David Miliband

Foreign Secretary

FCO Logo
« Six Years and No... | Main | If your neighbour's... »
Friday 04 July, 2008

Not a Euro Army

Sometimes eurosceptics are thought to have good tunes because they are the only ones humming.  On reform of the Common Agricultural Policy and the European Union's financial management there is a pro-European case for reform.  But the truth is that these problems are not the fundamental reason for no votes in referenda on Europe - there are bigger questions about the purpose and direction of the EU.  This is what I tried to address in my speech last night.

Security and defence policy is a hard case and a good case for thinking about the appropriate European role.  NATO is the foundation of security but does not act everywhere and needs civilian and policing complements.  But defence policy is a core national authority so this is a matter for intergovernmental work not the "community method".  On this French and British thinking is similar.  What we need are capabilities to act where NATO doesn't (e.g. Bosnia today) or where it needs partners (e.g. Kosovo).

It's not frightening - it's sensible.

Posted at 20:46 04 July 2008 by David Miliband  |  Comments[6]

  • Share this with:
Comments:

When we can all agree on common rules of engagement and military behaviour then perhaps a European defence force is a good idea. In the meantime when we have the Dutch army with unions and long hair, the Germans who can't fight outside of Nato, the French who are best at planting trees to shade invading armies and capitulating without firing a shot, the British stretched to a red line thinner than a spider's thread and Eastern bloc nations that are better equipped to win football matches or the Eurovision song contest then I fear that a European defence force is one idea that should be sent to the sin bin indefinitely. Let's build bridges rather than barricades.

Posted by Paul Everest on July 04, 2008 at 10:42 PM BST #

"these problems are not the fundamental reason for no votes in referenda on Europe" - Quite possibly. In our country, for instance, the fundamental reason for no votes is no referenda.

Posted by James Woodfield on July 06, 2008 at 08:56 PM BST #

Good idea! Any army except British army - and no problem of North Irland more! What's about serbian or bulgarian solders in North Irland?

Posted by MyName on July 07, 2008 at 12:24 PM BST #

I'm just looking forward to what you'll put on the blog after your visit to South Africa this week...

Posted by Gadifele Moroaswi on July 07, 2008 at 01:53 PM BST #

Sorry to carp on a trivial point but I blame partly a lack of a decent classical education for people getting the plural of referendum wrong but mostly I blame people who are trying to give the impression they had one harrumph! I failed Latin O level in 1967 but at least I took it.... This from the Irish Referendum Commission's website quoting the CD version of the Oxford English Dictionary: "In terms of its Latin origin, referendums is logically preferable as a modern plural form meaning ballots on one issue as a Latin gerund referendum has no plural; the Latin plural gerundive referenda, meaning 'things to be referred', necessarily connotes a plurality of issues. Those who prefer the form referenda are presumably using words like agenda and memoranda as models. Usage varies at the present time 1981, but The Oxford Dictionary for Writers and Editors 1981 recommends referendums, and this form seems likely to prevail.

Posted by Brian Hughes on July 07, 2008 at 10:23 PM BST #

Reform of the EU's financial management? You're presumably aware that auditors have not been able to approve the "majority" of the EU's spending for now 13 years in a row. It has long been clear to most of us that more radical action is required than just bleating endlessly about the 'need for reform'. It's very far from "pro-European" to accept that the billions Britain makes available annually to support the development of poorer Eastern European countries, which is funnelled through the EU, is being diminished due to waste, fraud and the EU's lavishly-funded administration. There must be a better way, such as co-operation on funding projects between national embassies on the ground in the target countries. Money right to where it matters, using existing local administration facilities. So enough bleating. The time for change is now. Or are you just all talk?

Posted by Stuart Coster on July 08, 2008 at 03:06 PM BST #

Post a Comment:
  • HTML Syntax: NOT allowed