EU army vs. Russia???

[Mr Greene]

Germans want EU army to face Russia...

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has called for the creation of a European army to face up to Russia and other threats.

Mr Juncker said such an army would restore the European Union's foreign policy standing and show it is serious about defending its values.

It would not be in competition with Nato, he insisted.

A UK government spokesman said defence was a national responsibility and there was no prospect of a European army.

Mr Juncker has voiced support for a European army before but he suggested Russia's military action in Ukraine had made the case much more compelling.

"With its own army, Europe could react more credibly to the threat to peace in a member state or in a neighbouring state," he said in an interview with German newspaper Die Welt.

He added: "One wouldn't have a European army to deploy it immediately.

"But a common European army would convey a clear message to Russia that we are serious about defending our European values."

The EU has come in for criticism for its response to Russia's annexing of Crimea last year and support for separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine.

Mr Juncker argued that inter-governmental force Nato was not enough because not all members of the transatlantic defence alliance are in the EU.

He said a common EU army would send important signals to the world and the purchase of military equipment would "bring significant savings".

The 28-nation EU already has battle groups that are manned on a rotational basis and meant to be available as a rapid reaction force. But they have never been used in a crisis.

EU leaders have said they want to boost the common security policy by improving rapid response capabilities.

But Britain, along with France one of the two main military in the EU, has been wary of a bigger military role for the bloc, fearing it could undermine Nato.

A UK government spokesman said: "Our position is crystal clear that defence is a national, not an EU responsibility and that there is no prospect of that position changing and no prospect of a European army."

But German Defence Minster Ursula von der Leyen, welcomed the idea. "Our future as Europeans will at some point be with a European army," she told a German radio station.

Hang on the Germans want what to face who? Again???hock:

[Dystopia]

Juncker can shove his EU badge up the orifice it came from. A corrupt, sovereignty-stealing bastard from the Brussels fascists will never give me orders - I would like to know why there hasn't been a referendum on all EU countries to check if the people really want to be there.

Oh, and I'm not exactly sure if the treaty allows to create an European army - I'll have to check that out

[Lucanus]

I think the idea is more to have a deterrent against "bullies" like Russia, like saying "Yo bud... We've got pretty much some of the biggest armies in the world bunched up in a single force, and ready to tear your ass apart in a rapid and organized way, and without even bringing America into the equation".

I personally don't dislike the idea of a European Army and I think that eventually the unification of Europe will happen. Of course, it can't just be like Juncker wakes up in the morning, scratches his butt and POOF the European Army appears. It needs to be a gradual process of optimization and "homogeneization" of the existent national armies.

[Dystopia]

Your first claim is a little silly - If there's something we should all understand is that Russia (1) Doesn't back down often (2) They are unafraid and fearless.

If the USA doesn't intimidate Russia I don't know why the EU will be capable of doing so - Our armies are not that strong excluding Germany, the UK and France. Even if we wanted to invest in an European army we have higher priorities such as the situation in Greece

[Marsellus Wallace]

don't count the french though

[Lucanus]

Sure, but it would help to see Europe able to react quickly and efficiently. Right now what you have is a bunch of bickering states that can't organize a decent military response in a reasonable time.

I dunno, I get unreasonably romantic when I read about European Unification - I just really like the idea that we might overcome our national egoisms and get along as one people.

I'd elaborate more but I just don't have the time right now lol

[Norman Humann]

Sure, but it would help to see Europe able to react quickly and efficiently. Right now what you have is a bunch of bickering states that can't organize a decent military response in a reasonable time.

Yeah, especially since over here we're a bit too close to Mother Russia and are getting a bit too nervous. Some nutjobs are already speculating and I don't like the prospect, even if they're dramatising.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I think it's probably a good idea, from a military standpoint. As matters stand, fielding joint NATO forces looks to the uninformed like a suitable answer to any Russian aggression, but there are definitely problems with such an approach:

1) Linguistic barriers will impose friction upon military operations.

2) Doctrinal assumptions vary amongst not just the various national forces, but indeed within them at times.

3) IFF issues are more complicated when fighting as part of a coalition.

Fielding a homogeneous European force would address these issues: a common language requirement would not only have personnel speaking the same language, but words would carry the same connotations -- such is very important in battlefield communications. There would be a unified doctrine, given that leadership is unified. Equipment-issue would be standardized.

I think it would be a better military solution to the potential threat. Whether it could hold politically, with nations jostling for position inside such a unified force structure, well, that's another question. Coalition fighting is the most difficult form of warfare, because the members have varying aims, backgrounds, and risk assessments. This suggestion would seem to address those problems.

Your first claim is a little silly - If there's something we should all understand is that Russia (1) Doesn't back down often (2) They are unafraid and fearless.

If the USA doesn't intimidate Russia I don't know why the EU will be capable of doing so - Our armies are not that strong excluding Germany, the UK and France. Even if we wanted to invest in an European army we have higher priorities such as the situation in Greece

The reason the US doesn't intimidate Russia is because the projection of force is an expensive proposition requiring an immense logistical base. We don't have as many US troops in Europe any more, and that means that any conventional war will require a massive transport of troops across the Atlantic, if not from further afield. Such a logistical problem is not easily solved; it took five months to put 540,000 American troops into Saudi Arabia in anticipation of the 1991 Iraqi invasion.

If the Russians decided to invade Central and Western Europe, five months is a very tardy response.

Russia is not invincible, but it will take European blood to defeat any Russian aggression. The question at that point becomes, how can you most efficiently accomplish the mission, given other demands on the European economy?

[Lucanus]

I agree with you completely, Parkers.

Also on an interesting side note... What unified Italy and made Italians speak a (more or less) standard language was the army. Then TV came along and finished the job.

[Anomalocaris]

This russian threat hysteria is rediculous. It is as if Brazil claims it needed an army to faces imminent threat of invasion from US Because the US refuse to allow anti-US Government in Mexico without a fight. Add to that the condition that it does not take a great deal of penetration by a neutral third party to see the reason why china wants to install an anti-US government in the mexico is so it can eventually rope Mexico into a military alliance that would enable it to put ballistic missile defence in Mexico that would severely discount the credibility of American nuclear deterrence, at a time when America has no credible means of counter chinese nuclear arsenal except with nuclear deterrence.

I don't see how any russian government not willing to accept an severe and permanent degradation in its long term position could possibly have done anything other than keep ukraine out of western orbit at any cost by any means.