October 22, 2003	Wednesday	Sha’aban 25, 1424

BRUSSELS: Almost two years after they launched a single currency to rival the US dollar, European Union governments look set to challenge America’s dominance in another vital area: defence. EU plans for forging its own military structures, independent of the US-led Nato alliance, have sparked another transatlantic battle reminiscent of the two sides’ recent bitter quarrels over the Iraq war. And like the disagreements over Iraq, American suspicions over Europe’s defence ambitions are likely to fester for months, if not years.

US fury at Europe’s military aspirations hit the headlines last week as EU leaders met in Brussels to negotiate a new constitution for an expanded post-2004 Union of 25 states. The treaty will for the first time include not just a catalogue of EU security aims but also a detailed chapter on how to achieve stronger defence ties. Countries may agree to a mutual defence clause. France and Germany want clear constitutional provisions for “structured cooperation” allowing small groups of nations to forge ahead with defence integration without waiting for others to catch up.

Most significantly, French President Jacques Chirac, Germany’s Gerhard Schroeder as well as the leaders of Belgium and Luxembourg want the EU to set up its own defence planning and military command structures, separate from Nato.

Washington is not pleased. America’s envoy to Nato Nicholas Burns has warned in no uncertain terms that Washington views the EU defence moves with deep suspicion — and that the Pentagon is especially unhappy at signs that British Prime Minister Tony Blair — once opposed to any non-Nato based European defence cooperation — is starting to sympathize with his French, German and Belgian colleagues on EU defence plans.

Independent EU defence represented “one of the greatest dangers to the transatlantic relationship,” Burns fumed at a meeting of Nato envoys last week. As his European counterparts seethed in anger, the US ambassador insisted that Nato should be kept abreast of all EU defence moves. He also took the unusual step of convening an emergency meeting of the alliance to discuss European defence plans.

European representatives at the hastily-called special Nato meeting, held in Brussels on Oct 20, certainly made the right conciliatory noises. Nato would be kept well-briefed on EU military developments, said ambassadors, vowing also that future European defence structures would never compete with or upstage the alliance.

Despite the reassuring words, however, European diplomats make clear that like the introduction of the euro, moves towards creating an autonomous EU defence cannot be stopped. Also, whether the US likes it or not, Britain, with its huge army and post-Iraq war hopes of joining the EU mainstream, will be pressed by its partners to become part of the European plans. As French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin put it, “there will be no Europe without European defence — and no European defence without Britain.”

American anger is especially embarrassing for Tony Blair. The British leader, who fell out with both Chirac and Schroeder because of his pro-war stance on Iraq and remains at odds with is EU allies over reconstruction aid for the country, is clearly eager to mend fences with his EU counterparts ahead of next year’s enlargement. Britain is also keen on European defence because it is one area where it can really be in the EU’s vanguard.

But Blair now finds himself in the unfortunate position of being publicly reprimanded by US officials for trying to draw closer to France and Germany. Seeking to calm tempers in Washington, Blair has vowed that he will never put Nato at risk. “Nato is the basis and the cornerstone of our defence,” the British premier insisted at last week’s EU summit.

Making no secret of the fact that he is torn between Washington and Europe, Blair forcefully underlined he was “a staunch ally and friend of the US” but also wanted to be “strong in Europe.” There was nothing wrong with the EU developing its own military planning capacity for operations that Washington did not wish to undertake, Blair argued. But the EU must not set up separate military command structures.

France and Germany, however, are unlikely to take ‘no’ for an answer from London. And they — along with Belgium and Luxembourg — also have no intention of giving up on their own defence ambitions. Diplomats in Brussels argue that an EU anxious to play a global role must have a defence arm if it is to be taken seriously. And while that does not mean competing with Nato, it does mean acting independently of the alliance — both in Europe and abroad.