Activities of Witold Jan WASZCZYKOWSKI related to 2020/2080(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on a European Parliament recommendation to the Council and the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy concerning the implementation and governance of Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO)
Amendments (20)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)
Citation 11 a (new)
- having regard to the NATO Treaty, and the Defence Investment Pledge made by the Heads of State at the NATO Summit in Wales 2014,
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 b (new)
Citation 11 b (new)
- having regard to the existing commitments of 21 Member States to spend 2% of their GDP on defence and 20% of their defence budget on procurement of new technologies in order to maintain a qualitative edge in Allied military hardware,
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 c (new)
Citation 11 c (new)
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas PESCO’s long-term vision is to achieve a coherent full-spectrum force package available to the Member States; whereas PESCO should enhance the EU’s capacity to act as an international security provider by enhancing interoperability in order to protect EU citizens and maximise the effectiveness of defence spending; whereas the cost of non-Europe in security and defence is estimated to be more than EUR 100 billion per year;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the COVID-19 pandemic has shown the consequences of the EU not having enough competence when it comes to health care; whereas, by the same analogy, it would make sense to establish an EU common defence strategy in order to be able to respond to an attack on the EU’s borders and territories; whereas PESCO constitutes an important step towards achieving the objective of a common much needed investment in offsetting the capability shortfalls that are essential to credible deterrence and defence;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas according to Council decision 2017/2315, establishing PESCO enhanced defence capabilities of the Member States will also benefit NATO provided that duplication is avoided and interoperability is prioritized, while strengthening the European pillar within the alliance and responding to repeated calls for stronger transatlantic burden- sharing;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas PESCO creates a binding framework between the pMS, which committed themselves to jointly investing, planning, developing and operating defence capabilities within Union framework in a permanent and structured manner by subscribing to 20 binding commitments in five areas set by the TEU; whereas these commitments should constitute a move from mere defence cooperation towards thefull integrationroperability of Member States’ defence forces; whereas despite these binding commitments, no effective compliance mechanism for PESCO is in place; and PESCO projects have not been implemented in a manner reflective of industrial capacity, duplication concerns or budgetary constraints of pMS;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas the pMS do not pay enough attention to the 20 binding commitments to which they have subscribed, and not enough progress has been achieved with regard to significantly embedding PESCO into national defence planning processes casting serious doubt over the capacity of pMS to finalize PESCO projects;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas PESCO was originally conceived as an avant-garde, comprising the Member States willing and able to upgrade their cooperation in defence to a new level of ambition; whereas the fact that there are 25 pMS means that PESCO is at risk of being constrained by the ‘lowest common denominator’ approach amplifying the widespread free rider problem in European defence spending;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas work on the first three waves of PESCO projects has led to the pMS proposing 47 projects; whereas the current list of projects lacks coherence, strategic ambition and does not adequately address priority shortfalls as identified by the pMS; whereas one of these projects has been stopped in order to avoid unnecessary duplication; whereas other projects did not make sufficient progress or are at risk of being stopped, and around 30 projects are still in the ideation and preparatory phase casting serious doubt on the efficacy of this initiative;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital W
Recital W
W. whereas the participation of third countries in individual PESCO projects might be in the strategic interest of the European Union, particularly in the cases of the United Kingdom, United States and Canada;
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Y
Recital Y
Y. whereas the governance of PESCO is led by pMS, and therefore eventually leads to the insufficient coordination and overall consistency of the projects; whereas this should constitute grounds for the extension of the mandate of the PESCO secretariatmaking further access to financial support conditional upon the level of progress achieved;
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b
Paragraph 1 – point b
(b) define the Union’s strategic vision, by, inter alia, implementing the level of ambition defined by the 2016 EU Global Strategy in the ongoing work of the Strategic Compass and, strengthen PESCO’s operational dimension to ensure that its outputs are functional and add value to ongoing or future operational readiness;
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point f
Paragraph 1 – point f
(f) ensure that PESCO is effectively used as an instrument to reach EU defence integration as a common goal, in line with the ambition for greater EU Strategic Autonomy-NATO cooperation;
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point h
Paragraph 1 – point h
Amendment 253 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point i
Paragraph 1 – point i
(i) incorporate directly into the PESCO project cycle the link between PESCO and EDIDP/EDF; imposea commitment to dedicate ample resources during the research and development phase that ensures that duplication concerns and operational shortfalls are offset and that the link between PESCO and EDIDP/EDF reflects the emphasis on the research and development stage by imposing the documentation of each project, before selection on the budgetary side;
Amendment 265 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point k
Paragraph 1 – point k
(k) ensure that future key land, sea, air and other platforms for the armed forces of the Member States are brought under PESCO or are at least closely connected to itutilized to ensure PESCO efforts are complementary to existing capabilities and used in a manner that resolves existing shortfalls and offsets overhead expenses;
Amendment 277 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point l
Paragraph 1 – point l
Amendment 300 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point p
Paragraph 1 – point p
Amendment 317 #