19 Financing European Union operations
having military or defence implications
| (33523)
18066/11
—
| Council Decision establishing a mechanism to administer the financing of the common costs of European Union operations having military or defence implications (ATHENA)[135]
|
| Legal base | Articles 26(2) and 41(2) TEU; unanimity
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 12 December 2011
|
| Department | Defence
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 9 December 2011
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| Discussion in Council | 15 December 2011
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
19.1 ATHENA is a mechanism that administers the financing of common
costs of EU operations having military or defence implications
on behalf of Member States contributing to the financing of EU
military operations. ATHENA was set up by the Council on 1st March
2004. ATHENA's legal basis was amended most recently
in December 2008.[136]
19.2 Currently the three active EU military operations
benefit from ATHENA financing, which is provided by 26 Member
States (Denmark has opted out of the EU Common Security and Defence
policy on military matters):
— EUFOR
ALTHEA[137]
— EUNAVFOR ATALANTA[138]
— EUTM SOMALIA[139]
19.3 ATHENA manages the financing of common costs
for these operations, which can include transport, infrastructure,
and medical services, as well as the Nation Borne Costs, which
include lodging, fuel, and similar costs linked to the national
contingents.
19.4 In the past, ATHENA has also financed the following
operations/support actions:
— AMIS
2 (Sudan) (June 2005 - December 2007)
— EUSEC RD CONGO (May 2005 - July
2008)
— EUFOR RD CONGO (June - November
2006)
— EUFOR TCHAD RCA (January 2008 -
March 2009)
19.5 ATHENA is managed by an administrator and under
the authority of a Special Committee composed of representatives
of the Member States contributing to the financing of each operation.
19.6 ATHENA can finance, for EU military operations,
so-called "common costs", which are spelled out in the
annexes appended to the Council Decision establishing ATHENA:
— HQ
implementation and running costs, including travel, computer information
systems, administration, public information, locally hired personnel,
Force Headquarters (FHQ) deployment & lodging;
— for forces as a whole, infrastructure,
medical services (in theatre), medical evacuation, identification,
acquisition of information (satellite images);
— reimbursements to/from NATO or other
organisations (e.g. UN).
- if the Council so decides:
transport and lodging of forces, Multinational Headquarters below
FHQ level.
- when requested by the Operation Commander and
approved by the Special Committee:
— barracks
and lodging/Infrastructure, essential additional equipment, medical
services, acquisition of information (theatre level intelligence,
reconnaissance and surveillance, including Air to Ground Surveillance
& Reconnaissance, human intelligence).
— other critical theatre-level capabilities
(demining, chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN)
protection, storage and destruction of weapons)
19.7 ATHENA has set out specific financial rules applicable
to all expenditure financed through its mechanism.
19.8 In accordance with article 41.2 of the Treaty
on European Union (TEU), Member States' contributions to ATHENA
are based on the Gross National Income scale.[140]
The Council Decision
19.9 A review takes place every three years in accordance
with Article 44 of the Council Decision. The draft revised Council
Decision is the result of a review which started in September
2011.
19.10 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 9 December
2011, the Minister for International Security Strategy at the
Ministry of Defence (Mr Gerald Howarth) says that this review
focused on two "baskets", which he describes thus:
"The first basket covered modifications of a
technical nature stemming from lessons learnt from operations;
providing more clarity on previously agreed text; and updating
References which are no longer valid. The second basket considered
the expansion of eligibility of common funded aspects of EU-led
military operations. The revised Council Decision covers only
the proposals relating to the former and does not impact on wider
eligibility of common funding. These amendments, which were politically
driven, have been successfully kept out of this review by the
UK."
The Government's view
19.11 The Minister goes on to comment as follows:
"The financial cost of military contributions
to CSDP operations are borne by the sending nations. We accept
that some elements of EU military operations should be common
funded where costs cannot be attributed to a specific nation (e.g.
operational Headquarter and Force Headquarter costs) hence we
have previously agreed to the establishment of the ATHENA mechanism
which administers these costs. Civilian CSDP missions are financed
from the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy Budget.
"The Council Decision focuses on the mechanics
of funding and the rules of eligibility on what can be common
funded. The previously agreed rules on eligibility have been maintained
during this latest review.
"We have resisted further expansion of common
costing, in contrast to most other Member States which have supported
increased EU engagement in this field. We maintain that Member
States are ultimately responsible for deploying their troops,
and increased common costing would both duplicate investment already
made by many and risks encouraging others to view common funding
as an effective and acceptable substitute for adequate national
investment in defence capability. Acceptance of the proposed expansion
would have resulted in the UK paying twice.
"The UK has protected its position in the latest
negotiations. Amendments to the Council Decision have been predominantly
technical in nature and have not crossed UK red lines. The UK
has been very firm in rejecting proposals that expand agreed eligibility
on common funding.
"The one key area that we have accepted limited
expansion is on strategic airlift (1-a note of the Council Decision)
which is a separate Declaration and not part of this decision
and thus outside the scope of this EM. We have agreed to the extension
of the current arrangements for deploying EU Battle-Groups[141]
up to the end of 2013 in line with arrangements for NATO, and
have supported the expansion to include common costs for land
and sea strategic lift. This is on the basis of the use of sea
and land being cheaper, quicker and in certain circumstances more
operationally effective than the use of air. Costs would only
be incurred if a Battle-Group were to deploy for which a separate
Council decision would be required and on which the UK has a potential
veto."
19.12 Finally, the Minister notes that:
— the
UK cost share of EU-led military operations in support of UN-mandated
missions is 14.36 %;
— the total cost of the operations funded
by the Mechanism for 2011 is €34.7 million, of which the
UK cost share is €4.9 million;
— funding is drawn from the Peacekeeping
budget, which is managed by the FCO.
Conclusion
19.13 We have no questions to raise with the
Minister; on the contrary, he is to be commended for having secured
what would appear to be a very satisfactory outcome. We are accordingly
reporting the results of this latest review to the House because
of the degree of interest in EU Common Security and Defence Policy
(CSDP), especially at a time of Europe-wide constraints on defence
expenditure.
19.14 For similar reasons we are also drawing
it to the attention of the Defence Committee.
19.15 We now clear the document.
135 Athena: the Greek goddess of wisdom, war, the arts,
industry, justice and skill. Back
136
Council Decision 2008/975/CFSP of 18 December 2008. Back
137
EUFOR ALTHEA operation was launched on 2 December 2004. See http://www.consilium.europa.eu/eeas/security-defence/eu-operations/althea?lang=en
for further information. Back
138
EU NAVFOR - Operation ATALANTA was launched in December 2008 in
response to the continuing impact of piracy and armed robbery
at sea off the coast of Somalia on international maritime security
and on the economic activities and security of countries in the
region. See http://www.consilium.europa.eu/eeas/security-defence/eu-operations/eunavfor-somalia?lang=en
for further information. Back
139
In April 2010, the EU launched a military training mission in
order to contribute to strengthening the Transitional Federal
Government and the institutions of Somalia. This support takes
place within the framework of EU's comprehensive engagement in
Somalia, with a view to responding to the priority needs of the
Somali people and stabilising Somalia. See http://www.consilium.europa.eu/eeas/security-defence/eu-operations/eu-somalia-training-mission
for further information. Back
140
See http://www.consilium.europa.eu/eeas/security-defence/csdp-structures-and-instruments/financing-of-csdp-military-operations?lang=en
for further information on ATHENA. Back
141
The key elements of which are: Stand-alone Battle- Group-sized
forces (around 1500 strong, including Combat Support and Combat
Service Support); deployable within 15 days; sustainable for 30
days (but extendable up to 120 days); designed for compatibility
with typical UN Chapter VII mandates to restore international
peace and security; composed of contributions from one or more
Member States, and open to participation by third parties. See
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/Battlegroups.pdf
for further information.
Back
| 
