Activities of Ana GOMES related to 2014/2220(INI)
Plenary speeches (2)
Implementation of the Common Security and Defence Policy - Financing the Common Security and Defence Policy - Security and defence capabilities in Europe (debate) PT
Implementation of the Common Security and Defence Policy - Financing the Common Security and Defence Policy - Security and defence capabilities in Europe (debate)
Amendments (14)
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers the European Union and neighbourhood security environment to be increasingly unstable and volatile; regards the war in Ukraine, the conflicts in Syria and Iraq, with the rise of the terrorist organisation ISIS, the Libyan crisis and the terrorist threat in the Sahel as direct threats to the Union’'s security; highlights that the European Union will only respond effectively to the new security challenges if it structures and its Member States work together in a common and truly coordinated effort in the context of the CFSP/CSDP; considers, too, that the US ‘'pivot to Asia’' and the impact of the financial crisis on Member States’' budgets and capabilities only highlight how necessary it is for the Union to shoulder more responsibility for its own security and defence;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that the Union and its Member States must, as a matter of the utmost urgency, adapt to the new security challenges, in particular by making effective use of the existing CSDP tools, by coordinating national action and pool resources more closely and, where appropriate, by introducing in a pragmatic and flexible way new arrangements for the expression of European solidarity; is, therefore, of the view that progress must intensely be made in effective cooperation, articulation and intelligence sharing among Member States, under the leadership and coordination of the HR/VP;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers, however, that the injection of political stimulus in 2013 did not lead to the implementation of practical measures commensurate with the declared levels of ambition; considers that the Union today does not yet possess the requisite resources, operationally, industrially or in terms of capabilities, to contribute in a determining way to the prevention and management of international crises and to assert its own strategic autonomy and its strategic interests;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers the issue of the review of the financing for CSDP missions and operations to be crucial if the policy is to have a future; finds it regrettable that specific proposals have not yet emerged from the discussion initiated on this subject by the December 2013 Council; calls for the Athena mechanism to be used as a matter of course for the financing of expenditure on CSDP operational and mission deployment and for the same mechanism to manage financing received from Member States on a bilateral basis as well as from third countries and other international organisations, so that they can participate in the financing of a given operation; is of the view that both civilian and military CSDP missions should be eligible for community funding, so as to allow for a fairer burden-sharing between force-contributing Member States and those Member States wishing to stay out of a mission, and also between those wishing to contribute but have budgetary constraints in doing so;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that too many of the civilian missions launched by the EU since 2009 have been about raising the Union’s crisis response profile rather than taking strategic measures on the basis of in-depth analysis and planning; believes that these missions should be not merely for show, but rather should be genuine, effective and responsibly used policy tools forming part of an overall action strategy, especially in the neighbourhood;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Questions, for example, the relevance of deploying and maintaining a mission on the Libyan border (EUBAM Libya) in an institutional and security context where it has never been able to address the basic aims identified there; calls, therefore, on the HR/VP to re-design EUBAM´s mandate to respond to pressing security needs in the country and focus on SSR/DDR, once a political settlement allows it; also, warns that the EU mission should be ready contribute should the UNSC enact a peacekeeping mandate in Libya;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes that CSDP military operations increasingly tend to be armed forces training missions (e.g. EUTM Mali and EUTM Somalia); while hailing the success of such operations, finds it regrettable that missions with an executive remit are rarely envisaged nowadays; considers that, given the persistent threats in our neighbourhood, the EU cannot allow itself to focus exclusively on instruments for a post-crisis context or for supporting exit from crisis, but rather must be capable of intervention across the full spectrum of crisis management, in line with the Charter of the United Nations;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Is dismayed by the problems of force generation encountered when military missions are being launched; notes that, with the exception of EUTM Mali to which 23. Member States are making an effective contribution, current EU military operations involve, in each case, no more than half a dozen Member States; considers that while the contribution of third countries reflects the vitality of partnerships under the CSDP, what it demonstrates most clearly is a certain disaffection on the part of Member States, which is also the result of defence budget cuts;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Considers that national defence budgets have been reduced due to the effects of the 2008 economic and financial crisis and that the reductions have taken place without coordination among the Member States, thus jeopardising the Union’s strategic autonomy and the ability of its Member States to meet the capacity requirements of their armed forces and in detriment of the Union´s responsibilities and potential as a global security provider;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. deplores the fact that, the blind austerity measures imposed on bailed-out Member States with strong military and maritime traditions and naval capabilities, such as Portugal, Greece, Ireland and Spain, is having a negative impact on EU security and strategic interests and assets, forcing them to sell the control of ports and maritime routes, shipyards, naval technology industries and other critical maritime and naval infrastructure to competing powers, in blatant contradiction with the objectives of the European Maritime Security Strategy and the European Security Strategy;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 b (new)
Paragraph 25 b (new)
25b. Strongly believes that the EU has a vital interest in a secure, open and clean maritime environment that allows the free passage of commerce and people and the peaceful, legal, fair and sustainable use of the oceans' riches; believes that the EU institutional framework, both civilian and military, should, therefore, be further developed in order to implement the European Maritime Security Strategy; notes that most of the strategic assets, critical infrastructures and capabilities are under the control of Member States and that their willingness to enhance cooperation is paramount for European security;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 c (new)
Paragraph 25 c (new)
25c. Calls on the HR/VP to map EU Member States' facilities in strategic locations – such as the Lajes Air Base in the Azores, Portugal, from which the USA's disengagement opens the possibility for the Base to be leased to China –, which should be put at the service of European security, in the framework of the CSDP, to develop specific naval and air operations and enhance the capacity to counter proliferation, terrorism, piracy, cybercrime and all sorts of organised crime;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Notes that minimal progress has been made on projects for pooling and sharing; welcomes the advances that have been made on air-to-air refuelling with the acquisition of a fleet of multirole tanker transport aircraft; finds it regrettable that only a very few Member States have so far participated in the project, and calls on those Member States which lack this type of capability to become involved;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Welcomes the Council’'s intention to develop projects for pooling critical technologies, e.g. remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) and Governmental Satcom; notes that a regulatory framework is needed for the initial integration of RPAS into Europe’'s air traffic system by 2016, taking due account of civilian and military requirements, as well as the need to comply with International Law;