World View/Paul Gillespie: 'Ireland continues to provide a sterling example of true national commitment to multilateralism." So says Mr Jean-Marie Guéhenno, the chief United Nations official in charge of peacekeeping operations, who addressed a conference on how the European Union and the UN can co-operate in military crisis management in Dublin this week.
Much progress has been made in a short time between the two organisations, as was attested to by a series of speakers at the high-powered meeting attended by political and military officials from the 25 EU member-states and the UN.
There is a "true consensus" in the EU about developing the new relationship with the UN and a growing "mutual trust" between them, as one Irish official put it, despite considerable caution on both sides.
It is good news from the Irish point of view, given this State's commitment to the core values of both organisations. It allows Irish diplomats and officers to contribute their peacekeeping experience to the EU without worrying about military neutrality. They came up with the idea of a "synergy" between them, which has become widely accepted.
Multilateralism involves acting in co-operation and agreement with other states in tackling political and security problems. It has become a more central value in tandem with the Bush administration's adoption of unilateral pre-emptive intervention following the 9/11 attacks.
Thus the growing relationship between the UN and the EU must be understood in part as a reaction to changing US policy. It is strikingly confirmed by developments in Iraq. This story has significant implications for international politics.
Ireland must present a report to next month's Brussels summit on how to develop more "effective multilateralism" within the framework of the EU Security Strategy agreed last December, which commits it to acting within principles of the UN Charter. Now that the EU is involved in managing military crises, what mechanisms should it draw upon?
The tasks involved were agreed 10 years ago and have been elaborated since then in successive treaties, including the draft constitution now in the concluding stages of negotiations.
They include the following tasks outside EU borders: joint disarmament operations; humanitarian and rescue tasks; military advice and assistance; conflict prevention; peacekeeping; tasks of combat forces in crisis management (including peace-making and post-conflict stabilisation); and strengthening international security.
Under the new treaty there is provision for states with bigger military capabilities to take part in "structured co-operation". In 1999 the EU made a commitment to create a Rapid Reaction Force of 60,000 troops available for such tasks at 60 days' notice and sustainable for up to a year. The "headline goal" was to have these in place by 2003.
There have been substantial shortfalls in achieving them. A new set of goals is to be agreed next month, extending to 2010. It will focus on making up these shortfalls quantitatively and qualitatively.
Among the new methods under active consideration is the "battle group concept". It originated in a Franco-British proposal last year to create joint groups of troops, each about 1,500 strong, so as to strengthen the EU rapid reaction capability in support of UN operations. Such groups are seen by military experts as the smallest self-sufficient formations that can be deployed and sustained in a theatre of operations with extensive air and naval support.
Germany and Italy have now expressed an active interest in developing them. In February France, Britain and Germany proposed that the EU should be able to deploy nine such battle groups within two weeks. The plan to be agreed next month would allow for the concept to be developed later this year and for a commitment conference to make it operational by 2007. This could give the EU and the UN the rapid reaction capability it currently lacks.
There was great interest in the concept at this conference. The French general who led last year's EU intervention (Operation Artemis) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to disarm militia groups and prepare the way for a longer term UN peacekeeping force explained how it was organised and executed. It was mandated by the UN under the political control of the EU but carried out by French troops, with co-operation from officers of other member-states, including Ireland.
The problem now is how to develop the idea on a multinational basis within the EU and how to resolve potential difficulties in command and control with the UN. Ireland has committed some 800 troops to the rapid response force and would have to integrate them in one of these battle groups.
Mr Guéhenno said the EU should send more blue-helmet troops to the UN (currently the EU 25 contribute 3,650 troops to the over 50,000 uniformed personnel and 11,400 civilians for 94 countries serving in 15 UN peacekeeping missions on three continents; there are only two US soldiers involved).
He paid tribute to Ireland's 420 troops in Liberia. He said the EU rapid response contribution could be either a bridging force, as in the Congo, paving the way for a UN force, or an "over the horizon" one to help out a UN force or deter potential spoilers. The EU could also contribute skilled "enabling" personnel to UN missions and rotate troops through them.
The UN peacekeeping department fought hard to develop its own stand-alone peacekeeping facility, as advocated by the Brahimi report in 2000, but lost the argument with its member-states.
It is now much more open to doing a deal with the EU on the EU's terms, especially about command and control, and on intelligence-sharing, and is very interested in the battle group idea. EU officials caution against expecting too much from a fledgling organisation and want to protect their autonomy; but they are committed to detailed talks
Both sides say a UN-EU military role in Iraq is completely out of the question so long as the US insists on controlling security and government there.