17 Amendments of Michael GAHLER related to 2016/2067(INI)
Amendment 17 #
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 and that they react to these threats and risks in an uncoordinated and fragmented way, thus preventing a more common approach;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes with concern that terrorism has brought guerrilla warfare to European streetsthe European way of life under pressure; underlines that, consequently, security of the individual has become paramount, eroding the traditional distinction between its external and internal dimensions;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines that, as Europe is no longer in control of its security environmentconfronted with various risks and threats and has lost the luxury of choosing the time and place of action, the CSDP, which has, until now, focused mainly on 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; encourages the European Council to start developing the common security and defence policy into a common defence as foreseen in article 42.2 TEU;
Amendment 106 #
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 in full coordinationmplementarity with NATO;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the presentation by the VP/HR of the Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy (EUGS) as a necessary and positive development for the institutional framework in which the CFSP and the CSDP will operate and develop; regrets the low involvement of member states in preparing the EUGS giving them the chance for not implementing it properly; stresses that further work is needed to ensure the implementation of the EUGS’s political level of ambition, priorities and comprehensive approach; in the form of an EU White Book on Security and Defence with broad participation of member states and parliaments;
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Supports the development of a sectoral strategy as a follow-up to the EUGS, to be agreed by the Council, that should further specify the civil-military level of ambition, tasks, requirements and capability priorities; reiterates its previous calls for the development of a European Defence White Book and expresses hope that the Council will assign the task of drafting this document without delayits concern that the suggested implementation plan on security and defence remains far behind parliamentary and public expectations;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. SalutesTakes note of the European Security Compact proposed by the Germany and Fraenceh Ministers of Foreign Affairs 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; regrets the lack of self- assessment of Member States’ inactivity in implementing previous European commitments in the defence area;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Highlights the significant contribution of CSDP missions and operations to international peace and stability; notes 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 disengagementuse the adequate military or civilian means, like cooperation in development, according to the stage of the conflict cycle;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Underlines that all Council decisions on future missions and operations should prioritise engagements in conflicts directly affecting EU security or the security of partners and regions where the EU has the role of a security provider; 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 205 #
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; calls for the revision of the Athena mechanism leading to the extension and use of more common funding;
Amendment 219 #
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 only; notes the EUSG’s objective of an appropriate level of EU strategic autonomy and underlines that the two organisations cannot afford to duplicateneed to have complementarity of 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 240 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Underlines that NATO is best equipped for deterrence and defence, and is ready to implement collective defence (Article V of the Washington Treaty) in the case of aggression against one of its members, while the EU is best equippedCSDP has its current complementary focus on peace-keeping, conflict prevention and strengthening international security (article 42 TEU) and the EU has additional means to deal with challenges to the internal security of the Member States as well, including subversion, which are not covered by Article V;
Amendment 249 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Welcomes the recent Joint Declaration signed by the EU with NATO in Warsaw and fully supports the fields of collaboration mentioned therein; regrets that the declaration describes well established informal practices rather than bringing EU-NATO cooperation to a new level;
Amendment 260 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Is convinced that enhancing the EU’s status as a global security provider in Europe's neighbourhood 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; regrets that the Policy Framework for Systematic and Long-Term Defence Cooperation has not yet been implemented by Member States with adequate commitment and that the pooling and sharing initiative has not led to tangible results;
Amendment 278 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Recalls that a robust European Defence Technological and Industrial Base, which includes facilities for SMEs, is a fundamental underpinning of the CSDP and a prerequisite for a common market, which should supply all buyers with adequate and affordable means, responding to their individual needs; regrets that Member States apply Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and security procurement and Directive 2009/43/EC on intra-European Union transfers of defence related products to totally different extent; calls on the European Commission to consequently apply the guidance note on Article 346 and to assume her role as guardian of the Treaties and start implementing infringement proceedings in the case of violations of the directives; calls on the Member States to improve multinational efforts on the demand side of military procurement and calls on European industries on the supplier side to strengthen their global market positions through better coordination and industrial consolidation;
Amendment 287 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Welcomes the European Defence Agency’s (EDA) increasing roleIs convinced that enhancing the role of EDA in coordinating capability- driven programmes, projects and activities, indispensablewould benefit to an efficient CSDP; welcomeconsiders the EDA’s Capability Development Plan and stresses the need for further commitments to ensure its full implementation should be reformed concerning its upcoming priorities and roles in particular in the perspective of EDAP and EDRP; therefore calls on the Member States to review the organisation, procedures and activities of the Agency in the light of Brexit opening more options for further cooperation and integration; calls on the Member States to give guidelines to EDA for coordinating a review of the CDP, in line with the EUGS and the sectorial strategy;
Amendment 307 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Supports the Commission’s defence-related initiatives such as the Defence Action Plan and the Defence Industrial Policy which need to start after the presentation of an EU White Book on Security and Defence; supports further involvement of the Commission in defence, through extensive and well- focused research, planning and implementation; welcomes the Preparatory Action for CSDP-related research and asks for adequate funding for the remainder of the current multiannual financial framework (MFF); supports the development of an EU Defence Research Programme under the next MFF (2021- 2027);