BETA

19 Amendments of Geoffrey VAN ORDEN related to 2016/2067(INI)

Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the EU’suropean 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, thus preventing a more common approach;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that Europe is now compelled to react toaffected by an arch of increasingly complex crises: from West Africa, through the Sahel, the Horn of Africa and the Middle East, to the Caucasus;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 41 #
3. Notes with concern that terrorism has brought guerrilla warfare to European streets; underlines that, consequently, security of the individual has become paramount, eroding the traditionalhe terrorist threat erodes many distinctions between its external and internal dimensionsaspects of policy;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines that, as Europe idoes no longer int control of its security environment and has lostdoes not have 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 commonre needs to be a fundamental review of security and defence of the entire area of freedom, security and justicecapabilities in many EU Member States;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines, equally, that the CSDP should be based on a strong collective defence principle, efficient financing and full coordination with NATO that NATO is the cornerstone of European defence, and therefore encourages all Member States to join the Alliance, thereby removing any vestigial justification for separate EU military structures;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. WelcomNotes 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; stresses that further work is needed to ensure the implementation of the EUGS’s political level of ambition, priorities and comprehensive approach;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 126 #
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 delay, taking account of the role of other organisations and the contributions of allies;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. SaluNotes the European Security Compact proposed by Germany and France 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, two leading NATO allies;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Observes that, to this effect, cooperation with similaravoidance of duplication of NATO activities and an increased exchange of intelligence and information between the Member States are indispensable;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that, as internal and external security are becoming more and more integrated, the integration of their respective inventories is also becoming necessary, empowering the EU to act along the entirein terms of dealing with terrorism and subversion, the boundary between internal and external spectrum of instruments, up to the level of Article 42(7) of the Treaty on European Unionurity has become increasingly fluid;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Highlights the significantNotes the moderate 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 disengbelieves that the EU can add most value in civil and development aspects of crisis management;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Underlines that allny Council decisions on future missions and operations should prioritise engagements in conflicts directly affecting EU securitywhere the EU as such may be able to add value - this will be primarily in the civil sphere; 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, and with consideration to the actions of other allies and organisations such as the UN or NATO;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution
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 financingthe 'Battlegroup' concept is merely part of a longstanding military inventory and any contribution by European allies should be regarded as potential NATO assets;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution
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 duplicate 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 relationsat Article 42(7) is no substitute for NATO's Article 5, and disagrees with the EUSG objective of EU 'strategic autonomy';
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 241 #
Motion for a resolution
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 equipped to deal with challenges to the internal security of the Member States, including subversion, which are not covered by Article Vshould focus on civil aspects of crisis management;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 251 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Welcomes the recentNotes the Joint Declaration signed by the EU with NATO in Warsaw and fully supports the fields of collaboration mentioned therein;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Is convinced that enhancing the EU’s status as a global security provider needs adequate, sufficient capabilities and a competitive defence industryies 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;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 293 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. WelcomNotes the European Defence Agency’s (EDA) increasing role inrole in trying to coordinatinge capability-driven programmes, projects and activities, indispensable to an efficient CSDP; welcomes the EDA’s Capability Development Plan and stresses the need for further commitments to ensure its full implementationwhich ideally should be folded into the relevant NATO areas of activity;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 303 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Supports the Commission’s defence-related initiatives such as the Defence Action Plan and the Defence Industrial Policy; 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)Notes with concern the increasing intrusion of the European Commission into defence-related initiatives;
2016/09/15
Committee: AFET