 For those of you who don't know my think tank Fridae Fridae is a foreign affairs think tank headquartered in Madrid Fridae means Foundation for international relations in Spanish, but I am actually based in our Brussels office We have a small office in Brussels and I'm the research director there But my own research interest is primarily on security defense particularly EU security and defense policies Which I guess is why I was invited to speak to you today about the future of EU defense policy Now what I don't want to do is perhaps what some of you might have expected Which is let's sit down and go through the summit conclusions all those wonderful decisions on You know capability development on how to share our budgets better how to have more efficient Defense markets because frankly, I think that's a little bit boring a lot of the research on EU defense policy Focuses on very technical issues, which are quite difficult to understand I think it's more interesting to think a bit longer term about the future of EU defense policy and take maybe a more strategic approach So I'm going to basically break up my remarks into three Parts the first part I want to say a few words about the kind of world and the kind of international system We're facing in the future And then I'll say a few words about what this may mean not just for Europe, but for EU defense policy Specifically and then at the very end because we're in Dublin I'd like to say a few things a few brief words about Ireland and the future of EU defense policy So the world we're entering into how might the world look say in 2030 now Why do I pick 2030 for a very simple reason? Because free day my think tank and Chatham house We've just finished a big study looking at future trends in power and governance for the European Union So I just want to throw out some of the findings for a few minutes of that study And the first thing we discovered is obviously the global economy will keep changing you're all familiar with the shifts in Economic power from the West to the rest or from the West the East in particular if you prefer and perhaps what's Interesting about the future of the global economy is how the non OECD world by 2030 will account for more of global GDP than the current OECD world and Indeed 97 percent of demographic growth in the world by 2030 will occur in the non OECD world and obviously East Asia in particular will account for a huge chunk of that growth But the global economy will change for other reasons because by 2030 half the world over half the world indeed Will be classified as middle-class and indeed almost around 60 percent of the world will live in cities So we'll have greater urbanization So imagine what impact that will have on consumption patterns for example Imagine what impact that will have on supply chains. There'll be more seltzer trade and imagine what impact that will have on resource demands With a bigger middle-class and so on. So that's the first point The second point is you know We're familiar with the shift in economic power from the West to the rest We're familiar with how this is starting to translate into You know greater or indeed spending by the rest and of course, it's also happening in the military sphere There is an ongoing shift in military power already in 2012 Asia as a whole is spending more than Europe on defense Indeed China's defense budget over the last ten years has grown 200% and is projected to surpass the EU 28 combined by 2020 and indeed The United States defense budget by 2030 now that of course does not mean China will become a global military actor Like the United States today the US is still expected to remain the premier military power because its research and development lead Its ability to act is so great You know, China has an aircraft carrier, but it doesn't mean it can use that aircraft carrier very well The United States has 11 carrier groups So it's not to say that that China will become a major global military actor on a power with the United States by 2030 But it does give us reason to think about it. What does it mean even psychologically if Chinese defense spending? surpasses the United States by 2030 Now of course these power shifts if you look at the projections on GDP demographics or indeed military spending They probably won't be linear. You know history teaches us nothing as linear in life And indeed there's no reason why the United States for example, we're not renew itself in the future Look at the impact the shale gas revolution is having on the United States economy There's a long history of renewal indeed in the United States Indy Aside with that if you look at the rise of China and India, you know, there's a lot of hype about their growing strength I think looking to the future. I'd be more worried about their potential weaknesses I'd be more worried about their potential fragility because not only are these huge countries massive populations They are undergoing enormous socio-economic change. They desperately need economic growth to sustain social peace They desperately need resources from elsewhere and we should not assume that their rise will be smooth And indeed the danger may be if they are if they experience serious domestic turbulence Because of these socio-economic challenges, which are enormous that they may be less inclined to cooperate Internationally and this is very bad potentially for the international system because of course we may have increased geopolitical competition China and India and indeed the United States and indeed Europeans all need access to trade to resources to technologies Consider for instance that by 2030 90% of Middle Eastern oil will be going eastwards to India and China Consider that the Arctic Circle may become a major Eurasian trade route What sorts of questions has that raised for maritime security? Particularly if you imagine that the United States may reduce its military presence around the world because indeed its defense budget Will also go down but that of others at the very moment China is increasing its military spending These are just some some ideas to think about So we may have increased geopolitical competition in the future Which will be a big challenge for us Europeans and deep for Ireland as well, but there is one other trend I want to mention In this world we're entering into in this rapidly changing world. It has to be said And that's the shift in power not just between states from the west to the rest But also away from states sideways if you like towards non-state actors You know for example on the environment It's a group of cities that at the moment are leading International initiatives to set new standards on how to cope with the environment called the C40 You know if you look at the role of international business look at the role of the media and so on and of course All the technological possibilities This will continue of course and it's changing politics not just domestic politics But international politics and making it much more complex in the sense that no one actor Not even the United States is decisive on any issue on their own So in other words in the world of the future, it's not just your power assets The accumulation of GDP military and so on that would matter. It's how you use those assets It's your power skills and most of all the ability to coalition to partner with others That will be the key skill for getting things done in the future So to sum it up the world we're entering into well, it'll be more crowded It will be more connected would be more interdependent in some ways than ever more congested in some ways And more contested because it will be more powerful state actors It'll be a more multi polar world in a nutshell. It will be a lot more complex Now what might all of that mean for Europe and for the European Union specifically now? I'm not going to go into what might happen in the eurozone whether or not the EU might break up or integrate more We can debate that if you like there are better qualified people than me particularly on the economics of all this in the room Nor am I going to speculate who will actually be in the European Union by 2030 I mean, it's obviously fun to consider a scenario with the UK be out by 2030 and Turkey be in for instance Whether or not Scotland is a member is another question again, but those are separate questions there to do with the internal politics It is certainly true that Europe has a big longer term challenge beyond the search for economic growth with its aging population It also has a big challenge for energy security Not just internally, but also because if you remember I mentioned earlier more Middle Eastern oil will be going eastwards Well, that may mean that we will be become even more dependent than we are today on Russia, Algeria and indeed West Africa Which does change your strategic picture a little bit But I think the biggest challenge for the European Union is how do we temper the growing specter of Geopolitical competition, which of course could lead to interstate conflict think of the border disputes or maritime disputes in the South and East China seas How do we temper geopolitical competition and in particular? How do we temper geopolitical competition between the United States and China? How do we encourage a cooperative relationship between the United States and China as Europeans? I mean, we do a lot of work on the EU-US relationship and increasingly of course on the EU-China relationship But I think Europeans need to think a little bit more about the US-China relationship What's our role there because that is the big question for the future of global governance for the future of the international system And this matters for the EU because of course the EU is not just a peace project It's a cooperative project and as Ben Tanra has often said the EU ultimately is all about the force of law Not the law of force. We don't want a competitive world. We want a cooperative world Okay, but that brings me on to CSDP and the future of EU defense policy now I just want to be clear that we're that we are all clear on what EU defense policy is and what it's not You know, George Orwell would have a fantastic time with the idea of EU defense policy Because if it's one thing that it's not it's it is not a defense policy. It is absolutely not a defense policy Okay, the EU is not a super state. It does not defend its own territory and Defense of territories and national prerogative and is a sovereign prerogative of national member states What it is is and of course, it's not a military alliance. Let's be clear about that as well It's not like NATO. There's no commitment in the EU treaties anything like article 5 of the NATO treaty Well, you defense policy is it's part it's supposed to be part of EU foreign policy It's one of a number of EU external actions or EU external policies along with development along with diplomatic policies There is a military component now arguably that military part of EU foreign policy is very Underdeveloped at least if you're going to compare with say NATO or the United Nations The EU has while it's deployed almost 10 military operations at this stage None of them have been anything like the scale or robustness of what the UN has been doing for instance in Congo or in Lebanon Or indeed what NATO has been doing in Afghanistan So it's a relatively underdeveloped part of EU foreign policy But we shouldn't forget when we're thinking about the politics I'm not really going to go into very much on national positions But of course we can discuss that in the Q&A But when we think about the politics of EU defense policy for some politicians in some countries The real aim of EU defense policy is not policy. It's it's contribution to the European project You know when politicians in other countries talk about a European army. It's not that they necessarily expect this army to do anything It's purely that they see it as a symbol of integration They want military integration as a virtue in itself So we shouldn't forget that in some countries EU defense policy is really a project rather than a part of EU farm policy Now added to all of that you have the simple fact that defense policy today in most national capitals Is not popular. I think it's fair to say or it's not a priority That's for sure and rightly so, you know the economic crisis should be the priority And you see this reflected in the fall in defense budgets Roughly 10 to 15 percent in most member states on average. You see this in the fall in deployments This was a point minister Shatter made during the Irish presidency very often and the recent figures from the European defense agency I think in 2008 the Europeans had roughly 80,000 soldiers deployed externally through the EU through NATO through the UN nationally Last year it was about 50,000 if I remember correctly so the trends are clear Europeans are spending less on defense and they're less willing to deploy externally and consider the experience for example of David Cameron The British Prime Minister last year when he tried to convince his parliament to support a military action in Syria He failed and Britain, you know would normally be considered one of the Deutsch marks of European defense along with France Certainly not hesitant normally to use military force So it gives you an idea of how difficult it is to explain what is the use of military force today in Europe? And it has to be said that defense policies lost a lot of credibility because of the experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan But we shouldn't forget of course you do need to be prepared to use military force sometimes if your main aim is To support international law that is why Ireland for example has been such a strong supporter of international peacekeeping And indeed has contributed very heavily since 1958 and indeed even before that in the League of Nations The problem for the Europeans though is because their budgets are going down their capability in many respects is going down If you consider that in the 1960s France was able to deploy almost 500,000 soldiers 500,000 in Algeria in 1999 Tony Blair the then British Prime Minister Was threatening Bill Clinton that he wanted land forces to be sent to Kosovo and he was prepared to send up to 50,000 50,000 at the time today If France and Britain wanted to send a large force a large intervention force They would be doing very well to send 15,000 and indeed it would probably be closer to 5,000 And again, they're the leading military powers in Europe. They're the Deutsch marks of European defense So it gives you an idea of the problem we have for the 200 billion we spend. What are we getting in return? What is this really contributing to supporting international law? Okay, let me move on though to What will or what might EU defense policy actually be doing in the future? Now an awful lot will depend on the United States I'm sure you're all familiar with the announcement in 2012 of what has been sound-bited as the pivot to the Asia Pacific Or the rebalancing really is a more correct fate phrase of US military resources towards the Asia Pacific Now, I think the European debate on that has been very Euro centric Has been very much about what does this mean for European security rather than discussing What role Europeans might have in the Asia Pacific, but I think this move makes perfect sense from a Washington perspective Yeah Given that the future of global growth really is in East Asia This makes perfect sense from a Washington perspective and given the number of security challenges in that part of the world Again remember all those border disputes between Japan China or between China and other neighbors in the South China Sea We shouldn't forget though the Asia Pacific security matters for us because of course We now trade as much with the Asia Pacific region as we do across the Atlantic Indeed in some years. We even trade more with Asia Pacific in 2010. It was 5% more However, even though obviously Asia East Asian security is important for Europe and particularly European trade interests I don't foresee the EU playing any military role in East Asia. I want to make that absolutely clear in the future I do think there are a lot of useful non-military things that you could do in Asian security and Even if some member states like Britain or France may want to play some military role in Asian security East Asian security in the future. I don't see the EU playing any role like that But I do see the EU being increasingly called upon to acting its broad neighborhood. Now, what do I mean by the broad neighborhood? I mean from Central Asia all the way across the Middle East by the Gulf all the way across Africa the Sahel to West Africa It's a very big area a very big area and it's a very turbulent area There are lots of connections across these different regions. There are a lot of sub reasons And there's a lot of countries of course in that broad area And not only is it very turbulent, you know, think of Syria think of Libya think of the Russian Georgia war think of Ukraine Think of the Horn of Africa and so on. There are many many challenges There's already a trend of Europeans leading international responses to crises in this broad area Consider 2006 the Europeans led the response to the Lebanese-Israeli war acting through the United Nations 2008 the Russia-Georgia war the Europeans led the response acting through the EU and the OSCE Libya 2011 France and Britain led the response ended up acting through NATO Mali 2013 France acts nationally with some eventually with European and American support again Central African Republic more recently France acts again again with European support and there will be a new operation sent there soon But the trend is clear That the Europeans are increasingly having to take a lead on coping with crises in this broad space And the US is less interested in most of these crises That's the the main Message of the pivot for me that the US does not it's quite happy for the Europeans to cope with crises in North Africa Or the Caucasus and many other places as well I think the Gulf and the Levant are more complicated obviously, but we can discuss that in the Q&A The other trend though is while the Europeans may be Are acting a little bit less with the United States in many of these crises? They are having to learn to act with many others Including the United Nations, of course the African Union NATO sometimes And indeed China India and Russia in 2008 the Russians sent helicopters to help with the Chad operation, which of course was led by General Pat Nash If you consider the anti-piracy operation of Somalia Where the Europeans have worked with Chinese and Indian ships alongside Americans and others this is a new trend This is a relatively new thing and this is a good thing because we want a cooperative relationship with these powers And this is clearly something we need to invest in for the future But I think maybe what's missing a bit in the debate about the future of European defense There are lots of good ideas on you know capabilities budgets and so on and We know the problem of political interest, but we're not very good You know if you want to use military force you have to be quite clear about your interests And we're not very clear on defining our interests as Europeans We do have a European security strategy Which lists a number of threats? But I think the problem with the European security strategy is exactly that it's quite threat driven It's also more than ten years old the world has changed a lot It's much more multi-polar so we need to be a bit more geopolitical as well in our analysis And maybe one way to think about this, and I think it helps consider When should we use military force is to think about what should our priorities be? What would your top three or top five priorities be for EU foreign policy? Now I'll give you mine for the sake of the debate Mine would be supporting international law first and foremost. I want to ensure we keep an open trading system We're a big trading block. I would like energy security. I would like a stable and more democratic neighborhood And I would like a good working relationship with the key non-EU powers in European security namely Russia Turkey and the United States Now other people would have other things that they would have on that list Some people would have climate change Some people might have migration again. This is for the debate, but it helps us understand What really should our priorities be where should we be putting our 200 billion on defense? You know, when are we really prepared to use military force? And by the way, this does not mean you always use military force to cope with these problems But sometimes you do need to use military force to cope with these problems Now I'm under no illusions of what the European Union can do I don't think anyone imagines it becoming a full spectrum dual strategic Military actor. I mean, I don't see it becoming a federal super state So that's not on the cards and of course the member states themselves don't always act through the European Union They act through the UN, they act through NATO and so on And as we know while I'm trying to make a strategic case Why I think a more active and more effective EU defense policy is needed in the future And I think the strategic trends are pushing us in that direction The fact is the political case in most member states is still very weak You know at the moment Germany does not give the impression of being very keen on using military force The UK does not give the impression of being very keen of acting through the EU and France is pretty much stuck in the middle Between the Berlin and London positions. So what does that mean for Ireland and EU defense? I mean, I would argue of course that EU defense policy is very much in Ireland's interest Because of its aim of wanting to support international law and because of its approach of mixing different instruments The military instrument is but one of many alongside development and understanding the security development nexus This comprehensive approach I think very much fits with Irish ideas on how security problems should be dealt with And of course the European Union is a key forum for our foreign policy So a you know the fact that Ireland has been so active on EU defense policy and has contributed so much to CSDP operations is very good for our standing on EU foreign policy and around the EU table in general I think that the tension that I mentioned earlier, you know, that France is stuck in the middle between Berlin and London I think this tension suits has suited Ireland Over the last decade because you know, UK has essentially ensured that EU defense policy does not Become a military alliance that would challenge NATO while France has ensured that EU defense policy does not get sucked into NATO Yeah, and that is giving the space to develop a completely different type of policy That mixes civilian and military instruments. I think though the danger may be Not so much this tension in the future, but whether or not you defense is doing anything at all Whether or not the EU is contributing anything at all because an ineffective EU defense policy is very much not in Ireland's interest Given our desire to uphold international law and our desire to see people stand up for that I'll stop there, but thank you very much for your time and attention