Catherine Ashton says the European Union must have military power to preserve the European peace. Fair enough for a body without any real military power to its name. But saying is not being.
And she says that Europeans must stop their national competition in manufacturing which makes their spending inefficient. So which country goes first in giving up its favorite national arms manufacturer for the sake of efficiency?
I thought so.
But the really funny bit is where she tries to imply that Europe has made great strides in creating real military power. Check it out:
Europe has come a long way, from being a consumer of security to becoming a provider of security. The meeting of EU leaders in Brussels this week sends a clear signal that defense is now top of the agenda in Europe.
And no, I'm not speaking of the boasting about how a freaking leaders' meeting--the Holy of Holies for the bureaucracy in Brussels--is a clear signal of anything of the sort. That's shooting fish in a barrel, no?
A clear signal that defense is now top of the agenda in Europe would be increases in defense spending. It would be the priority of training soldiers rather than being willing to pretend that civil servants dressed alike are soldiers.
No, the lack of those signals clearly indicate that defense is nowhere near the top of Europe's agenda. It still lies somewhere below cheese subsidies but above (I hope!) perfume standards.
What I'm talking about is the first sentence--boasting that Europe has gone from "being a consumer of security (needing America to defend them against the Soviet threat) to becoming a (small) provider of security." That, my friends, is a hoot!
I can only assume they mean their embryonic EU Eurocorps that has yet to provide security to anyone in any significantly challenging environment. Talk to me when you can say Eurocorps commanded in Regionial Command East in Afghanistan.
Normally, boasting of such a defense transition would imply that the Europeans have armed up so much that they no longer need our help--now they can help others!
But the consumption/providing equation has two sides. What has happened--even as European military capacity has plummetted--is that the military threat to Europe evaporated into near nothingness with the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Obviously, even a crappy defense structure no longer needs to worry about a non-existent invasion threat and can look abroad to tiny dragons in need of slaying. High fives all around the European Commission table!
I suspect the EU will have enough armed power to push around civilians. And maybe that's the only type of security the EU really cares to provide.
Ms. Ashton has quite the sense of humor. I want to party with that high representative of the European Union for foreign affairs and security policy and vice president of the European Commission , no doubt.
