FRANCE:Irish neutrality is seen in France as an illusion of insular security, reliant on others to look out for it, writes Lara Marlowe
IT'S NOT often that little Ireland has the military establishment of a nuclear power quaking in its boots. But officials at the French defence ministry in the rue Saint Dominique are so aware of the extreme sensitivity of tomorrow's referendum that no one will be quoted about plans for the upcoming presidency of the EU.
"People are very cagey," admits a high-ranking officer. "They're afraid they'll be blamed if the Irish vote No." As reported by Le Monde, the Élysee gave strict instructions to the defence ministry not to discuss strengthening European defence policy until after the referendum.
President Nicolas Sarkozy's bland, five-page summary of his goals for the EU presidency, distributed to EU heads of state, was seized upon by the Irish Anti-War Movement, which opposes the Lisbon Treaty. It used often distorted or erroneous versions of French goals to argue for a No vote.
When he received foreign ambassadors at the Élysée last August, Mr Sarkozy devoted two pages of his speech to European defence, saying he wanted to give it "new impetus" during the French presidency. His desire for a rapprochement between France and Nato reassured France's German and British partners.
"We need to reinforce our ability to plan and conduct operations; to develop an Armaments Europe with new weapons programmes and to streamline the existing ones; to ensure the interoperability of our forces; and we must ensure that all in Europe have a stake in its common security," Mr Sarkozy said.
But it's important to distinguish between French desiderata and what will actually happen. "French ambitions for its presidency are only French ambitions," sighs an officer. He describes "strengthening industrial capabilities" through the European Defence Agency (established in 2004 by a European Counci decision) as the highest priority.
In particular, the French officer laments the lack of transport aircraft for EU humanitarian and peacekeeping missions. The EU mission in Chad had to rent helicopters from Russia. Ireland did not have the means to ferry its own troops to Chad. The US is pushing the 21 of 27 EU members who are in Nato to buy Boeings. France would prefer that EU armies be equipped with the A400M transport aircraft, built by the EADS consortium, but it won't be available for several years.
In Paris, Irish neutrality is perceived as an illusion of insular security, based on the knowledge that others will look out for Ireland. "Ireland understood that markets are global; why can't they understand that threats are also global?" asks the French officer. He cites cyber-attacks that can cripple a country's entire civil infrastructure, and threats to fuel supplies. "Neutrality shouldn't mean naivete," he says.
France will publish a White Paper on Defence this month, detailing priorities for the next 15 years. It shows how assessment of threats against France, and Europe, have evolved. War is now seen as the danger of chaos and death on home territory. Preventing terrorist attacks, intelligence gathering and observation satellites are new priorities - 10,000 French soldiers will be reserved for domestic use in the event of bombings, health disasters, cyber or nuclear, chemical, biological or radiation attacks.
The Irish Anti-War Movement charged that France wants the EU to have its own military satellites. It already does - financed by France, Belgium, Spain and Italy. Military satellites are too expensive for any one EU member, notes a French official, but are necessary to enable Europe to see through phoney US intelligence like that used to justify the Iraq war.
The anti-war lobby claims France wants EU states to increase arms spending to 6 per cent of GDP. The US, the biggest military spender, devotes 3.3 per cent of GDP to defence. France has in fact expressed a non-binding "pious wish" for EU countries to strive for 2 per cent. The British and French defence budgets together amount to two-thirds of the total defence budgets of the EU's other 25 members.
European heads of state and government decided in Helsinki in 1999 to make 60,000 soldiers, capable of deploying for one year, available on 60 days' notice. This has been achieved, but operations like the peacekeeping mission in Congo have shown, in French eyes, the need for a more adequate operations centre in Brussels. The Congo mission had three headquarters - in Potsdam, Brussels and Kinshasa. "We flirted with disaster," said a French analyst. Likewise, Gen Pat Nash, the commander of the Chad mission, "spends all his time in the train" (between Montvalérien and Brussels) according to the same analyst.
Because of British opposition, the EU Brussels operations centre is comprised of "five men and computers". France believes a permanent headquarters to co-ordinate future peacekeeping and humanitarian missions would save time, money and confusion. "We're not even asking that it be located in France," says a French officer.