9 Participation of third States in EU
crisis management
| (25326)
—
—
| Draft framework agreement for the participation of third States in European Union crisis management operations
|
| Legal base | Article 24 EU; unanimity
|
| Department | Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 4 February 2004
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | 26 February 2004
|
| Committee's assessment | Legally and politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
9.1 Article 24 of the Treaty on European Union provides for the
conclusion of agreements with third States and international organisations
where these are necessary for the implementation of the Union's
Common Foreign and Security Policy.
9.2 All civilian and military crisis management operations
within the European security and defence policy (ESDP) have so
far involved the participation of third States. For example,
the European Union Police Mission (EUPM) in Bosnia-Herzegovina
involves the participation of police officers from 18 non-EU States.
The 'Concordia' mission in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
which patrols the ethnic Albanian regions of Macedonia bordering
Albania, Serbia and Kosovo, includes troops from 14 non-EU States,
with a significant contribution by Poland and Turkey. The 'Artemis'
mission to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which lasted
from June to September 2003, included troops from South Africa,
Canada and Brazil.
9.3 Agreements governing the participation of third
States have hitherto been drawn up on an ad hoc basis.
This has involved separate negotiations for each mission, and
has sometimes meant that the agreements were not concluded before
the commencement of operations.
The draft framework participation agreement
9.4 The proposal consists of an agreement in standard
form which would address such issues as the status of personnel
and forces, the handling of classified information, the chain
of command and financial contributions. The agreement covers civil
and military crisis management operations and is intended to last
for five years. Such an agreement would be concluded with particular
third State participants but would not prejudge the issue of whether
a particular third State will participate in any particular operation.
This latter question would be determined by a separate exchange
of letters between the EU Presidency and the government of the
third State in question.
9.5 With regard to the chain of command, personnel
seconded by a third State to civilian or military crisis management
operations are to remain under the command of their national authorities,
but the latter agree to transfer operational control to the EU
civilian crisis management Head of Mission or (in military operations)
to the EU Operation Commander.
9.6 The cost of its participation is to be borne
by each third State, and provision is also made for a contribution
to the operational budget (in the case of civilian crisis management)
or to common costs (in the case of military crisis management).
The Government's view
9.7 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 4 February 2004
the Minister for Europe (Mr Denis MacShane) welcomes this initiative,
as the Government considers that the framework agreement will
enable the EU to improve the speed with which it can launch operations,
which is in line with the Government's goal of enabling the ESDP
to react quickly to emerging crises.
9.8 The Minister explains that the framework agreement
is based on existing agreements adopted under Article 24 EU and
sets out the legal and financial parameters of a third country's
participation in an ESDP operation. The Minister considers that
the framework will streamline mission-planning and indicates that
the EU hopes to negotiate such an agreement with key third State
contributors such as Norway, Iceland, Bulgaria, Romania, Turkey,
Canada, Russia and Ukraine. The Minister points out that these
countries have been selected either because they are non-EU European
States which are members of NATO or because (in the case of Canada,
Russia and Ukraine) they are countries the terms and conditions
of whose participation have been set out by the European Council
in Seville in June 2002.
9.9 The Minister further explains that for each mission
the EU will still decide which countries to invite and that the
existence of the long-term framework agreement does not pre-suppose
that a particular country will automatically participate in an
operation. (The Minister nevertheless recalls that in the case
of operations which are carried out using NATO assets[15]
non-EU NATO countries have the right to participate and do not
need to be specifically invited.)
9.10 The Minister explains that the financial provisions
of the framework agreement clarify the existing arrangements whereby
third countries pay the cost of their participation in the mission
and also, unless the EU decides otherwise, a contribution towards
the common costs. The framework agreement requests the third country
to contribute towards common costs calculated by reference to
the ratio of that country's GNP to that of contributing Member
States or by reference to the ratio of its personnel to those
of participating Member States, whichever produces the lower figure.
In the case of countries with a GNP per capita lower than that
of any Member State or which provide vital equipment, such as
heavy lift aircraft, no contribution to common costs will be required.
Conclusion
9.11 We are grateful to the Minister for his clear
explanation of the framework agreement. We agree with the Minister
that this initiative is welcome and we clear the document.
15 Known as 'Berlin Plus' operations. Back
| 
