47 EU External Action: the Instrument
for Stability
| (35240)
12862/13
+ ADDs 1-3
COM(13) 563
| Commission Report: Annual Report on the Instrument for Stability in 2012
|
| Legal base | Article 23 of Regulation (EC) No.1717/2006: —
|
| Document originated | 24 July 2013
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 16 August 2013
|
| Department | Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 28 August 2013
|
| Previous Committee Report | None; but see (34165) —: HC 86-xii (2012-13), chapter 14 (12 September 2012); (33120) 14048/11: HC 428-xxxviii (2010-12), chapter 17 (12 October 2011); (32103) 15764/10: HC 428-xii (2010-11), chapter 17 (12 January 2011) and HC 428-x (2010-11), chapter 7 (8 December 2010); also see (30859) 12674/10 HC 19-xxvi (2008-09), chapter 18 (10 September 2009); and (29656)—: HC 16-xxiv (2007-08), chapter 11(18 June 2008) and (27653-55)—: HC 34-xxxv (2005-06), chapter 11 (12 July 2006)
|
| Discussion in Council | To be determined
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
47.1 Towards the end of the previous Financial Perspective, the
Commission and Council decided to replace the then plethora of
financial instruments for the delivery of external assistance
with a simpler, more efficient framework. Instead of the wide
range of geographical and thematic instruments that had grown
up in an ad hoc manner over time, the new framework comprises
six instruments only, four of them new. The four new instruments
are:
— an
Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance;
— a
European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument;
— a
Development Cooperation and Economic Cooperation Instrument; and
— an
Instrument for Stability.
47.2 The first three all essentially repackage existing
EC activity. The Instrument for Stability (IfS),
however, is a new instrument to tackle crises and instability
in third countries and address trans-border challenges including
nuclear safety and non-proliferation, the fight against trafficking,
organised crime and terrorism. [178]
47.3 The previous Committee cleared the draft IfS
Regulation on 12 July 2006.[179]
At that time, it noted that an original concern — how in
practice it would be prevented from encroaching on Common Foreign
and Security Policy (CFSP) activities and objectives — had
been overcome: activities covered by the Regulation were limited
to those falling within the scope of the Community's powers relating
to development co-operation and economic co-operation; the Commission
would be required to submit all projects for the opinion of the
Stability Instrument Management Committee, composed of representatives
of all Member States, in order to exercise proper political control.
47.4 The Instrument for Stability was allocated €2.1
billion between 2007 and 2013. The UK's share of the allocation
was 17%, i.e. €350.5 million.
47.5 An Annual Report must be submitted to the European
Parliament and the Council in compliance with Article 23
of Regulation (EC) No. 1717/2006 of the European Parliament and
the Council of 15 November 2006 establishing an Instrument for
Stability (the IfS Regulation). The Committee's consideration
of previous Annual Reports is set out in the earlier Reports cited
in the headnote.
47.6 Most recently, in its fifth year of operation,
and with a budget which has more than doubled from €139 million
in 2007 to €282 million in 2011, the Commission said that
the Instrument for Stability had "demonstrated its robustness
and capacity to contribute to timely and dynamic EU responses
to a wide range of challenges around the world [which] ... included
those associated with the impact of the Arab Spring in the Middle
East and North Africa region as well as the ever more complex
situation throughout the Horn of Africa region."
47.7 What the Commission described as the
maturity of the IfS was (it said) reflected in the findings of
the independent evaluation report published in July 2011:
"Covering the period from inception, the report
summarises that 'the IfS has significantly contributed to enhancing
the overall relevance, effectiveness and efficiency of EU crisis
response and preparedness action'."
It concluded that:
"the IfS makes a significant contribution
to the coherence of the EU peace, security and development architecture
— and to global peace and stability. Critical to its contributions
is the demonstrated capacity of the IfS to provide quick, timely
and catalytical responses in situations of crisis."[180]
The 2012 report
47.8 The 2012 Annual Report outlines the progress
made under the short-term IfS measures launched in that year and
provides an update on the financial commitments of the long-term
projects.
47.9 Article 3 of the IfS Regulations (67% of total
funding) deals with short-term projects designed to provide assistance
to help third countries respond to crises or emerging crises.
Over the period 2007-2012, the IfS has made available €872
million funding 243 projects responding to crises in approximately
70 countries or regions worldwide. In 2012 alone, €195.8
million was spent worldwide, the largest areas of spend being
39% in Middle East and North Africa and 37% in Sub-Saharan Africa.
47.10 Article 4 of the IfS Regulations (33% of total
funding) covers longer-term programmable measures to address security
and safety threats in a trans-regional context, risk mitigation
linked to Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN)
materials and pre- and post-crisis capacity building. Over the
period 2007-2012 €403.8 million was made available for this
element. In 2012, €22 million was committed to trans-regional
threats, €46.3million for CBRN risk mitigation and €22
million for pre- and post-conflict capacity building in third
countries.
The Government's view
47.11 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 28 August
2013, the Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington) notes that
the IfS:
—
enables the EU to respond quickly and flexibly to crisis and instability
overseas when timely financial help cannot be provided by other
EU sources;
— focuses
its projects on a range of key issues, such as supporting democracy
and good governance, mediation, confidence building and strengthening
the rule of law in EU partner countries; and
— also
complements wider EU engagement in line with CSDP interventions
and longer term development goals (for example, the IfS funded-Needs
Assessment on Border Management issues in Libya, paving the way
for a CSDP mission, EUBAM Libya).
47.12 With regard to the short term component,
the Minister says that the IfS was heavily engaged in 2012 two
of the worst crises of the year: Syria and the Sahel:
"In Syria, the IfS funding supported rapid and
safe deployment of United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria
(UNSMIS) by funding 25 armoured vehicles, some of which later
transferred to the UN-Arab Special Envoy Lakhdar Brahimi and his
team once the UNSMIS mandate ended. The IfS supported two events,
bringing together members of the Syrian Opposition, helping them
forge a united position. The IfS has also supported the authorities
in neighbouring countries, including Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and
Iraq to build their capacities to cope with the sudden influx
of refugees and assisted with the extra education and psychosocial
needs of the refugee population.
"In the Sahel, the IfS has been supporting implementation
of the EU's Strategy for Security and Development in the Sahel
by funding a range of activities linked to fighting insecurity,
terrorism and organised crime."
47.13 Further examples cited are:
"In Mauritania, the IfS has supported strengthening
of land border posts and airports while in Niger, it has helped
to create a municipal police service, provide socio-economic opportunities
for unemployed youth and has strengthened capacity building activities
for national and local authorities. The programme for Mali was
severely disrupted due to the coup d'etat in March 2012 but updated
programmes for 2013 have been approved.
"In 2012 the short term component of the IfS
was also engaged in broad range of thematic issues concerning
peace-building and stability. Examples include:
- "Support for electoral processes, e.g.,
organising voter education campaigns, training polling staff,
promoting civil society participation, developing systems for
voter registration and support to Electoral Commissions. Elections
in 2012 included those in Togo, Burkina Faso, Madagascar, Kenya,
Pakistan and Afghanistan;
- "Support to Democratic Transition and Governance
-Training and capacity building for civil society to participate
in democratic processes and support to preparations for democratic
elections and governance (Egypt, Tunisia, Burma);
- "Strengthening Security Sector Reform and
Rule of Law activities including training of police and law enforcement
in Afghanistan, Democratic Republic of Congo and Yemen; support
to piracy trials in Mauritius and the Seychelles; support to Truth
and Reconciliation Tribunals in Colombia, Honduras, East Timor
and Lebanon;
- "Awareness raising programmes and support
to clearing land mines and unexploded ordinances in Chad, Central
African Republic, Somalia and Nepal;
- "Supporting peacebuilding and crisis preparedness:
a variety of activities have been implemented in several countries
including strengthening civil society organisations working on
reducing inter-ethnic tension in Kenya, improving socio-economic
opportunities for unemployed youth in Bosnia-Herzegovina, follow
up activities to the Peace Process in Aceh, Indonesia and capacity
building for non-State actors in peacebuilding and humanitarian
assistance in Haiti."
47.14 With regard to management issues, the Minister
says that the short-term component of the IfS is managed relatively
efficiently, although some projects have been less successful
than hoped for or have had to be cancelled:
"Projects are designed by EU Delegations in
country and are approved in Brussels, with Member State input
at the Political and Security Committee (PSC), and respond to
genuine needs quickly and flexibly. Updates on projects are also
provided to Member States via the PSC. While the vast majority
of short term projects continue to contribute to the stabilisation
of fragile countries, a very small minority of projects do not
achieve the impact intended. For example, the IfS supported capacity
building of Zimbabwe's Electoral Commission. It has also been
working to build capacity within Zimbabwe's Parliament to enact
democratic reforms and to conduct its oversight role over the
executive.
"One of the priorities was for new legislation
on the Constitution, electoral reform and the Human Rights Commission.
Preliminary results from the recent elections suggest that this
programme has not been successful. Another concern, although
outside the control of the IfS, is the cancellation of projects
in countries that are most in need of stabilisation. For example
projects working to combat insecurity linked to terrorism in Mali
and Yemen were both cancelled in 2012 due to insecurity."
47.15 With regard to the long-term component, the
Minister says that the IfS continued to work on three key areas
in which to build the capacity of partner countries:
"Trans-regional threats to security and safety.
Programmes included work on transit routes for cocaine trafficking
through West Africa, programmes fighting heroin trafficking from
Afghanistan, the fight against the proliferation of small arms
and light weapons, particularly in Central America and Africa,
and organised crime and terrorism programmes in the Sahel and
Pakistan. New programmes have also been designed in developing
law enforcement capacities in relation to cyber crime and strengthening
the legal framework and capacity building to fight threats from
falsified medicines.
"Chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear
risk mitigation (CBRN). Six regional CBRN Centres of Excellence
have been set up in third countries and have become operational.
The aim is to strengthen the long-term national and regional capabilities
of responsible authorities and administrative infrastructures,
and develop a durable cooperation legacy in the fight against
the CBRN threat. Other programmes relate to cooperation in export
control of dual use goods, re-direction of former weapons scientists
and border monitoring to prevent illicit trafficking.
"Pre- and post-crisis capacity building.
This area of work is focused on building the capacity of non-state
actors to respond to and mediate in crisis situations. Meetings
and capacity building programmes during 2012 were held on thematic
topics (such as armed groups; conflict prevention and early warning;
women, peace and security; children in armed conflict; peacebuilding
and development, private sector and conflict) and country or conflict
specific topics (such as meetings on Syria, Northern Nigeria and
Boko Haram, Northern Mali, Libya, Kosovo) and served to provide
input to the EU's policy-making processes.
47.16 More generally, the Minister says:
"The long term programmed activity works less
well than the short term. There are fewer opportunities for Member
States to input views on programmes and it is therefore more difficult
to influence spending. Member States also do not receive sufficient
updates on ongoing programmes to enable them to judge whether
programmes are achieving an impact and value for money and therefore
whether they should be continued. The UK has repeatedly brought
this to the attention of the IfS Management at Annual Committee
meetings, particularly in relation to the CBRN Centres of Excellence
and a programme working on securing critical maritime routes in
the Horn of Africa, and will continue to work on improving access
to information for Member States."
47.17 Overall, the Minister nonetheless welcomes
what he describes as the valuable work conducted worldwide under
the IfS in 2012, and says that he has worked to promote the IfS
with UK Embassies overseas:
"The IfS contributes to UK objectives in fragile
countries, in important areas of work around crisis handling and
pre-/post-conflict management. Several Embassies including those
in Burma, El Salvador and Nigeria, signalled their interest in
accessing funds and have worked with EU institutions to design
programmes, which will be implemented in 2013. Work is ongoing
to encourage further Embassies to make more use of this funding
stream."
Conclusion
47.18 The IfS is a significant part of the EU's
capacity to respond positively to relevant challenges that are
in both UK as well as wider EU interests. For these reasons we
continue to draw this Annual Report to the attention of the House,
and of the International Development Committee.
47.19 Elsewhere, we look at the closing stages
of two longstanding CFSP missions in the Democratic Republic of
Congo, where the challenge beyond next September (when both will
close) will be to ensure that progress is sustained once the EU
moves towards a more long term approach.[181]
In one of these, the IfS is being considered as a source of funding.
What the Minister has to say about the relative ineffectiveness
of long-term programmed activity compared to short-term, and the
difficulties for Member States to input views on programmes and
to influence spending, is concerning. Continuing "to work
on improving access to information for Member States" is
all well and good. But this cannot be allowed to continue: over
€100 million of UK taxpayers' money is involved (c.f. paragraph
47.4 above). And there will be more to come in the next Financial
Perspective.
47.20 In a year's time, there will be a final
report on this first period of IfS activity. When it is submitted
for scrutiny, we shall expect the Minister to be reporting that
this matter has been satisfactorily resolved, and that Member
States:
— now
have a proper degree of access to information and influence on
spending and programmes;
— receive
sufficient updates on ongoing programmes to enable them to judge
whether programmes are achieving an impact and value for money
and therefore whether they should be continued;
and that, overall, long-term programmed activity
is working as well as the short term.
47.21 In the meantime, we clear this report.
178 Two existing instruments, for Humanitarian Aid,
and for Macro Financial Assistance, were judged not to be in need
of modification, and were maintained. See http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/04/1151&format=HTML&aged=0&lg=et&guiLanguage=en
for further background Back
179
See headnote: HC 34-xxxv (2005-06), chapter 11 (12 July 2006). Back
180
See (34165) 13149/12 + ADDs 1-4; HC 86-xii, dated 12 September
2012, chapter 14. Back
181
[CROSS REF TO 35723-4]. Back
| 
