkish interests. Turkey will certainly not get the right of veto, but EU operations in such sensitive areas as the Aegean or Cyprus are no longer on the cards.

But on Monday, this compromise proved to be unacceptable to Greek Foreign Minister George Papandreou. It's rumoured that Athens actually has no objections to the accord. To avoid giving the impression that it's been making concessions to the Turks, the Greek government has referred the issue to this week's European Summit. This will allow the Greek Prime Minister, Costas Simitis, to sell the issue as a matter of the highest national importance and tell his people that he managed to extract a hard-fought and last-ditch compromise that will meet Greek interests.

Belgium, which currently holds the EU's six-month rotating presidency, is less optimistic. But that may be the wisest approach for an EU president that has made a point of taking the views of all EU members equally seriously.

The agreement between the US, major EU states, and Turkey is that the EU would not use it's army to solve disputes between NATO states. Greece, hopeful of sicking the EU on Turkey, is disillusioned...

yep.

Let me understand--why does the EU need any type of armed force? And if it would not be used internally, where? And will it exist simultaneously with NATO? Seems like a waste, a redundancy. Perhaps it is an attempt ot make NATO irrelevant down the road, by tossing out America, Turkey and Canada. Any thoughts?

Perhaps it is an attempt ot make NATO irrelevant down the road, by tossing out America, Turkey and Canada. Any thoughts?

Austria, Finland, Ireland and Sweden are in the EU, but not NATO.

Canada, Czech, Hungary, Iceland, Norway, Poland, Turkey and US are in NATO, but not in EU (although Czech, Hungary, and Poland are likely to be in the EU soon).

why does the EU need any type of armed force?

I think they aspire to become a country fashioned much like the USA one day. For now, they say they'd like to relieve the USA in places like Bosnia and Kosova.

I don't mind it really, just so I don't have to kill British or German boys and girls one day in a war over Greek whinery..

Anyway, if they want to use NATO assets, then it ought to follow that these should not be used against a NATO country.. Right?

Good job getting that clause( non nato interference) in their Turks France will just cause trouble if they can automatically get all of Europe to support them against America.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.