5 EU Special Representative to the
African Union
| (35051)
—
—
| Council Decision extending the mandate of the European Union Special Representative to the African Union
|
| Legal base | Articles 28, 31(2) and 33 TEU; QMV
|
| Department | Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 18 June 2013
|
| Previous Committee Report | None; but see (34062) —: HC 86-viii (2012-13), chapter 17 (11 July 2012); also see (33212) —: HC 428-xxxviii (2010-12), chapter 18 (19 October 2011); (33069) —: HC 428-xxxv (2010-12), chapter 15 (7 September 2011); and (31844) —, (31856-66) HC 428-i (2010-11), chapter 66 (8 September 2010)
|
| Discussion in Council | To be determined
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Not cleared; further information requested
|
Background
5.1 EU Special Representatives (EUSRs) are appointed where
the Council agrees that an additional EU presence on the ground
is needed to deliver the political objectives of the Union in
troubled regions and countries.
5.2 An EUSR is appointed by Council through the
legal act of a Council Decision (formerly a Joint Action). The
substance of his or her mandate depends on the political context
of the deployment. Some provide, inter alia, a political
backing to a CSDP operation; others focus on carrying out or contribute
to developing an EU policy. Some EUSRs are resident in their country
or region of activity; others work on a travelling basis from
Brussels.
5.3 All EUSRs carry out their duties under the
authority and operational direction of the High Representative
of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (HR; Baroness
Catherine Ashton) and the Political and Security Committee (PSC).[18]
Each is financed out of the CFSP budget. Member States contribute
regularly, for example, through seconding some of the EUSR's staff
members.
EUSR to the African Union (EUSR/AU)
5.4 On 6 December 2007, the Council adopted Joint
Action 2007/805/CFSP appointing Mr Koen Vervaeke as EUSR. The
Council Decision that we considered in September 2010 extended
the appointment until 31 August 2011.
5.5 The objective of the EUSR is to support African
efforts to build a peaceful, democratic and prosperous future
as set out in the EU Africa Strategy.
5.6 The Minister said at that time:
"The UK fully supports maintaining the Office
of the EUSR in Addis where the African Union is based. The AU
is a key partner in Europe-Africa cooperation on human rights
and governance. A successful AU will bring the benefits of a reduced
peacekeeping burden, fewer thorny governance and human rights
issues and the increased prosperity that stability will bring
to Africa. This all chimes with the government's objectives on
reducing conflict, promoting sustainable global growth and supporting
Africa's participation globally where the AU is becoming a global
"voice for Africa". The organisation is already making
good progress on sanctioning instances of unconstitutional power
changes and peace keeping in Africa.
"The EU, the AU's biggest and most sustainable
source of finance, provides €350 million for peace and security
and human rights alone. The UK can achieve a more able AU through
ensuring that EU funds are deployed effectively and co-ordinated
with wider donors to achieve common objectives. These are the
objectives that we will press the EUSR to achieve."
5.7 The EUSR/AU post existed prior to the creation
of the EEAS and of the EU Delegation to the AU. With the opening
of the Delegation the post became double-hatted as EU Ambassador
and EUSR to the AU. The EEAS' longer-term plan has been to end
this double-hatting arrangement.
5.8 In late 2011, the Minister for Europe (Mr
David Lidington) said that he had hoped that the administrative
groundwork would have been finalised by then. In the meantime,
he described the principal benefits of the EUSR to both the EU
and UK and described the incumbent, Mr Koen Vervaeke, as "good
and active", with a team that had excellent access with the
AU (where EU Member States had only observer status) and provided
regular reports to the PSC and Member States. He described his
successor — Mr Gary Quince who initially appointed in from
1 November 2011 to 30 June 2012 — in similarly positive
terms.
5.9 The Committee thought that, though the shape
of the arrangements beyond June 2012 was still to be determined,
there was plainly a good case for continuing to have a separate
EUSR, irrespective of whether he or she continued also to head
the EU delegation, having noted what the Minister had said about
the access that this individual had, compared with a plain head
of delegation, to the very protocolaire hosts.[19]
5.10 A year ago, from what the Minister then
said, he and his officials had pushed hard in Brussels to secure
agreement that the double-hatted arrangement would draw down over
a period of two years, subject to an EEAS review in 2013; and
pressed for some progress immediately with the cutting of more
slots and additional budgetary savings under the EUSR budget with
the aim of ensuring that the budget presents the best value for
money.[20]
Our assessment
5.11 The Minister had referred elsewhere to
the proposed review in 2013 of the EUSRs as a whole. We took
this opportunity to remind him of our expectation that it would
be deposited with an Explanatory Memorandum setting out his views
on the findings and whatever proposals are then put forward.
5.12 The Minister once again referred to the
protocol aspects of the EUSR position. A merger thus continued
to carry the danger that, by virtue of not being seen by his hosts
as having the same standing, the Head of the "merged"
EU delegation, who would continue to have the responsibilities
of the EUSR, would not be as effective as hitherto. We therefore
agreed with the Minister that a properly planned merger would
be essential, in order to provide sufficient time to ensure that
his hosts become accustomed to the change, and that any diminution
in access and influence did not happen.
5.13 We also commended the Minister's endeavours
to maintain budgetary discipline.[21]
The draft Council Decision
5.14 The draft Council Decision proposes that
the EUSR mandate be extended for a further period of 12 months
until 30 June 2014.
The Government's view
5.15 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 18 June
2013, the Minister notes that:
— as
well as a double-hatted EUSR/AU and Head of Delegation to the
AU, in Addis Ababa, there is a also separate Head of EU Delegation
to Ethiopia;
— the AU Delegation staff are funded from
the EAS budget, but the EUSR position, and its staff, are funded
from the CFSP Budget for missions;
— this is used to fund staff, mostly in
the clerical grade, secretaries, drivers, etc, as well as a small
number of advisors to the mission; and
— there is no additional policy role or
function that the EUSR carries out in addition to his EEAS role.
5.16 The Minister recalls that, at the time of
the last renewal in June 2012, his expectation that the EEAS would
work to draw-down the role and staff over 24 months and end the
double-hatting arrangement — i.e., the EUSR to be simply
the Head of Delegation to the AU, with the EUSR title and mandate
ended by June 2014.
5.17 The Minister continues as follows:
"The current EEAS mandate renewal proposal,
in the form of this draft Council Decision, makes some concession
to draw down (e.g. by phasing out two posts during the course
of the year). Up until now the EEAS has claimed that a) it cannot
accommodate the extra staff on its budget, and b) the reputation
of the EU at the AU would be damaged by terminating the EUSR mandate.
Our judgement is that the EEAS could go further in streamlining
the number of staff on the EUSR's budget with little or no impact
on the Delegation's effectiveness. We will continue to make this
case in negotiations. Current staffing under the EUSR mandate
includes:
- Political/Press and Information:
three staff EUSR;
- Peace and Security: two staff EUSR;
- Administration: five staff EUSR;
- CFSP Budget Management: two staff EUSR.
"The UK will continue to press for draw-down
of the EUSR role in 2014, and provide regular updates to the Committees
on progress."
5.18 With regard the proposed budget, the Minister
says:
"The proposed budget is €95,000 less than
for last year (€655,000), and includes a termination phase.
This is a budget reduction, which we have welcomed, although
we are continuing to push for further reductions. We have argued
that activities and staff should reduce further over the course
of the year, to prepare for the end of mandate.
"Specifically:
- "Personnel costs
have increased by €8,000. This is due to unavoidable per
diem rises and severance payments, but we have argued that the
full staff should not be needed for the whole year and so have
encouraged a further reduction (which as noted in para 7 has already
led to some success);
- "Missions: we have successfully argued
for a cut in missions; the EUSR should travel less as his mandate
nears its end."
5.19 The Minister notes that further budget discussions
are due on 18 June in RELEX (the relevant Council working group),
and says that he will update the Committee following those discussions.
Conclusion
5.20 It is not at all clear what will happen
to the work that the EUSR has been doing hitherto, or what is
meant by the sentence: "there is no additional policy role
or function that the EUSR carries out in addition to his EEAS
role." Presumably the "plain" Head of Delegation
is effectively to have the EUSR role subsumed within his job description.
In that case, it is also not clear how the issue of not losing
"access" to protocolaire hosts will have been overcome
by then. If Member State representatives are allowed only observer
status by the AU, will the EU Head of Delegation enjoy a greater
status, and thus greater access and influence, than Member States
local ambassadors? Or will he effectively be "down-graded"
in local eyes?
5.21 In these circumstances, we have decided
to retain the draft Council Decision under scrutiny. Yet again,
this and a large number of mandate renewals have been produced
inordinately late in the day: this means that there is insufficient
time for questions to be asked and answered before mandates expire.
We take this issue up with the Minister elsewhere in this Report.
5.22 We should be grateful if the Minister
would clarify the issues raised above when he provides the additional
budgetary information to which he refers.
5.23 We will also question the Minister further
about Parliamentary scrutiny of EUSR mandates when he comes to
give evidence on Thursday 4 July.
18 The PSC is the committee of ambassador-level officials
from national delegations who, by virtue of article 38 TEU, under
the authority of the HR and the Council, monitor the international
situation in areas covered by the CFSP and exercise political
control and strategic direction of crisis management operations,
as set out in article 43 TEU. Back
19
See (33231) -: HC 428-xxxviii (2010-12), chapter 18 (19 October
2011) for further detail. Back
20
See (34062) -: HC 86-viii (2012-13), chapter 17 (11 July 2012)
for further detail. Back
21
Ibid. Back
| 
