12 Financing European Union operations
having military or defence implications
| Committee's assessment
| Politically important |
| Committee's decision | Cleared from scrutiny
|
| Document details | Council Decision on establishing a mechanism to administer the financing of the common costs of European Union operations having military or defence implications (Athena)
|
| Legal base | Articles 26(2) and 41(2) TEU; unanimity
|
| Department | Defence
|
| Document numbers | (36464); —
|
Summary and Committee's conclusions
12.1 Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) operations
with military implications or defence operations cannot be financed
from EU funds. For the common costs, the Council established a
special mechanism (ATHENA) in 2004. The first part of the "Background"
section below describes the history and operation of ATHENA thus
far. Currently there are five active EU military operations that
benefit from ATHENA financing, which is provided by 27 Member
States (Denmark has opted out of the "military" CSDP).
12.2 Common costs are financed on the basis of a
GNI-based indicator. The UK share is presently 14.82% of eligible
common costs. The total UK cost share for 2014 is €8.8m.
Funding is drawn from the Peacekeeping budget which is managed
by the FCO.
12.3 The remainder of the expenditure is financed
directly by Member States on the basis of the "costs lie
where they fall" principle (see paragraphs 12.10-12.16 below
for full details).
12.4 The draft Council Decision is the outcome of
the latest triennial review. The Minister for Reserves at the
Ministry of Defence (Mr Julian Brazier) says that, from the UK
perspective, it has been a success. As in 2011, the review has
largely focussed on modifications of a technical nature as a result
of lessons learned from operations, as well as proposals from
some Member states to expand the eligibility of common funded
costs of EU Military operations: as in 2011, the latter have been
resisted (see paragraphs 12.18-12.21 below for full details).
12.5 What the Minister describes as "the one
key area in which we have continued to accepted limited expansion
on a temporary basis" is on strategic airlift. This, he says,
is "a separate Declaration and not part of this decision
and thus outside the scope of this EM". He explains it thus:
"We have agreed to the extension of the
current arrangements for deploying EU Battle-Groups[60]
up to the end of 2016, in line with arrangements for NATO, in
order to allow time for Member States to bring into service planned
capability such as the A400M. We have supported the expansion
of this arrangement to include common costs for land and sea strategic
lift on the grounds that the use of sea and land may be cheaper,
quicker and in certain circumstances more operationally effective
than the use of air. Such costs would only be incurred if a Battle-Group
were to deploy, in which case a separate Council decision would
be required over which the UK would have a potential veto."
12.6 We are somewhat wary of Declarations generally
since, though they may give comfort, they are by definition not
legally-binding. However, on this occasion, we note that there
is the in-built safeguard of needing a fresh Council Decision,
were implementation to be proposed.
12.7 The Minister also says that he and his officials
"are working to secure an unclassified version of the Council
Decision but hope that you are able to conduct scrutiny on the
basis of this Explanatory Memorandum". This suggests a misunderstanding
about the nature of the document submitted, which (as with most
CFSP/CSDP Council Decisions) is still an "unofficial"
text, i.e., not yet fully finalised, and therefore lacking a Council
number, rather than one that is "classified" (in EU
parlance, i.e., "limité" or "restreint").
The Committee is well-used to clearing such "unofficial"
texts, on the basis that no substantive changes are subsequently
made prior to adoption by the Council (in which, very rare, case,
the Minister concerned is expected to submit the revised text
for scrutiny in the normal way).
12.8 On that basis, we now clear the draft Council
Decision.
Full
details of the document:
Council Decision establishing a mechanism to administer the financing
of the common costs of European Union operations having military
or defence implications (Athena): (36464), —.
Background
12.9 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.[61]
12.10 Currently there are five active EU military
operations benefiting from ATHENA financing, which is provided
by 27 Member States (Denmark has opted out of the EU Common Security
and Defence policy on military matters):
— EUFOR ALTHEA[62]
— EUNAVFOR ATALANTA[63]
— EUTM SOMALIA[64]
— EUTM MALI[65]
— EUFOR RCA[66]
12.11 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.
12.12 In the past, ATHENA has also financed the following
operations/support actions:
— AMIS 2 (Sudan) (June 2005 - December
2007)
— EUFOR RD CONGO (June - November 2006)
— EUFOR TCHAD RCA (January 2008 - March
2009)
— EUFOR Libya (April - November 2011).
12.13 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.
12.14 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:
· In all cases:
— 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); and
— 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 and Reconnaissance,
human intelligence); and
— other critical theatre-level capabilities
(demining, chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN)
protection, storage and destruction of weapons).
12.15 ATHENA has set out specific financial rules
applicable to all expenditure financed through its mechanism.
12.16 In accordance with the article 41.2 TEU, Member
States' contributions to ATHENA are based on the Gross National
Income scale.[67]
The Council Decision
12.17 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
2014.
12.18 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 28 October
2014, the Minister for Reserves at the Ministry of Defence (Mr
Julian Brazier) explains that:
— this review has looked at modifications
of a technical nature as a result of lessons learned from operations
as well as proposals from some Member states to expand the eligibility
of common funded costs of EU Military operations; and
— as all changes to the extant Council
Decision require unanimity from Member States "the UK is
continuing to successfully block proposals on any expansion of
eligibility for common funding whilst accepting some modifications
to the mechanism that will enable it to support EU military operations
more effectively".
The Government's view
12.19 Noting that the financial cost of military
contributions to CSDP operations are borne by the sending nations,
the Minister says:
"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."
12.20 He also points out that civilian CSDP missions
are financed from the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy
Budget.
12.21 The Minister continues his comments as follows:
"The Council Decision focuses on the mechanics
of funding and the rules of eligibility on what can be common
funded. We support the current rules of eligibility for common
funding as laid out in the extant Council Decision.
"We have successfully resisted further expansion
of eligibility for common funding, in the face of pressure from
many 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 funding would
both duplicate investment already made by the higher-spending
nations such as the UK and risk encouraging others to view common
funding as an effective and acceptable substitute for adequate
national investment in defence capability. Acceptance of the proposed
expansions would have resulted in the UK paying twice.
"All proposed amendments to the existing
Council Decision require approval by unanimity from MS. As such
the UK has been able to block all proposals to expand eligibility
for common funding despite continued proposals by Member States
to expand eligibility to include funding for costs relating to
exercising, transportation, barracks, lodgings and infrastructure.
"Other proposed amendments to the Council
Decision have been predominantly technical in nature and have
not crossed UK red lines. The UK has supported a proposal to allow
ATHENA the ability to pre-finance elements of mission costs to
expedite mission deployments."
12.22 The Minister then says:
"The one key area in which we have continued
to accepted limited expansion on a temporary basis is on strategic
airlift 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[68]
up to the end of 2016, in line with arrangements for NATO, in
order to allow time for Member States to bring into service planned
capability such as the A400M. We have supported the expansion
of this arrangement to include common costs for land and sea strategic
lift on the grounds that the use of sea and land may be cheaper,
quicker and in certain circumstances more operationally effective
than the use of air. Such costs would only be incurred if a Battle-Group
were to deploy, in which case a separate Council decision would
be required over which the UK would have a potential veto."
12.23 Finally, the Minister notes that:
— the UK cost share of EU led Military
operations is 14.82% of eligible common costs;
— the total UK cost share for 2014 is €8.8m;
and
— funding is drawn from the Peacekeeping
budget, which is managed by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
Previous Committee Reports
None, but see (33523), 18066/11: Forty-ninth Report
HC 428-xliv (2010-12), chapter 19 (14 December 2011).
60 The key elements of EU Battlegroups are: Stand-alone
Battlegroup-sized forces (around 1,500 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/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/esdp/91624.pdf
for full information. Back
61
Council Decision 2008/975/CFSP of 18 December 2008. Back
62
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
63
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?
for further information. Back
64
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
65
On 18 February 2013, at the request of the Malian authorities,
and in accordance with international decisions on the subject,
in particular United Nations Security Council Resolution 2085
(2012), the European Union launched a training mission for Malian
armed forces, EUTM Mali for an initial mandate of 15 months. See
http://www.eeas.europa.eu/csdp/missions-and-operations/eutm-mali/index_en.htm
for further information. Back
66
On 10 February 2014 the Council established an EU military operation
to contribute to a secure environment in the Central African Republic,
as authorised by the UN Security Council in resolution 2134 (2014).
See http://www.eeas.europa.eu/csdp/missions-and-operations/eufor-rca/index_en.htm
http://www.eeas.europa.eu/csdp/missions-and-operations/eufor-rca/index_en.htm
for further information. Back
67
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. Also see http://www.eeas.europa.eu/csdp/missions-and-operations/index_en.htm
for full information on all EU CSDP (Common Security and Defence
Policy) missions. Back
68
The key elements of EU Battlegroups are: Stand-alone Battlegroup-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/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/esdp/91624.pdf
for full information. Back
| 
