BETA


2015/2275(INI) Peace support operations - EU engagement with the UN and the African Union

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead AFET VAN ORDEN Geoffrey (icon: ECR ECR) ZDROJEWSKI Bogdan Andrzej (icon: PPE PPE), PARGNEAUX Gilles (icon: S&D S&D), NART Javier (icon: ALDE ALDE), VALERO Bodil (icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE)
Committee Opinion DEVE VÄYRYNEN Paavo (icon: ALDE ALDE) Nirj DEVA (icon: ECR ECR), Arne LIETZ (icon: S&D S&D), Sabine LÖSING (icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL), Joachim ZELLER (icon: PPE PPE)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54

Events

2016/06/07
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2016/06/07
   EP - Decision by Parliament
Details

The European Parliament adopted by 491 votes 110 with 73 abstentions, a resolution on Peace Support Operations – EU engagement with the UN and the African Union.

Parliament recalled that Peace Support Operations (PSOs) are a form of crisis response, normally in support of an internationally recognised organisation such as the UN or the African Union (AU), with a UN mandate, and designed to prevent armed conflict, restore, maintain or build peace, enforce peace agreements and tackle the complex emergencies and challenges posed by failing or weak states. The aim of PSOs is also to help create stable, secure and more prosperous environments for the longer term.

Parliament also stressed that the security landscape in Africa in particular has changed dramatically in the last decade, with the emergence of terrorist and insurgent groups in Somalia, Nigeria, and the Sahel-Sahara region, and with peace enforcement and counter-terrorism operations becoming the rule rather than the exception in many areas. In this context, it considered that coordinated external actions that make use of diplomatic, security and development tools are necessary to restore confidence and tackle the challenges of wars, internal conflicts, insecurity, fragility and transition.

The deployment of multiple UN-authorised missions in the same theatre of operations, with different actors and regional organisations, is increasingly the reality of modern peace operations. However, managing these complex partnerships, while not duplicating work or missions, is essential to successful operations. In this regard, Parliament called for the evaluation and rationalisation of the existing structures .

Better coordination : Parliament urged the EU, given the scale of the challenges and the complex involvement of other organisations and nations, to seek an appropriate division of labour and to focus on where it can best add value. It considered that UN and AU missions are in need of a comprehensive approach under which, in addition to deploying military, diplomatic and development instruments, other essential factors are a thorough knowledge of the security environment, exchanges of intelligence and information and modern technologies. It stressed the importance of the other instruments of the EU in the security field and, in particular, of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions and operations.

Provision of military forces: Parliament noted that the perceived legitimacy of a PSO is key to its success. It believed that the AU should therefore contribute with support and military forces wherever possible . It welcomed the UN-EU Strategic Partnership on Peacekeeping and Crisis Management and called on the EU to make further efforts to facilitate Member State contributions. It recalled that the EU has engaged in crisis-management activities in Africa. However, only 11 of the 28 EU Member States made pledges at the 28 September 2015 Leaders’ Summit on Peacekeeping, while China pledged a standby force of 8 000 and Colombia 5 000 troops. Accordingly, Parliament called on the EU Member States to significantly increase their military and police contributions to UN peacekeeping missions.

Prevention of conflicts : recalling the need for a rapid African response to crisis, the resolution emphasised the importance of investing more in conflict prevention. It recognised the critical contribution of the African Peace Facility in developing the triangular partnership between the UN, the EU and the AU, but considered it vital that the EU institutions and Member States remain closely engaged if the Facility is to be fully utilised. It took the view that the Facility should focus on structural support rather than just bankrolling African forces' pay.

Military assistance for African states : Members observed that stepping up European military cooperation would increase the efficiency and effectiveness of Europe's contribution to UN peace missions. They called on the EU and its Member States, as well as on other members of the international community, to assist with training , including discipline, equipment, logistical support, financial assistance and development of rules of engagement, to encourage and assist the African Standby Force .

European missions in Africa : Parliament noted the importance of Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for Africa’s security, in particular training and support missions for African forces, and especially EUTM Mali, EUCAP Sahel Mali and EUCAP Sahel Niger, EUTM Somalia, and EUCAP Nestor. It called on the EU to step up the capabilities of those training missions, in particular by allowing African soldiers who have been trained to be monitored on and after their return from theatres of operations.

Parliament also considered that the Official Development Assistance (ODA) needs to be redesigned under the OECD framework through peace building lenses. Similarly, the EDF regulation should be reviewed in order to allow programming design that includes peace, security and justice expenditures.

Parliament insisted that neither the EU nor the Member States, in supporting PSOs, should act in isolation but that they should, rather, take full account of the contributions of other international actors, improve coordination with them, improve rapidity of response , and focus their efforts on certain priority countries.

Member States’ contributions to the UN system : Parliament noted that the European countries and the EU itself are major contributors to the UN system, and that France, Germany and the UK are the largest European contributors to the budget for UN Peacekeeping Operations. It recalled that the EU Member States are collectively the largest contributor to the UN’s peacekeeping budget, with about 37 %, and are currently contributing troops to nine peacekeeping missions (in 2014 and 2015 EU financial commitments to the AU totalled EUR 717.9 million. It indicated, however, that France, for example, trains 25 000 African soldiers each year and separately deploys over 4 000 personnel in African peacekeeping operations.

Targeted funds : Parliament recognised that the problem is often not the lack of funding but, rather, how funds are spent and what other resources are utilised. It backed initiatives such as the Békou trust fund operating in the Central African Republic. It believed the current funding programme is unsustainable, and that conditions should be attached to the African Peace Facility in order to encourage the AU to increase its own contributions to PSOs.

A holistic EU approach : Parliament supported a holistic EU approach, which is the main instrument for mobilising the full potential of EU action in the context of peacekeeping operations and the stabilisation process, as well as for mobilising various ways to support the development of AU countries. It stressed that border management assistance should be a priority for EU engagement in Africa.

Sexual abuse by United Nations personnel : lastly, Parliament took note of the UN Evaluation Report of 15 May 2015 on sexual exploitation and abuse by United Nations personnel. It considered that the AU, the UN, the EU and Member States should exercise strong vigilance concerning such criminal matters and urged the most rigorous disciplinary and judicial procedures and the utmost effort to prevent such crimes.

Documents
2016/06/07
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2016/06/06
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2016/04/28
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Details

The Committee on Foreign Affairs adopted the own-initiative report by Geoffrey VAN ORDEN (ECR, UK) on Peace Support Operations – EU engagement with the UN and the African Union.

The Committee on Development, exercising its prerogatives as an associated committee in accordance with Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure , also gave its opinion on the report.

Members recalled that Peace Support Operations (PSOs) are a form of crisis response, normally in support of an internationally recognised organisation such as the UN or the African Union (AU), with a UN mandate, and designed to prevent armed conflict, restore, maintain or build peace, enforce peace agreements and tackle the complex emergencies and challenges posed by failing or weak states. The aim of PSOs is also to help create stable, secure and more prosperous environments for the longer term.

The committee also stressed that the security landscape in Africa in particular has changed dramatically in the last decade, with the emergence of terrorist and insurgent groups in Somalia, Nigeria, and the Sahel-Sahara region, and with peace enforcement and counter-terrorism operations becoming the rule rather than the exception in many areas. In this context, Members considered that coordinated external actions that make use of diplomatic, security and development tools are necessary to restore confidence and tackle the challenges of wars, internal conflicts, insecurity, fragility and transition.

The deployment of multiple UN-authorised missions in the same theatre of operations, with different actors and regional organisations, is increasingly the reality of modern peace operations. However, managing these complex partnerships, while not duplicating work or missions, is essential to successful operations. In this regard, Members called for the evaluation and rationalisation of the existing structures .

Better coordination : the committee urged the EU, given the scale of the challenges and the complex involvement of other organisations and nations, to seek an appropriate division of labour and to focus on where it can best add value. It considered that UN and AU missions are in need of a comprehensive approach under which, in addition to deploying military, diplomatic and development instruments, other essential factors are a thorough knowledge of the security environment, exchanges of intelligence and information and modern technologies. It stressed the importance of the other instruments of the EU in the security field and, in particular, of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions and operations.

Provision of military forces: Members noted that the perceived legitimacy of a PSO is key to its success. They believed that the AU should therefore contribute with support and military forces wherever possible . They welcomed the UN-EU Strategic Partnership on Peacekeeping and Crisis Management and called on the EU to make further efforts to facilitate Member State contributions. They recalled that the EU has engaged in crisis-management activities in Africa. However, only 11 of the 28 EU Member States made pledges at the 28 September 2015 Leaders’ Summit on Peacekeeping, while China pledged a standby force of 8 000 and Colombia 5 000 troops. Accordingly, Members called on the EU Member States to significantly increase their military and police contributions to UN peacekeeping missions.

Prevention of conflicts : recalling the need for a rapid African response to crisis, Members emphasised the importance of investing more in conflict prevention. They recognised the critical contribution of the African Peace Facility in developing the triangular partnership between the UN, the EU and the AU, but considered it vital that the EU institutions and Member States remain closely engaged if the Facility is to be fully utilised. They took the view that the Facility should focus on structural support rather than just bankrolling African forces' pay.

Military assistance for African states : Members observed that stepping up European military cooperation would increase the efficiency and effectiveness of Europe's contribution to UN peace missions. They called on the EU and its Member States, as well as on other members of the international community, to assist with training , including discipline, equipment, logistical support, financial assistance and development of rules of engagement, to encourage and assist the African Standby Force .

Members also considered that the Official Development Assistance (ODA) needs to be redesigned under the OECD framework through peace building lenses. Similarly, the EDF regulation should be reviewed in order to allow programming design that includes peace, security and justice expenditures.

The committee insisted that neither the EU nor the Member States, in supporting PSOs, should act in isolation but that they should, rather, take full account of the contributions of other international actors, improve coordination with them, improve rapidity of response , and focus their efforts on certain priority countries.

A holistic EU approach : Members supported a holistic EU approach, which is the main instrument for mobilising the full potential of EU action in the context of peacekeeping operations and the stabilisation process, as well as for mobilising various ways to support the development of AU countries. They stressed that border management assistance should be a priority for EU engagement in Africa.

Targeted funds : Members recognised that the problem is often not the lack of funding but, rather, how funds are spent and what other resources are utilised. They backed initiatives such as the Békou trust fund operating in the Central African Republic. They believed the current funding programme is unsustainable, and that conditions should be attached to the African Peace Facility in order to encourage the AU to increase its own contributions to PSOs.

Sexual abuse by United Nations personnel : lastly, Members took note of the UN Evaluation Report of 15 May 2015 on sexual exploitation and abuse by United Nations personnel. They considered that the AU, the UN, the EU and Member States should exercise strong vigilance concerning such criminal matters and urged the most rigorous disciplinary and judicial procedures and the utmost effort to prevent such crimes.

It should be noted that in a minority report tabled by the GUE/NGL, Members pointed out that the report aims to increase EU contribution to peace support operations. They felt that the responsibility-to-protect-mechanism should not be used as a pretext for military intervention. They considered that NATO should leave the African continent, and stressed the need for a strict separation of EU from NATO in this context.

Documents
2016/04/19
   EP - Vote in committee
2016/03/16
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2016/02/25
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2016/01/25
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2015/10/29
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament
2015/10/29
   EP - Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament
2015/10/29
   EP - VÄYRYNEN Paavo (ALDE) appointed as rapporteur in DEVE
2015/09/15
   EP - VAN ORDEN Geoffrey (ECR) appointed as rapporteur in AFET

Documents

Activities

Votes

A8-0158/2016 - Geoffrey Van Orden - § 9/3 #

2016/06/07 Outcome: +: 483, -: 173, 0: 19
DE RO ES FR BE AT IT CZ HU PT BG SE NL HR LT SI FI PL SK LU EE MT LV CY IE GB DK EL
Total
92
27
45
72
20
18
65
21
17
20
17
18
25
11
10
8
11
47
11
6
6
6
6
5
9
52
12
18
icon: PPE PPE
195

Finland PPE

2

Luxembourg PPE

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Cyprus PPE

1
icon: S&D S&D
173

Sweden S&D

Abstain (1)

4

Netherlands S&D

3

Croatia S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Finland S&D

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Malta S&D

3

Latvia S&D

1

Cyprus S&D

2

Ireland S&D

Abstain (1)

1
3
icon: ALDE ALDE
66

Romania ALDE

2

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

2

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

United Kingdom ALDE

1

Denmark ALDE

Abstain (1)

3
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
46

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Croatia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: NI NI
14

Germany NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Hungary NI

2

Poland NI

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom NI

Against (1)

1
icon: ENF ENF
38

Germany ENF

Against (1)

1

Romania ENF

1

Belgium ENF

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

4

Poland ENF

2

United Kingdom ENF

Against (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
34

Germany EFDD

Against (1)

1

France EFDD

Against (1)

1

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1

Poland EFDD

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
49

Italy GUE/NGL

3

Czechia GUE/NGL

3

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Ireland GUE/NGL

3

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
60

Romania ECR

For (1)

1

Italy ECR

2

Czechia ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Netherlands ECR

2

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Finland ECR

Against (1)

2

Slovakia ECR

2

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Greece ECR

Against (1)

1

A8-0158/2016 - Geoffrey Van Orden - § 18 #

2016/06/07 Outcome: +: 485, -: 148, 0: 35
DE ES IT RO FR BE HU AT CZ BG SE PT NL PL LT HR SI SK LU EE MT FI LV IE DK CY GB EL
Total
90
45
65
27
71
20
17
18
21
16
18
19
25
46
10
10
8
11
6
6
6
11
6
9
12
5
52
18
icon: PPE PPE
193

Luxembourg PPE

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Finland PPE

2

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Cyprus PPE

1
icon: S&D S&D
172

Netherlands S&D

3

Croatia S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Malta S&D

3

Finland S&D

1

Latvia S&D

1

Ireland S&D

Abstain (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
65

Romania ALDE

2

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Portugal ALDE

1

Croatia ALDE

2

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

United Kingdom ALDE

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
44

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: NI NI
14

Germany NI

Against (1)

2

Hungary NI

2

Poland NI

Against (1)

1

United Kingdom NI

Against (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
34

Germany EFDD

Against (1)

1

France EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2

Poland EFDD

1

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1
icon: ENF ENF
38

Germany ENF

Against (1)

1

Romania ENF

Abstain (1)

1

Belgium ENF

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

4

Poland ENF

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

United Kingdom ENF

Against (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
49

Italy GUE/NGL

3

Czechia GUE/NGL

3

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

Against (2)

Abstain (1)

3

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
59

Italy ECR

2

Romania ECR

For (1)

1

Czechia ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Netherlands ECR

2

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Slovakia ECR

2

Finland ECR

2

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Greece ECR

Against (1)

1

A8-0158/2016 - Geoffrey Van Orden - Résolution #

2016/06/07 Outcome: +: 491, -: 110, 0: 73
DE PL ES RO IT GB BG CZ BE FR HU PT NL AT SK HR LT FI SE DK SI EE LV MT LU IE CY EL
Total
92
47
45
27
65
52
17
21
20
71
17
20
25
18
11
11
10
11
18
12
8
6
6
6
6
9
5
18
icon: PPE PPE
195

Finland PPE

2

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Cyprus PPE

1
icon: S&D S&D
173

Netherlands S&D

3

Croatia S&D

2

Finland S&D

1

Sweden S&D

Abstain (1)

4

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Latvia S&D

1

Malta S&D

3

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
66

Romania ALDE

2

United Kingdom ALDE

1

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

2

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
59

Romania ECR

For (1)

1

Italy ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Czechia ECR

2

Netherlands ECR

2

Slovakia ECR

2

Croatia ECR

For (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

1
2

Denmark ECR

3

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

Greece ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
46

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Croatia Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1
icon: NI NI
14

Germany NI

2

Poland NI

Abstain (1)

1

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

1

France NI

3

Hungary NI

2
icon: ENF ENF
38

Germany ENF

Against (1)

1

Poland ENF

2

Romania ENF

Abstain (1)

1

United Kingdom ENF

Against (1)

1

Belgium ENF

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

4
icon: EFDD EFDD
34

Germany EFDD

Against (1)

1

Poland EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

France EFDD

Against (1)

1

Lithuania EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
49

Italy GUE/NGL

3

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Czechia GUE/NGL

3

Netherlands GUE/NGL

2

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

3

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2
AmendmentsDossier
165 2015/2275(INI)
2016/02/25 AFET 165 amendments...
source: 578.460

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

committees/0/associated
Old
True
New
 
events/4/docs
  • url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-8-2016-06-06-TOC_EN.html title: Debate in Parliament
committees/0/shadows/3
name
COUSO PERMUY Javier
group
European United Left - Nordic Green Left
abbr
GUE/NGL
docs/0/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE575.014
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/AFET-PR-575014_EN.html
docs/1/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE578.460
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/AFET-AM-578460_EN.html
docs/2/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE575.372&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/DEVE-AD-575372_EN.html
events/0/type
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
New
Committee referral announced in Parliament
events/2/type
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
New
Vote in committee
events/3
date
2016-04-28T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2016-0158_EN.html title: A8-0158/2016
summary
events/3
date
2016-04-28T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2016-0158_EN.html title: A8-0158/2016
summary
events/4/docs
  • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20160606&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
events/6
date
2016-06-07T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0249_EN.html title: T8-0249/2016
summary
events/6
date
2016-06-07T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0249_EN.html title: T8-0249/2016
summary
procedure/Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure EP 159
procedure/Other legal basis
Rules of Procedure EP 159
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Foreign Affairs
committee
AFET
rapporteur
name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey date: 2015-09-15T00:00:00 group: European Conservatives and Reformists abbr: ECR
shadows
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Foreign Affairs
committee
AFET
date
2015-09-15T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey group: European Conservatives and Reformists abbr: ECR
shadows
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
rapporteur
name: VÄYRYNEN Paavo date: 2015-10-29T00:00:00 group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
date
2015-10-29T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: VÄYRYNEN Paavo group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
events/3/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0158&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2016-0158_EN.html
events/6/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0249
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0249_EN.html
activities
  • date: 2015-10-29T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP shadows: group: EPP name: ZDROJEWSKI Bogdan Andrzej group: S&D name: PARGNEAUX Gilles group: ALDE name: NART Javier group: GUE/NGL name: COUSO PERMUY Javier group: Verts/ALE name: VALERO Bodil responsible: True committee: AFET date: 2015-09-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ECR name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2015-10-29T00:00:00 committee_full: Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: VÄYRYNEN Paavo
  • date: 2016-04-19T00:00:00 body: EP type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP shadows: group: EPP name: ZDROJEWSKI Bogdan Andrzej group: S&D name: PARGNEAUX Gilles group: ALDE name: NART Javier group: GUE/NGL name: COUSO PERMUY Javier group: Verts/ALE name: VALERO Bodil responsible: True committee: AFET date: 2015-09-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ECR name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2015-10-29T00:00:00 committee_full: Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: VÄYRYNEN Paavo
  • date: 2016-04-28T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0158&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A8-0158/2016 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2016-06-06T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20160606&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2016-06-07T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0249 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T8-0249/2016 body: EP type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Foreign Affairs
committee
AFET
date
2015-09-15T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey group: European Conservatives and Reformists abbr: ECR
shadows
committees/0
body
EP
shadows
responsible
True
committee
AFET
date
2015-09-15T00:00:00
committee_full
Foreign Affairs (Associated committee)
rapporteur
group: ECR name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
True
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
date
2015-10-29T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: VÄYRYNEN Paavo group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/1
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
DEVE
date
2015-10-29T00:00:00
committee_full
Development (Associated committee)
rapporteur
group: ALDE name: VÄYRYNEN Paavo
docs
  • date: 2016-01-25T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE575.014 title: PE575.014 type: Committee draft report body: EP
  • date: 2016-02-25T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE578.460 title: PE578.460 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2016-03-16T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE575.372&secondRef=02 title: PE575.372 committee: DEVE type: Committee opinion body: EP
events
  • date: 2015-10-29T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2015-10-29T00:00:00 type: Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament body: EP
  • date: 2016-04-19T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2016-04-28T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0158&language=EN title: A8-0158/2016 summary: The Committee on Foreign Affairs adopted the own-initiative report by Geoffrey VAN ORDEN (ECR, UK) on Peace Support Operations – EU engagement with the UN and the African Union. The Committee on Development, exercising its prerogatives as an associated committee in accordance with Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure , also gave its opinion on the report. Members recalled that Peace Support Operations (PSOs) are a form of crisis response, normally in support of an internationally recognised organisation such as the UN or the African Union (AU), with a UN mandate, and designed to prevent armed conflict, restore, maintain or build peace, enforce peace agreements and tackle the complex emergencies and challenges posed by failing or weak states. The aim of PSOs is also to help create stable, secure and more prosperous environments for the longer term. The committee also stressed that the security landscape in Africa in particular has changed dramatically in the last decade, with the emergence of terrorist and insurgent groups in Somalia, Nigeria, and the Sahel-Sahara region, and with peace enforcement and counter-terrorism operations becoming the rule rather than the exception in many areas. In this context, Members considered that coordinated external actions that make use of diplomatic, security and development tools are necessary to restore confidence and tackle the challenges of wars, internal conflicts, insecurity, fragility and transition. The deployment of multiple UN-authorised missions in the same theatre of operations, with different actors and regional organisations, is increasingly the reality of modern peace operations. However, managing these complex partnerships, while not duplicating work or missions, is essential to successful operations. In this regard, Members called for the evaluation and rationalisation of the existing structures . Better coordination : the committee urged the EU, given the scale of the challenges and the complex involvement of other organisations and nations, to seek an appropriate division of labour and to focus on where it can best add value. It considered that UN and AU missions are in need of a comprehensive approach under which, in addition to deploying military, diplomatic and development instruments, other essential factors are a thorough knowledge of the security environment, exchanges of intelligence and information and modern technologies. It stressed the importance of the other instruments of the EU in the security field and, in particular, of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions and operations. Provision of military forces: Members noted that the perceived legitimacy of a PSO is key to its success. They believed that the AU should therefore contribute with support and military forces wherever possible . They welcomed the UN-EU Strategic Partnership on Peacekeeping and Crisis Management and called on the EU to make further efforts to facilitate Member State contributions. They recalled that the EU has engaged in crisis-management activities in Africa. However, only 11 of the 28 EU Member States made pledges at the 28 September 2015 Leaders’ Summit on Peacekeeping, while China pledged a standby force of 8 000 and Colombia 5 000 troops. Accordingly, Members called on the EU Member States to significantly increase their military and police contributions to UN peacekeeping missions. Prevention of conflicts : recalling the need for a rapid African response to crisis, Members emphasised the importance of investing more in conflict prevention. They recognised the critical contribution of the African Peace Facility in developing the triangular partnership between the UN, the EU and the AU, but considered it vital that the EU institutions and Member States remain closely engaged if the Facility is to be fully utilised. They took the view that the Facility should focus on structural support rather than just bankrolling African forces' pay. Military assistance for African states : Members observed that stepping up European military cooperation would increase the efficiency and effectiveness of Europe's contribution to UN peace missions. They called on the EU and its Member States, as well as on other members of the international community, to assist with training , including discipline, equipment, logistical support, financial assistance and development of rules of engagement, to encourage and assist the African Standby Force . Members also considered that the Official Development Assistance (ODA) needs to be redesigned under the OECD framework through peace building lenses. Similarly, the EDF regulation should be reviewed in order to allow programming design that includes peace, security and justice expenditures. The committee insisted that neither the EU nor the Member States, in supporting PSOs, should act in isolation but that they should, rather, take full account of the contributions of other international actors, improve coordination with them, improve rapidity of response , and focus their efforts on certain priority countries. A holistic EU approach : Members supported a holistic EU approach, which is the main instrument for mobilising the full potential of EU action in the context of peacekeeping operations and the stabilisation process, as well as for mobilising various ways to support the development of AU countries. They stressed that border management assistance should be a priority for EU engagement in Africa. Targeted funds : Members recognised that the problem is often not the lack of funding but, rather, how funds are spent and what other resources are utilised. They backed initiatives such as the Békou trust fund operating in the Central African Republic. They believed the current funding programme is unsustainable, and that conditions should be attached to the African Peace Facility in order to encourage the AU to increase its own contributions to PSOs. Sexual abuse by United Nations personnel : lastly, Members took note of the UN Evaluation Report of 15 May 2015 on sexual exploitation and abuse by United Nations personnel. They considered that the AU, the UN, the EU and Member States should exercise strong vigilance concerning such criminal matters and urged the most rigorous disciplinary and judicial procedures and the utmost effort to prevent such crimes. It should be noted that in a minority report tabled by the GUE/NGL, Members pointed out that the report aims to increase EU contribution to peace support operations. They felt that the responsibility-to-protect-mechanism should not be used as a pretext for military intervention. They considered that NATO should leave the African continent, and stressed the need for a strict separation of EU from NATO in this context.
  • date: 2016-06-06T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20160606&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2016-06-07T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=27144&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2016-06-07T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0249 title: T8-0249/2016 summary: The European Parliament adopted by 491 votes 110 with 73 abstentions, a resolution on Peace Support Operations – EU engagement with the UN and the African Union. Parliament recalled that Peace Support Operations (PSOs) are a form of crisis response, normally in support of an internationally recognised organisation such as the UN or the African Union (AU), with a UN mandate, and designed to prevent armed conflict, restore, maintain or build peace, enforce peace agreements and tackle the complex emergencies and challenges posed by failing or weak states. The aim of PSOs is also to help create stable, secure and more prosperous environments for the longer term. Parliament also stressed that the security landscape in Africa in particular has changed dramatically in the last decade, with the emergence of terrorist and insurgent groups in Somalia, Nigeria, and the Sahel-Sahara region, and with peace enforcement and counter-terrorism operations becoming the rule rather than the exception in many areas. In this context, it considered that coordinated external actions that make use of diplomatic, security and development tools are necessary to restore confidence and tackle the challenges of wars, internal conflicts, insecurity, fragility and transition. The deployment of multiple UN-authorised missions in the same theatre of operations, with different actors and regional organisations, is increasingly the reality of modern peace operations. However, managing these complex partnerships, while not duplicating work or missions, is essential to successful operations. In this regard, Parliament called for the evaluation and rationalisation of the existing structures . Better coordination : Parliament urged the EU, given the scale of the challenges and the complex involvement of other organisations and nations, to seek an appropriate division of labour and to focus on where it can best add value. It considered that UN and AU missions are in need of a comprehensive approach under which, in addition to deploying military, diplomatic and development instruments, other essential factors are a thorough knowledge of the security environment, exchanges of intelligence and information and modern technologies. It stressed the importance of the other instruments of the EU in the security field and, in particular, of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions and operations. Provision of military forces: Parliament noted that the perceived legitimacy of a PSO is key to its success. It believed that the AU should therefore contribute with support and military forces wherever possible . It welcomed the UN-EU Strategic Partnership on Peacekeeping and Crisis Management and called on the EU to make further efforts to facilitate Member State contributions. It recalled that the EU has engaged in crisis-management activities in Africa. However, only 11 of the 28 EU Member States made pledges at the 28 September 2015 Leaders’ Summit on Peacekeeping, while China pledged a standby force of 8 000 and Colombia 5 000 troops. Accordingly, Parliament called on the EU Member States to significantly increase their military and police contributions to UN peacekeeping missions. Prevention of conflicts : recalling the need for a rapid African response to crisis, the resolution emphasised the importance of investing more in conflict prevention. It recognised the critical contribution of the African Peace Facility in developing the triangular partnership between the UN, the EU and the AU, but considered it vital that the EU institutions and Member States remain closely engaged if the Facility is to be fully utilised. It took the view that the Facility should focus on structural support rather than just bankrolling African forces' pay. Military assistance for African states : Members observed that stepping up European military cooperation would increase the efficiency and effectiveness of Europe's contribution to UN peace missions. They called on the EU and its Member States, as well as on other members of the international community, to assist with training , including discipline, equipment, logistical support, financial assistance and development of rules of engagement, to encourage and assist the African Standby Force . European missions in Africa : Parliament noted the importance of Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions for Africa’s security, in particular training and support missions for African forces, and especially EUTM Mali, EUCAP Sahel Mali and EUCAP Sahel Niger, EUTM Somalia, and EUCAP Nestor. It called on the EU to step up the capabilities of those training missions, in particular by allowing African soldiers who have been trained to be monitored on and after their return from theatres of operations. Parliament also considered that the Official Development Assistance (ODA) needs to be redesigned under the OECD framework through peace building lenses. Similarly, the EDF regulation should be reviewed in order to allow programming design that includes peace, security and justice expenditures. Parliament insisted that neither the EU nor the Member States, in supporting PSOs, should act in isolation but that they should, rather, take full account of the contributions of other international actors, improve coordination with them, improve rapidity of response , and focus their efforts on certain priority countries. Member States’ contributions to the UN system : Parliament noted that the European countries and the EU itself are major contributors to the UN system, and that France, Germany and the UK are the largest European contributors to the budget for UN Peacekeeping Operations. It recalled that the EU Member States are collectively the largest contributor to the UN’s peacekeeping budget, with about 37 %, and are currently contributing troops to nine peacekeeping missions (in 2014 and 2015 EU financial commitments to the AU totalled EUR 717.9 million. It indicated, however, that France, for example, trains 25 000 African soldiers each year and separately deploys over 4 000 personnel in African peacekeeping operations. Targeted funds : Parliament recognised that the problem is often not the lack of funding but, rather, how funds are spent and what other resources are utilised. It backed initiatives such as the Békou trust fund operating in the Central African Republic. It believed the current funding programme is unsustainable, and that conditions should be attached to the African Peace Facility in order to encourage the AU to increase its own contributions to PSOs. A holistic EU approach : Parliament supported a holistic EU approach, which is the main instrument for mobilising the full potential of EU action in the context of peacekeeping operations and the stabilisation process, as well as for mobilising various ways to support the development of AU countries. It stressed that border management assistance should be a priority for EU engagement in Africa. Sexual abuse by United Nations personnel : lastly, Parliament took note of the UN Evaluation Report of 15 May 2015 on sexual exploitation and abuse by United Nations personnel. It considered that the AU, the UN, the EU and Member States should exercise strong vigilance concerning such criminal matters and urged the most rigorous disciplinary and judicial procedures and the utmost effort to prevent such crimes.
  • date: 2016-06-07T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP
links
other
    procedure/Modified legal basis
    Old
    Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
    New
    Rules of Procedure EP 159
    procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
    Old
    AFET/8/04818
    New
    • AFET/8/04818
    procedure/legal_basis/0
    Rules of Procedure EP 54
    procedure/legal_basis/0
    Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
    procedure/subject
    Old
    • 6.10.05 Peace preservation, humanitarian and rescue tasks, crisis management
    New
    6.10.05
    Peace preservation, humanitarian and rescue tasks, crisis management
    activities/3/docs
    • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20160606&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament
    activities/3/type
    Old
    Debate in plenary scheduled
    New
    Debate in Parliament
    activities/4/docs
    • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0249 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T8-0249/2016
    activities/4/type
    Old
    Vote in plenary scheduled
    New
    Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
    procedure/stage_reached
    Old
    Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
    New
    Procedure completed
    activities/2/docs/0/text
    • The Committee on Foreign Affairs adopted the own-initiative report by Geoffrey VAN ORDEN (ECR, UK) on Peace Support Operations – EU engagement with the UN and the African Union.

      The Committee on Development, exercising its prerogatives as an associated committee in accordance with Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure, also gave its opinion on the report.

      Members recalled that Peace Support Operations (PSOs) are a form of crisis response, normally in support of an internationally recognised organisation such as the UN or the African Union (AU), with a UN mandate, and designed to prevent armed conflict, restore, maintain or build peace, enforce peace agreements and tackle the complex emergencies and challenges posed by failing or weak states. The aim of PSOs is also to help create stable, secure and more prosperous environments for the longer term.

      The committee also stressed that the security landscape in Africa in particular has changed dramatically in the last decade, with the emergence of terrorist and insurgent groups in Somalia, Nigeria, and the Sahel-Sahara region, and with peace enforcement and counter-terrorism operations becoming the rule rather than the exception in many areas. In this context, Members considered that coordinated external actions that make use of diplomatic, security and development tools are necessary to restore confidence and tackle the challenges of wars, internal conflicts, insecurity, fragility and transition.

      The deployment of multiple UN-authorised missions in the same theatre of operations, with different actors and regional organisations, is increasingly the reality of modern peace operations. However, managing these complex partnerships, while not duplicating work or missions, is essential to successful operations. In this regard, Members called for the evaluation and rationalisation of the existing structures.

      Better coordination: the committee urged the EU, given the scale of the challenges and the complex involvement of other organisations and nations, to seek an appropriate division of labour and to focus on where it can best add value. It considered that UN and AU missions are in need of a comprehensive approach under which, in addition to deploying military, diplomatic and development instruments, other essential factors are a thorough knowledge of the security environment, exchanges of intelligence and information and modern technologies. It stressed the importance of the other instruments of the EU in the security field and, in particular, of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) missions and operations.

      Provision of military forces: Members noted that the perceived legitimacy of a PSO is key to its success. They believed that the AU should therefore contribute with support and military forces wherever possible. They welcomed the UN-EU Strategic Partnership on Peacekeeping and Crisis Management and called on the EU to make further efforts to facilitate Member State contributions. They recalled that the EU has engaged in crisis-management activities in Africa. However, only 11 of the 28 EU Member States made pledges at the 28 September 2015 Leaders’ Summit on Peacekeeping, while China pledged a standby force of 8 000 and Colombia 5 000 troops. Accordingly, Members called on the EU Member States to significantly increase their military and police contributions to UN peacekeeping missions.

      Prevention of conflicts: recalling the need for a rapid African response to crisis, Members emphasised the importance of investing more in conflict prevention. They recognised the critical contribution of the African Peace Facility in developing the triangular partnership between the UN, the EU and the AU, but considered it vital that the EU institutions and Member States remain closely engaged if the Facility is to be fully utilised. They took the view that the Facility should focus on structural support rather than just bankrolling African forces' pay.

      Military assistance for African states: Members observed that stepping up European military cooperation would increase the efficiency and effectiveness of Europe's contribution to UN peace missions. They called on the EU and its Member States, as well as on other members of the international community, to assist with training, including discipline, equipment, logistical support, financial assistance and development of rules of engagement, to encourage and assist the African Standby Force.

      Members also considered that the Official Development Assistance (ODA) needs to be redesigned under the OECD framework through peace building lenses. Similarly, the EDF regulation should be reviewed in order to allow programming design that includes peace, security and justice expenditures.

      The committee insisted that neither the EU nor the Member States, in supporting PSOs, should act in isolation but that they should, rather, take full account of the contributions of other international actors, improve coordination with them, improve rapidity of response, and focus their efforts on certain priority countries.

      A holistic EU approach: Members supported a holistic EU approach, which is the main instrument for mobilising the full potential of EU action in the context of peacekeeping operations and the stabilisation process, as well as for mobilising various ways to support the development of AU countries. They stressed that border management assistance should be a priority for EU engagement in Africa.

      Targeted funds: Members recognised that the problem is often not the lack of funding but, rather, how funds are spent and what other resources are utilised. They backed initiatives such as the Békou trust fund operating in the Central African Republic. They believed the current funding programme is unsustainable, and that conditions should be attached to the African Peace Facility in order to encourage the AU to increase its own contributions to PSOs.

      Sexual abuse by United Nations personnel: lastly, Members took note of the UN Evaluation Report of 15 May 2015 on sexual exploitation and abuse by United Nations personnel. They considered that the AU, the UN, the EU and Member States should exercise strong vigilance concerning such criminal matters and urged the most rigorous disciplinary and judicial procedures and the utmost effort to prevent such crimes.

      It should be noted that in a minority report tabled by the GUE/NGL, Members pointed out that the report aims to increase EU contribution to peace support operations. They felt that the responsibility-to-protect-mechanism should not be used as a pretext for military intervention. They considered that NATO should leave the African continent, and stressed the need for a strict separation of EU from NATO in this context.

    activities/2
    date
    2016-04-28T00:00:00
    docs
    url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0158&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A8-0158/2016
    body
    EP
    type
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    activities/2
    date
    2016-04-28T00:00:00
    docs
    url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0158&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A8-0158/2016
    body
    EP
    type
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    activities/3/type
    Old
    Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
    New
    Debate in plenary scheduled
    activities/4
    date
    2016-06-07T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Vote in plenary scheduled
    activities/2/docs
    • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0158&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A8-0158/2016
    activities/2
    date
    2016-04-28T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    activities/2
    date
    2016-04-28T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    activities/2
    date
    2016-04-28T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    activities/2
    date
    2016-04-28T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    activities/2
    date
    2016-04-28T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    procedure/stage_reached
    Old
    Awaiting committee decision
    New
    Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
    activities/1
    date
    2016-04-19T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
    committees
    procedure/Modified legal basis
    Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
    activities/1
    date
    2016-04-19T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading
    activities/1/date
    Old
    2016-04-18T00:00:00
    New
    2016-04-19T00:00:00
    activities/2
    date
    2016-06-06T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
    activities/0/committees/0/date
    2015-09-15T00:00:00
    activities/0/committees/0/rapporteur
    • group: ECR name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey
    activities/0/committees/0/shadows
    • group: EPP name: ZDROJEWSKI Bogdan Andrzej
    • group: S&D name: PARGNEAUX Gilles
    • group: ALDE name: NART Javier
    • group: GUE/NGL name: COUSO PERMUY Javier
    • group: Verts/ALE name: VALERO Bodil
    activities/1
    date
    2016-04-18T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading
    committees/0/date
    2015-09-15T00:00:00
    committees/0/rapporteur
    • group: ECR name: VAN ORDEN Geoffrey
    committees/0/shadows
    • group: EPP name: ZDROJEWSKI Bogdan Andrzej
    • group: S&D name: PARGNEAUX Gilles
    • group: ALDE name: NART Javier
    • group: GUE/NGL name: COUSO PERMUY Javier
    • group: Verts/ALE name: VALERO Bodil
    activities
    • date: 2015-10-29T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: True committee_full: Foreign Affairs (Associated committee) committee: AFET body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2015-10-29T00:00:00 committee_full: Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: VÄYRYNEN Paavo
    committees
    • body: EP responsible: True committee_full: Foreign Affairs (Associated committee) committee: AFET
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: DEVE date: 2015-10-29T00:00:00 committee_full: Development (Associated committee) rapporteur: group: ALDE name: VÄYRYNEN Paavo
    links
    other
      procedure
      dossier_of_the_committee
      AFET/8/04818
      reference
      2015/2275(INI)
      title
      Peace support operations - EU engagement with the UN and the African Union
      legal_basis
      Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
      stage_reached
      Awaiting committee decision
      subtype
      Initiative
      type
      INI - Own-initiative procedure
      subject
      6.10.05 Peace preservation, humanitarian and rescue tasks, crisis management