18 Amendments of Arnaud DANJEAN related to 2016/2067(INI)
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the EU’s security environment has deteriorated considerably, becoming more fluid, more dangerous and less predictable; notes that threats are both conventional and hybrid, generated by both state and non-state actors, and coming from the South and the East, and that they affect the Member States differently, thus preventing a more common approach but recalls that the security of EU Member States is deeply interconnected;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that Europe is now compelled to react to an arch of increasingly complex crises: from West Africa, through the Sahel, the Horn of Africa and the Middle East, to the Caucasus; considers that the EU should increase the dialogue and cooperation with third countries from the region as well as regional and sub-regional organisations;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes with concern that terrorism has brought guerrilla warfare to European streetsfrom radical Islamist organizations is targeting Europe at an unprecedented scale; underlines that, consequently, security of the individual has become paramount, eroding the traditional distinction between its external and internal dimensions; calls therefore on the EU to adapt to these security challenges, in particular by using more efficiently the existing CSDP tools in coherence with other external and internal instruments: calls for better cooperation and coordination between Member States, especially in the field of counter- terrorism;
Amendment 67 #
4. Is firmly convinced that, as a result, a thorough revision of the CSDP is needed, in order to enable the EU to contribute in a decisive way to the management of international crises and to assert its strategic autonomy;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines that, as Europe is no longer in control of its security environment and has lost the luxury of choosing the time and place of action, the CSDP, which has, until now, focused mainlyConsiders that the EU, through CSDP missions and operations as well as other relevant instruments, should be able to intervene across the whole spectrum onf crisis management operations, should complement these operations with crisis prevention and crisis resolution, and truly ensure the common security and defence of the entire area of freedom, security and justice, including crisis prevention and crisis resolution;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines, equally, that the CSDP should be based on a strong collective defence principle, efficient financing and full coordination with international institutions in the field of security and defence, as NATO;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Salutes the European Security Compact proposed by the ministers of Foreign Affairs of Germany and France and supports inter alia the idea of a common analysis of Europe’s strategic environment, making threat assessment a periodical common activity, and thus getting respect for each other’s concerns and support for common capabilities and common action;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Observes that, to this effect, cooperation with similar NATO activities and an increased and more efficient exchange of intelligence and information between the Member States are indispensable;
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Highlights the significantNotes the contribution of CSDP missions and operations to international peace and stability; notesfinds regrettable that the CSDP missions and operations have continued to be dogged by structural weaknesses, jeopardising their efficiency; considers that they should be genuine tools and could be better integrated in the EUGS; notes in this regard the level of political ambition set by the EUGS for an integrated approach to conflicts and crises concerning the engagement of the Union at all stages of the conflict cycle through prevention, resolution and stabilisation, and the commitment to avoid premature disengagement; considers that the EU should coherently support the Member States involved in the coalition against Daesh by setting up a CSDP operation in Iraq and Syria;
Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Welcomes the idea of "regionalised" CSDP missions present in the Sahel, notably since it corresponds to the will of countries of the sub-region to increased cooperation in the field of security through the G5 Sahel platform; is convinced that this could represent an opportunity to strengthen the efficiency and the relevance of the CSDP missions (EUCAP Sahel Mali and EUCAP Sahel Niger) present on the field; strongly believes that such a concept of "regionalisation" must rely on field expertise, definite objectives and the means to achieve them and should not be defined only under the impetus of political considerations;
Amendment 188 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Underlines that all Council decisions on future missions and operations should prioritise engagements in conflicts directlyrises affecting EU security; considers that the decision to engage should be based on a common analysis and understanding of the strategic environment and on shared strategic interests of the Member States; considers that CSDP capacity-building missions must be coordinated with security sector and rule of law work by the Commission;
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal to amend Regulation (EU) No 230/2014 (establishing an Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace) in order to extend the Union’s assistance to equip military actors in partner countries, considering this an indispensable contribution to their resilience, thus diminishing their chances of becoming once again the object of conflict and sanctuaries for hostile activities against the EU; in this regard encourages the EEAS and the Commission to speed up the implementation of the CSBD initiative to improve the effectiveness and sustainability of CSDP missions;
Amendment 203 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes, to that effect, that the Petersberg tasks should be revised and the Battlegroups should become an employable military instrument through increased modularity and more functional financing; notes the lack of a constructive attitude among Member States continues to serve a political and operational impediment to the deployment of Battlegroups;
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recalls that NATO and the EU share the same strategic interests and face the same challenges to the East and the South; notes the relevance of the mutual defence clause, Article 42(7), for the EU non-NATO members and not onlyMember States, members of NATO or not; notes the EUSG’s objective of an appropriate level of EU strategic autonomy and underlines that the two organisations cannot afford to duplicate their means; considers that the EU’s ‘strategic autonomy’ should reinforce Europe’s capacity to promote security within and beyond its borders as well as strengthen the partnership with NATO and transatlantic relations;
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Considers that the bedrock for EU- NATO cooperation is provided by the complementarity of their missions and, consequently, of their inventories of instruments; stresses that the relations between the two organisations should continue to be cooperative and not competitive; considers that the EU should encourage Member States to meet NATO capacity goals, which requires a minimum level of defence spending of 2% of GDP;
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 263 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. IConsiders that the development of a strong defence industry is strengthening the strategic autonomy and the technologic independence of the EU; is convinced that enhancing the EU’s status as a global security provider needs adequate, sufficient capabilities and a competitive defence industry ensuring a sustainable supply chain; notes that the European defence sector is characterised by fragmentation and duplication, which need gradual elimination through a process providing incentives and rewards to all national components;
Amendment 290 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Welcomes the European Defence Agency’s (EDA) increasing roleIs convinced that enhancing the role of the EDA in coordinating capability- driven programmes, projects and activities, indispensablewould benefit to an efficient CSDP; welcomstresses the EDA’s Capability Development Plan and stresses the need for further commitments to ensure its full implementationneed to give guidelines to EDA for coordinating a review of the CSDP, in line with the EUGS and the sectorial strategy; considers that EDA should be directed concerning its upcoming priorities and role in particular in the perspective of EDAP and ERDP;