BETA

Activities of Andrew DUFF related to 2010/2299(INI)

Plenary speeches (1)

Main aspects of the common foreign and security policy and the common security and defence policy - Situation in Syria and in Camp Ashraf - Report: Albertini - Annual report from the Council to Parliament on the main aspects of CFSP in 2009 - Report: Gualtieri - Development of CSDP following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty - Report: Muñiz De Urquiza - The EU as a global actor: its role in multilateral organisations (debate)

2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2010/2299(INI)

Shadow reports (1)

2016/11/22
Committee: AFET
Dossiers: 2010/2299(INI)
Documents: PDF(257 KB) DOC(168 KB)

Amendments (44)

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point b

(b) when conducting foreign and security policy~~, not least under the CSDP,~~ the EU must ensure consistency between the different areas of its external action and between ~~these and other policies~~external and internal policies; notes that the HR has a special responsibility in this matter;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point c a (new)

(c a) the HR has powers to make proposals to the Council in common foreign and security policy, either on her own initiative or at the request of the European Council, and under the overall direction of the European Council - in which case the Council may act by QMV;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Regrets, therefore, that, more than one year after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, there are not yet clear signs of a post-Lisbon EU holistic approach enabling traditional procedural and institutional barriers to be overcome, while preserving the respective legal prerogatives when European citizens' security is at stake;deleted

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Urges the European Council to carry out its task of identifying the strategic interests and political objectives of the EU by drawing up a European foreign policy strategy geared to international developments, which should be based on real convergence of the different dimensions of EU external action and increasing conformity of the national policies of the Member States to the common objectives of the EU, and subject to regular review;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls on the European Council and its President to set about this task by engaging in political dialogue with the European Parliament and to discuss Parliament's recommendations; maintains that such a dialogue is required in the light of the new Treaty provisions and of the need to lay down and implement the foreign policy strategy, proceeding from an effective comprehensive approach;deleted

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Considers the termination of the WEU Treaty and the disbandment of the WEU Assembly to be consistent with the new legal framework created by the Lisbon Treaty, and does not believe that disbandment of the Assembly will leave anyWishes to enhance cooperation with EU national parliaments in exercising democratic scrutiny over the CFSP and the CSDP, with the goal of mutually reinforcing their respective influence on the political choices made by the other European institutions and by the Member States; looks forward to reaching agreement with national parliaments on new forms of vacuum in which the VP/HR, the Council, and the Commission could act outside of parliamentary control; declares its willingness to enhance cooperation with EU national parliaments in exercising democratic scrutiny over the CFSP and the CSDP, with the goal of mutually reinforcing their respective influenceinterparliamentary cooperation in the field of CFSP which fully respect the distinct mandates and functions of the two parliamentary levels yet which combine to hold national ministers and the EU institutions to account for their performance in the field of foreign affairs and which reassure the citizen onf the ~~poli~~democratical ch~~oices made by the other European institutions and by the Member States~~aracter of the emerging common policies at EU level;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Points out that the powers and responsibilities of the High Representative do not just constitute ‘double hatting’, but also amount to merging of functions and legal bases, making her central to the process of bringing the various instruments, actors, and procedures of EU external action into a coherent relationship; calls on the High Representative to interpret her role as one that is constantly evolving and requires her, while carrying on a constructive dialogue with Parliament, to commit herself to the twofold effort of actively fostering a political consensus among the Member States on the strategic directions and policy options for the CFSP and the CSDP, and of bringing coherence to, effectively coordinating, and fully exploiting the potential for the CFSP- CSDP to act synergistically with the other sectors of EU external action and with EU internal policies having an impact and implications at the external level;deleted

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Deplores the fact that the provisional organisation chart of the EEAS does not include the ‘appropriate structure’ which, under the Madrid accords, is to integrate the various units dealing with crisis response planning and programming, conflict prevention, and peace-building with the CSDP structures; calls for a crisis management board to be set up, to be staffed by the CMPD, the CCPC, the EUMS, the EU SITCEN, the peace- building, conflict prevention, mediation, and security policy units, the Chair of the PSC, the geographical desks and other policy departments concerned, according to the circumstances, and the Commission humanitarian aid and civil protection structures, placed under the authority of the HR and the executive Secretary- General, and coordinated by the Managing Director for Crisis Response; calls on the High Representative and the Commission to equip the board with an efficient alert and emergency system and a large unified operations room, located within the EEAS, so as to enable surveillance to be carried out 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, hence avoiding the present operational overlapping (seven operations rooms), which hardly squares with the need for a proper surveillance and rapid reaction system to deal with crises;deleted

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Believes that the Crisis Management Board should be responsible on the one hand for forward planning in relation to potential theatres and crisis scenarios and secondly for practical crisis response management, working both in Brussels and on the ground to coordinate the use of the various financial instruments and deployment of capabilities available to the EU, without undermining the specific decision-making procedures and legal bases applying to the deployment of civilian and military capabilities under the CFSP/CSDP or to the use of Community instruments;deleted

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Points to the need to strengthen the civilian crisis response structures, departments, and units within the EEAS and the Commission, spreading them out and organising them in a more rational way, and in particular: (a) calls for expansion of the CPCC unit responsible for operational planning of civilian missions; (b) renews its call for the Commission staff who have in the past planned and programmed the Instrument for Stability Article 3 crisis response measures to be integrated into the EEAS crisis management and peacebuilding structures and specifically for the former Relex/A2 posts assigned to Unit 2 of the new foreign policy instruments (12 AD and 5 AST) to be transferred to the EEAS; and points out that this transfer is a condition which has to be satisfied in order to release the reserve under the corresponding heading in the Commission budget; (c) supports the projected shared services centre for the management of CSDP missions, that is to say, an interinstitutional office combining the Commission's Unit 3 (CFSP Operations of the Foreign Policy Instruments – formerly Relex/A3) and the CPCC Mission support Unit; notes that by relieving the heads of missions from administrative duties, the new office would address the personnel, logistics, procurement, and financial responsibilities of the civilian CSDP missions (which would acquire legal personality) with a view to guaranteeing greater efficiency both by pooling administrative functions, starting with the selection and recruitment of personnel, and by centralising procurement and equipment management;deleted

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Deplores the scant results achieved by the Civilian Headline Goal 2010 process regarding civilian capabilities, and in particular the discrepancy between the personnel assigned by Member States on paper and the numbers actually available for missions, the modest progress as regards the training of human resources (no common standards, limited number of training programmes uploaded to the Schoolmaster training opportunities programme within the Goalkeeper software environment); calls on the High Representative, the Council, and the Member States to take coordinated steps to reactivate the development of civilian capabilities, especially where recruitment, training, and deployment are concerned;deleted

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Maintains that all of the above points should be tackled by means of a clear-cut long-term political resolve, making full use of the potential offered by the Lisbon Treaty, and that any common defence policy intended to move gradually towards common defence must serve to strengthen the EU's ability to respond to crises and long-term peace-building, and above all guarantee Europe's strategic autonomy, averting the danger that its standing might decline on the world stage; calls on the national parliaments to embark on an appropriate joint initiative in relation to their institutional partners and calls for a special European Council meeting to be given over to European defence; renews its call for a European defence White Paper;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)

26a. Renews its call for a White Paper on European Defence to be based on national defence and security reviews in all the Member States which accord to a common template and allow for direct comparability of strengths and weaknesses in current capabilities and planning assumptions; urges that in the course of 2012 this White Paper be discussed at a special meeting of the European Council and debated in the European Parliament and between the European and national parliaments;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Takes note ofthat the Franco-British ~~initiative of 2 November 2010 on security and defence cooperation and hopes that it~~agreement on security and defence cooperation has been launched outside the framework of the Treaty on European Union and without regard to the provisions of that Treaty for permanent structured cooperation in defence; hopes nevertheless that this latest attempt at Franco-British collaboration can act as a springboard for further progress at European level in line with the Union's institutional framework and the logical requirements of rationalisation ~~and technological, industrial, and operational integration from which it stemmed~~, inter- operability and cost effectiveness;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Notes that, in addition to being a political necessity, Permanent Structuraled Cooperation ~~(PESCO), as provided for in the Treaty, takes the form of a legal obligation and not~~, as laid down in the Treaty, provides legal safeguards and o~~ption (i.e. Member States ‘shall establish’ and not ‘may establish’)~~bligations; calls on the Council and the Member States to remedy their failure hitherto to act in this area by using the Defence White Paper to determin~~ing~~e the aims and substance of ~~PESCO without further delay,~~such enhanced cooperation in the military field involving all the Member States ~~on as broad a basis as possible and, not least, assessing the advisability of implementation based on variable geometry~~which prove themselves to be both politically willing and militarily capable;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Believes that the role of the Defence Ministers needs to be strengthened both within the Council's Foreign Affairs configuration and within the EDA; ~~maintains that the number of meetings should be higher than at present;~~

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Recommends that serious thought be given toin the ~~true significance~~White Paper and its follow-up to the significance and implications of the clause on mutual assistance in the event of armed aggression on the territory of a Member State, tackling the unresolved problems regarding the implementing provisions, which were removed from the draft treaty on the functioning of the European Union; calls for political guidelines to be drawn up, an imperative need which has arise not least from the recent termination of the modified Treaty of Brussels (WEU);

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Supports the recommendations of the January 2011 Foreign Affairs Council, which called on the High Representative to pursue the subjects raised in the Weimar initiative so as to enable practical measures to be taken on the basis of a report that she is to submit to the Foreign Affairs Council by mid-2011, with a view to achieving concrete results by the end of the year as far as possible, including the potential for extending such initiatives to include other interested Member States;deleted

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Points to the need to overcome the current imbalance in terms of planning capabilities and the conduct of civilian and military operations by providing the EU with a permanent military-strategic level of command or Operational Headquarters (OHQ) to serve as a counterpart to the C~~PCC~~ommon Planning and Conduct Capability; points out that the Berlin Plus arrangements have been put to only limited use, having been confined to date to takeovers of pre-existing NATO missions, and draws attention to the problems connected with the framework nation track, which is based on the use of five national OHQs, and in particular to the fragmented nature of political and strategic operations planning (Crisis Management Concept, Military Strategic Options, Initiating Military Directive), adding to the difficulty of force generation, as well as making the use of civilian and military capabilities more complex to coordinate;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Considers that the existing Operation Centre, though constituting a welcome first step, falls short of ~~the~~ requirements ~~(it is no coincidence that it has never been used)~~ and that it must instead be made permanent and put in a position to manage missions beyond the present limited size (some 2 000 troops), the ways to do so being to increase its staff substantially and deal with the unreliability of the EU's communications and information systems infrastructure, the main reason for which is that there is no permanent C2 structure (or corresponding legal framework), a fact which can also adversely affect situational awarenesslarger missions, and to deal with the unreliability of the EU's communications and information systems infrastructure; maintains that the military OHQ should be set up alongside the civilian HQ, thus making it possible to carry out the whole range of military and civilian operations, exploiting potential synergistic effects to the full while respecting the distinctive civilian and military chains of command and the different decision-making procedures and financing arrangements;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36

36. Welcomes the fact that, in her reply to the Weimar initiative, the HR recognised the need for an EU military conduct capability; maintains that the cost efficiency analysis called for by the HR should also factor in the costs arising because the EU has no OHQ; ~~declares its intention of promoting a study on that point and on the possible cost of, and~~urges that the White Paper exercise deals with the question of the financing arrangements for, the new structure;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. Encourages the ~~head of the Agency/VP/HR and the Commission to seek strong~~close cooperation between the EDA and the Commission with a view to enhancing dual-use capability in order to make for better synergistic management of civilian- military resources, in particular through the security chapter of the framework programme for research and technological development; accordingly welcomes the prospect of the eighth framework programme, which will also cover external security;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40

40. Maintains that one of the prerequisites for a ~~self-contained~~credible CSDP is the establishment of a more competitive European defence and security market~~, with an enhanced Eur~~ opean ~~defence technological and industrial base (EDTIB)~~to public procurement (including identification of key industrial capabilities, security of supply between countries, ~~increased competition in the defence equipment market,~~ a deepening and diversifying supplier base, and increased armaments cooperation);

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 – introductory part

41. Points out that it is essential, for the defence market, for the following directives to be transposed into national law by all Member States:

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41

recommends that Member States comply strictly with the deadlines, under the Commission's supervision, and that they draw up the necessary implementing regulations and train the relevant staff to enforce the new rules;deleted

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44

44. Calls on the EDA's participating Member States to give loyal and cooperative support to the work and initiatives presented by the VP/HR in her capacity as head of the Agency and urges the VP/HR to establish working methods allowing the participating Member States invariably to play an active role in decision-taking, consistent with the intergovernmental nature of the Agency and the provisions of the Treaty, the idea being to build a political consensus;deleted

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47

47. Acknowledges that the connections between internal and external security policies have become more and more evident in the Member States and notably in third countries such as the US, where the Department of Homeland Security, established in 2003 by the merger of 22 federal agencies, now employs more than 200 000 officials and has an annual budget of more than $40 billion; considers it to be no surprise that the main missions of the DHS are to some extent the same as those which the European Union has linked to the creation of the area of freedom, security, and justice (protection of external borders, migration, anti-terrorism);deleted

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 – introductory part

48. Welcomes the fact that key provisions of the Lisbon Treaty ~~have allowed for a context of the kind described above and~~ reflect the need to exploit the synergies between external and internal security, including the following:

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 – indent 1

– expansion of the CSDP to include wider Petersberg-type missions that could contribute to counterterrorism, not least through support to help third countries fight terrorism on their territory; ~~recommends that these provisions be interpreted in sweeping terms;~~

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 – indent 2

– ~~solidarity clause: agrees that this instrument must be made operative and~~ welcomes the fact that the Commission and the HR/VP have promised to submit a cross-cutting proposal in 2011 in order to provide the basis for the EU's collective commitment to putting the solidarity clause into practice;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49

49. Considers that the European Security Strategy (2003) and the Internal Security Strategy (2010) coherently identify a number of common areas – such as terrorism, organised crime, and cybersecurity – with implications for both security dimensions; agrees, therefore, that the way of bringing together the internal and external dimensions needs to be improved~~, an idea which has been developed by the Commission in its communication entitled ‘The EU internal security Strategy: five steps towards a more secure Europe’~~;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51

51. Is of the view that all the initiatives listed above could therefore be launched only with a sound legal basis and legislative measures which can be adopted under the internal ordinary EU competence, for which a qualified majority in the Council is the rule and which also involves codecision in Parliament and, last but not least, judicial review by the Court of Justice;deleted

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52

52. I~~s of the view that logic will then imply~~nsists that, when the same threat requires the activation of external and internal security measures, the EU should give priority to the more efficient – and legally sound – measures available, the latter being those arising from internal competence; considers that Parliament's role should also be decisive as regards the related specific CFSP strategies and measuresre measures needed to safeguard external security mirror the internal competences of the EU, the ordinary legislative procedure should be used;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59

59. Points out that clear-cut progress is needed urgently as regards technical, legal, operational, and above all political and strategic aspects; maintains in particular that every mission should be encompassed within a clear (medium- and long-term) political strategy; considers such linkage to be essential in order to ensure the operational success of interventions and, more generally, break the vicious circle in which the CSDP, rather than being a tool of the CFSP, is tending to replace it, with all the inconsistencies which that entailCalls for the stricter evaluation of all CSDP missions and for the clearer establishment of operational and strategic objectives, leading to the introduction of more robust procedures;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61 – introductory part

61. Calls for closer coordination on the ground, in which the heads of ~~delegation (now EEAS officials and no longer Commission officials)~~EEAS delegations and the EUSRs will have a crucial role to play; considers that such coordination should apply at several levels, in particular:

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68

68. Points to the need for more robust procedures, officially established at institutional level, to enable assessment to be brought to bear at regular intervals – on the basis of common criteria – on the conduct of missions on the ground; believes that this would enable the experience acquired to be turned to account from a political and strategic, technical, legal, and operational point of view and in the long term could provide a starting point for improving interventions under way and for criteria to be applied to emerging crises so as to make for the best possible balance between strategic interests and available resources;deleted

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 71

71. Acknowledges that, on a legal basis, the Lisbon Treaty has overcome the previous dichotomy between Union and Community policies by conferring a unique legal personality and by strengthening the autonomy of the EU legal order in terms of international law, even when international security is at stake, as already stated by the Court of Justice case law in the Kadi case (according to which ‘international law can permeate the EU legal order only under the conditions set by the constitutional principles of the Community’);

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72

72. Calls on those Member States which have seats on the UN Security Council to defend ~~the~~common positions and interests of the EU and to ask the HR/VP to speak for the EU in that forum, in accordance with the Lisbon Treaty;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 74

74. Recognises that NATO still constitutes the bedrock of collective defence for those Member States which belong to it; welcomes France's return to the integrated command structure of the Atlantic Alliance ~~and considers that this should help to dispel any resistance to the development of a common defence policy at EU level~~;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 76

76. Points to the fundamental importance of the African continent for the EU's security and for peacekeeping and conflict prevention; supports close cooperation between the EU and the African Union within the Peace and Security Partnership in conjunction with the Africa-EU Joint Strategy; favours greater involvement of the African Union, especially where crisis management is concerned, and reaffirms the need for the Commission and the Member States to play their part by taking practical measures to combat trafficking in, and the spread of, light weapons and small arms; ~~endorses the pledge in the Tripoli Declaration to make the African peace and security architecture fully operational;~~

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77

77. Recommends in particular that African early warning and conflict capabilities be developed, that the ‘panel of the wise’ should be placed in a more effective position to mediate, and that study should focus on ways of giving effect to the recommendations in the Prodi report on the financing of African peacekeeping operations; urges that relations be pursued on a collaborative basis and; urges that the capabilities of African sub-regional organisations be enhanced;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78

78. Recalls that, in addition to partnerships with other international organisations such as the UN, NATO, and the AU, cooperation with individual third countries should be enhanced in the context of the CSDP; notes that experience shows that third countries can bring important assets, human resources, and expertise to CSDP missions, such as in the context of EUFOR Chad/CAR, for which Russia provided much-needed helicopters, and EUFOR Althea, to which countries like Turkey and Morocco contributed substantial contingents of troops; believes, furthermore,believes that the involvement of third countries can enhance the legitimacy of CSDP operations and help set up a broader security dialogue with ~~important~~ partners;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 79

79. Considers that such dialogue should address ~~respective~~ threat assessment, involv~~e (where relevant)~~ing the participation of third countries in EU exercises and training activities and lead to closer mutual engagement across the board; believes that procedural obstacles should be tackled in order to facilitate cooperation with third countries and avoid the delays that negotiating each specific contribution may entail; takes the view that framework agreements and standard procedures could be established~~, to this end, with some third countries to facilitate their contribution~~ with third countries;

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET

Andrew DUFF, Marietje SCHAAKE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 80

80. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the European Council, Vice- President/High Representative, the Council, the Commission, the parliaments of the Member States, the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, and the Secretaries-General of the United Nations and NATO.

2011/03/22
Committee: AFET