The Foreign Service Journal, April 2009

18 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / A P R I L 2 0 0 9 Lisbon Treaty remains unratified. Nor is there an identity for Euro- peans to assume. Nonetheless, the CFSP reflects a longstanding desire in European countries to have a foreign policy and a military force independent of — but not opposed to — NATO. European nations can boast an impressive numerical tally: 27 armed forces, 10,000 tanks, around 2,500 combat aircraft, and almost two million soldiers — but with much overlap and redundancy. According to a July 2008 white paper published by the European Council on For- eign Relations, “Re-Energizing Europe’s Security and Defense Policy” by Nick Witney, some “70 percent of Europe’s land forces are unable to operate outside na- tional territory.” According to that study, one reason that the E.U.’s operational missions throughout the world re- main limited in scope is that “the 5 percent of Europe’s nearly two million men and women in uniform currently overseas is the maximum that obsolete military machines can sustain.” Until 2007, Witney headed the European Defense Agency, which attempts to “improve Europe’s defense performance, by promoting coherence and a more inte- grated approach to capability development.” EDA’s goals may appear modest, but its attempts at coordination and efficiency among militaries that together consume one- quarter of the world’s defense budgets can be made to bear fruit. France: Back in the NATO Fold? Several important European countries share mem- bership in NATO and the E.U., but among NATO’s top powers, only France has formally separated its political and military participation. France was key to NATO’s foundation, and until 1967 was the host to the organiza- tion’s political headquarters in central Paris and military headquarters (SHAPE) in the Parisian suburbs. That all changed when President Charles de Gaulle, proclaiming France’s independence in matters strategic, pulled out of the unified military command. Ever since, NATO has been headquartered in Belgium. NATO’s 60th-anniversary summit this month will be held in Strasbourg, the most European of French cities. Sitting on the Rhine, linked by bridges to Kehl, Germany (summit co-host), it houses such important institutions as the European Parlia- ment, the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights. It is also headquarters of EUROCORPS, which grandly pro- claims itself “A Force for Europe and NATO” — consisting of ear- marked troops from France, Ger- many, Spain, Poland, Belgium and Luxembourg. Don’t expect a return to Paris — NATO will stay in Brussels and SHAPE in Mons, Belgium— but the sum- mit in Strasbourg will mark a turning point. French Pres- ident Nicolas Sarkozy has promised to return his country to NATO’s military command. In late January, NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer hinted at the impending decision: “I hope that Strasbourg might be the moment in which we can welcome France’s move to take its full place again in NATO, particularly in the mil- itary structure.” Along the same lines, in early February Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel co-authored a lengthy article that appeared in both Le Monde and the Süddeutsche Zeitung , providing the context for what they present as a net plus for both NATO and the European Union. “NATO and the E.U., alliances founded on com- mon values,” wrote the French and German leaders, “take on increased importance” in the current context of global crises, the variety of which “requires a wider def- inition of security policy.” This joint declaration, coming as it did just prior to the annual Munich Security Conference and coordinated with leaks detailing France’s NATO negotiations, sets the expected French reintegration squarely within the con- tinuum of both European Union and bilateral Franco- German security cooperation. Observing that “the overwhelming majority of European nations have pre- ferred joining NATO and the E.U.,” the leaders under- lined the near-universal appeal of both organizations. Both NATO and the E.U. form parts of a whole, which the French and German leaders call the “Euro-Atlantic security partnership.” Pres. Sarkozy’s desire to rejoin NATO’s unified mili- tary command shows that the club still has its attractions. F O C U S European member-states — which also tend to belong to the E.U. — no longer see NATO as their primary institution of reference.