BETA

Activities of Jérôme RIVIÈRE related to 2019/2135(INI)

Plenary speeches (1)

Annual report on the implementation of the common foreign and security policy - Annual report on the implementation of the common security and defence policy (debate)
2020/01/14
Dossiers: 2019/2135(INI)

Shadow reports (1)

REPORT on the implementation of the common security and defence policy – annual report
2019/12/11
Committee: AFET
Dossiers: 2019/2135(INI)
Documents: PDF(257 KB) DOC(95 KB)
Authors: [{'name': 'Arnaud DANJEAN', 'mepid': 96747}]

Amendments (33)

Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Notes the lasting deterioration in the Union’s strategic environment in the face of multiple challenges directly or indirectly affecting the security of its Member States and citizens: armed conflicts immediately to the east and south of the European continent, jihadist terrorism, cyber attacks, uncontrolled migration, increasing threats to natural resources, climate change, presence of foreign influence networks defending interests contrary to those of the Member States, etc.;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Considersriticises the fact that instability and unpredictability on the Union’s borders and in its immediate neighbourhood (north Africa, the Middle East, Ukraine, the Caucasus, the Balkans, etc.) pose a direct threat to the security of the continent; stresses the inextricable link between internal and external security; is concerned about some Member States' support for forces causing instability in the immediate neighbourhood (for example, the destruction of Libya, the destabilisation of Egypt and the severance of diplomatic relations with Syria);
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Deplores the fact that, in this context, some of these actors are deliberately circumventing or attempting to destroy the multilateral mechanisms essential to maintaining peace; criticises the fact that the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) on nuclear capacity in Iran has been abandoned, affecting the international credibility of multinational solutions to conflicts;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes, in this adverse and volatile context, the belated but real recognition of shared security interests and the growing political will on the part of European countries and the European institutions to act collectively for their security by endowing themselves with greater means to act autonomously;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Is convinced that the response to the Union’sMember States' security challenges lies primarily in strengthening its strategic autonomyepping up their cooperation; highlights the strategic instability caused by Turkish diplomacy; is concerned about the return of a number of jihadis to Member States and the Western Balkans;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that the ambition of achieving European strategic autonomy was recognised for the first time in June 2016 by the 28 Heads of State and Government in the ‘Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy’, presented by the Vice- President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR) on 28 June 2016;deleted
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that the principle of European strategic autonomy is based on the ability of the UnionMember States to strengthen itstheir freedom to assess, take decisions and take action where circumstances so require in order to defend itstheir interests and values, which sometimes coincide;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Considers, therefore, that European strategic autonomy is based, above all, on the ability of the Union to assess a crisis situation and take a decision autonomously, which necessarily entails an independent decision-making process, the availability of means of assessment and a freedom to analyse and take action; considers, also, that European strategic autonomy is based on the ability of the Union to act alone when its interests are at stake (theatres of operations not considered as priorities by its European partners) or within the framework of existing cooperation arrangements; considers, lastly, that European strategic autonomy is part of a multilateral framework which respects commitments within the UN and complements the (NATO) alliances and partnerships to which most Member States are signed up; stresses that strategic autonomy does not mean that the Union will systematically act alone, everywhere and always;deleted
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that the affirmation of European strategic autonomy depends on the establishment of European defence cooperation in the technological, capability, industrial and operational fields; considers that only practical and flexible cooperation based on pragmatic initiatives will make it possible to gradually overcome the difficulties, forge a genuine common strategic culture and shape common responses tailored to the continent’s main security and defence issues; states that these collaborations must, above all, be part of an inter-state cooperation policy;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses that European strategic autonomy can only be genuinely achieved if Member States demonstrate solidaritycooperation, which is reflected in particular in the needcapacity to prioritise the procurement of European capabilities where equipment is available and competitive; points out that the CJEU explicitly stated in its judgment of 10 March 2005 (Kingdom of Spain v Council of the European Union) that the concept of Community preference is a political principle rather than a legal principle and cannot therefore be used as a counter-argument against the free-trade dogma that the EU continues to impose; recognises the sovereignty of the Member States in their strategic and military choices, particularly with regard to supplying their armed forces with the requisite equipment;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that Europe’s defence is based largely on the Union’s capacity to intervene militarily, in a credible manner, in external theatres of operations;deleted
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that the Union currently has a presence on three continents through the deployment of 16 civilian or military missions (10 civilian and six military, of which three are executive and three are non-executive missions); recognises the contribution made by these missions to peace and international security and stability; stresses that their implementation must be accompanied by an overhaul of the instruments laid down in the Lisbon Treaty and introduced in recent years, in order to make them more effective;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Notes, however, that the effectiveness of CSDP missions and operations in general is being hampered by an increasing reluctance on the part of Member States and the European institutions to make such missions and operations more robust, both in terms of human resources and their mandates; noteswelcomes the fact that CSDP military operations increasingly tend to be based on armed forces training (EUTM), with no executive dimension;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Notes with concern that the effectiveness of the most recent CSDP civilian and military operations has been hampered by persistent structural weaknesses;deleted
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 224 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Deplores the lengthy decision- making and implementation processes; points out that very few recent military operations have been given an executive mandate because of the different speeds at which commitment decisions are made, and calls, in this connection, for changes to CSDP structures and procedures so that missions can be deployed in a more rapid, flexible and coherent manner; notes the use of a new crisis management tool – the launching of mini-missions under Article 28 TEU – with a view to responding to crises more quickly and flexibly;deleted
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 251 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
30. Notes the decision of 26 September 2019 to extend the EU maritime operation in the Mediterranean (EUNAVFORMED Sophia) by six months to 31 March 2020; deeply deplores the decision temporarily to suspend the navalstresses the urgent need to reach agreement among the Member States; calls for the operation to include the objective of presvence; stresses the urgent need to reach agreement among the Member States and calls for the redeployment of naval assets andting departures and, where necessary, repatriating migrants in their country of departure when it is not possible to repatriate them in their country of origin, as this is the only strategy that will dissuade people from leaving, tackle people-smuggling mafias and save lives; calls for a European 'No Way' policy to be introduced, fuoll implementation of the mandateowing the Australian model, which has proved its worth;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
32. Supports the creation of the Military Planning and Conduct Capability (MPCC) for executive missions to enable all CSDP military operations to be carried out; calls for enhanced cooperation between the MPCC and the Civilian Planning and Conduct Capability; draws attention to the problems of recruitment and resource provision, which need to be overcome in order for the MPCC to be fully effective; calls on the EEAS to transform the MPCC from a virtual entity, with multiple-assignment posts, into a robust civilian-military entity which can plan and conduct operations;deleted
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 272 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. Notes the failure of the Union’s battlegroup project; the battlegroups have never been deployed since their creation in 2007, owing in particular to opposition on the part of all the Member States and the complexity of their implementation and funding, which is at odds with the original objective of speed and efficiency;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 287 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
36. Expects the Union to make effective use of all existing CSDP policy instruments in the areas of diplomacy, cooperation, development, conflict management and peacekeeping; stresses that CSDP military and civilian instruments cannot, under any circumstances, be the only solution to security issues and that a ‘comprehensive approach’ should always be adopted; considers that only the use of all these instruments on the basis of a ‘comprehensive approach’ will provide the flexibility needed to effectively achieve the most ambitious security objectivesCalls for a common European security and defence policy to be based on cooperation among states, with decisions being taken solely on the basis of unanimity;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 315 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
39. Welcomes the recent efforts by the European institutions and the Member States, following on from the publication of the ‘EU Global Strategy’, to breathe new life into the hitherto virtual instruments of the CSDP and to fully implement the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty; stresses that these promising ambitions must now be consolidated and followed up with practical action so that they make an effective contribution to security on the European continent;deleted
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 321 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
40. Notes with satisfaction the Commission’s proposal of 2 May 2018 to establish a EUR 13 billion budget line for defence in the next multiannual financial framework (MFF) under the heading of industrial policy; notes that this proposal, which reflects an unprecedented commitment by the Commission, remains subject to the unanimous agreement of the Member States in the next MFF; calls for the funds to be allocated to suitable but not necessarily military cooperation programmes (for example, programmes involving satellites or intelligence cooperation, or tackling cybercrime or terrorism);
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 327 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
41. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal of June 2017 to create a European Defence Fund (EDF), which would foster cooperation between Member States and support the European defence industry; notes that this proposal is the first initiative for which Community funds are to be used in direct support of defence projects; recognises that this is a major step forward for European defence, from both a political and an industrial perspective; notes that the EDF could finance structural projects such as the future European aircraft or tank or a European anti-missile defence capability; notes that the 2019 work programme for the preparatory action will focus on electromagnetic spectrum dominance and future disruptive defence technologies, two key areas for maintaining Europe’s technological independence in the long term; welcomes, also, the adoption by the Commission in March 2019 of the first European Defence Industrial Development Programme (EDIDP) and the publication of nine calls for proposals for 2019, including for the Eurodrone, which is a key capability for Europe’s strategic autonomy; points out that 12 further calls for proposals will follow in 2020, covering priority areas in all domains (air, land, sea, cyber and space); notes the link between the procurement decisions taken today by the Member States and the prospects for industrial and technological cooperation under the EDF;deleted
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 341 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
42. Welcomes the effective implementation of Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) as an important step towards closer cooperation in security and defence among Member States; stresses that this provision, introduced in the 2009 Lisbon Treaty (Article 46 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union), is legally binding and includes a set of ambitious commitments to enable European countries wishing to do so to move ahead faster on common defence projects; recognises the role that PESCO can play in structuring European demand; notes that a significant number of EDIDP-eligible projects are being developed within the PESCO framework and may also benefit from higher rates of subsidy; supports full consistency between PESCO projects and the EDF;deleted
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 347 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
43. Highlights the close link between PESCO, with the Coordinated Annual Review on Defence (CARD) launched in 2017, and the EDF for enhancing the Member States’ defence capabilities; stresses that new projects should be covered by the Capability Development Plan (CDP), which will serve to foster cooperation between Member States with a view to closing the capability gap through the work of the European Defence Agency; considers that the CARD should make an effective contribution to harmonising the investments and capabilities of national armed forces in an effective manner, guaranteeing the Union’s strategic and operational autonomy and allowing Member States to invest more efficiently in defence;deleted
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 358 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
45. Questions the slow start-up of the 34 projects and the delays to the launch of a third wave of 13 projects, given that none are as yet up and running; notes that only four projects will reach their initial operational capacity in 2019; highlights the lack of ambition and scale of some projects, which do not address the most obvious capability gaps, particularly those in the first wave, which are primarily capability projects involving as many Member States as possible; notes that the desired inclusion of participation in PESCO projects should not jeopardise a high level of ambition on the part of the participating Member States; considers that third countries’ involvement should be subject to stringent conditions and based on established and effective reciprocity; calls on the Member States to submit projects with a strategic European dimension, thereby strengthening the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB), which is an essential part of the strategic autonomisation process and relates more to the operational side in order to respond directly to the operational needs of European armed forces;deleted
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 367 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
46. Stresses the still virtual nature of the European Defence Fund; points out that that this instrument has not yet been finally approved, with only partial and political agreement having been given in April 2019; stresses the importance of maintaining Parliament’s position concerning the amount of the EDF, the involvement of third countries and the establishment of an appropriate intellectual property policy in relation to security and defence in order to protect research results; draws attention, in that connection, to the highly sensitive and strategic nature of defence research, both for industrial competitiveness and for the strategic autonomy of the Union; calls for the initial lessons learned from the implementation of the EDIDP (in particular concerning the application of derogations for eligible entities), the pilot project and the preparatory action on defence research to be properly taken into account; calls on the Member States to be fully involved in the decision-making process in order to avoid bureaucratic excesses and to ensure that the programmes included address the strategic needs of the CSDP and the Member States; considers that the success of the EDF will depend on its ability to cater for the specific defence needs of the participating states and to guarantee the availability of sufficient budgetary resources, whilst ensuring that industrial know-how is not duplicated, national defence investment is not crowded out and cooperation does not become over- complicated; considers that developing the European defence industry by regulating access for entities controlled by non-EU third parties to projects financed by the Fund is fully consistent with the European ambition of strategic autonomyCalls for the European Defence Fund, in its current configuration (i.e. under the exclusive control of the Commission), to be abolished and calls for it to be managed on a permanent basis by the Council, under the unanimity rule;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 392 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
49. Is convinced that the Union has a vital interest in creating a safe and open maritime environment which makes for the free passage ofit possible to monitor the transit of both goods and people more closely; notes that most of the strategic assets, critical infrastructure and capabilities are under the control of Member States and that their willingness to enhance cooperation is paramount for European security; reaffirms the Union’s role as a global maritime security provider, and stresses the importance of developing relevant military and civilian capabilities; welcomes in that connection the adoption of the revised EU Maritime Security Strategy Action Plan in June 2018;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 409 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
51. Welcomes efforts to strengthen the Union’sMember States’ capacity to address ‘hybrid’ threats, which are combinations of ambiguous posturing, direct and indirect pressure and the involvement of military and non-military capabilities, and are just some of the range of internal and external security challenges facing the Union; notes the reflections on the triggering of the mutual assistance clause with regard to hybrid threats in order to provide the Union with an effective common response;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 416 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
52. Recognises the increasingly prominent role of artificial intelligence (AI) in European defence; notes, in particular, the many military applications stemming from AI for managing and simulating operational environments, assisting the decision-making process, detecting threats and processing intelligence; stresses that the development of reliable AI in the field of defence is essential for ensuring European strategic autonomy in capability and operational areas; calls on the Member States to cooperate to that end and calls on the Union to keep up its investment in this area and in particular in disruptive technologies through existing instruments (European Defence Fund, European Innovation Council, future Horizon Europe, Digital Europe programme);
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 432 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
54. Stresses that the ambition of European strategic autonomy is based on the ability of Europeans to take action to defend their interests, either independently or within an institutionalter-country cooperation framework (NATO, UN);
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 450 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57
57. Draws attention to NATO’s fundamental role in collective defence, as explicitly recognised in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; believes that the EU-NATO partnership is essential for addressing the security challenges facing Europe and its neighbourhood; believes that EU-NATO cooperation should be complementary and takes full account of each of the two institution’s specific features and roleTakes the view that a genuine policy of independence for Europe would imply states that are signatories to the Washington Treaty leaving NATO; is keen for an alliance of European nations to be established to guarantee Europe’s security and the diplomatic and strategic independence of its members; calls for a strategic partnership to be established with Russia and the United States, based on the defence of the common interests of the European nations;
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 459 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60
60. Supports, in parallel with institutional cooperation and partnerships, the combining of different forms of flexible, multifaceted, open and, at the same time, operational, ambitious and demanding cooperation, both within and outside EU, NATO and UN structures, which could facilitate joint commitments in operations, thereby strengthening the Union’s operational strategic autonomy; stresses, in this connection, that examples of cooperation such as the European Intervention Initiative, the Nordic Defence Cooperation (NORDEFCO) and the increasing integration of the German and Dutch armed forces refelct this drive for closer military cooperation between Member States;deleted
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 476 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
61. Considers that progress in 61. European defence will pave the way for major structural changes; notes the announcement ofOpposes the creation of a Directorate-General for Defence and Space at the Commission under the responsibility of the Commissioner-designate for the Internal Market; notes that this new DG should be responsible for supporting, coordinating or complementing the Member States’ actions in the area of European defence and would thus contribute to strengthening European strategic autonomy; notes the definition of its five main tasks (implementation and oversight of the EDF, creation of an open and competitive European defence equipment market, implementation of the action plan on military mobility, enhancement of a strong and innovative space industry, implementation of the future space programme), but calls on the Commission to provide further details on the role and responsibilities of the new DG; Wonders how it will coordinate its work with that of other defence policy structures which have other responsibilities (EDA, EEAS, etc.);
2019/11/12
Committee: AFET