2015年-CEPS欧洲政策研究中心_European_Security_after_the_Paris_Attacks_4页_298kb

Summary of "European Security after the Paris Attacks"

Core Content

The document analyzes the implications of the European Union's activation of the mutual assistance clause under Article 42.7 of the Lisbon Treaty following the November 13th, 2015 Paris terrorist attacks. It explores the decision made by France to invoke this clause rather than NATO's Article 5 or the EU Solidarity Clause (Article 222 TEU), and assesses the broader impact on European security and foreign policy.

Main Viewpoints

• Europeanisation of the War Against Daesh: The activation of Article 42.7 marks a significant step towards a more unified European response to terrorism, particularly in areas of internal and border security where NATO cannot act.
• Political Signal: France's use of the mutual assistance clause was a deliberate political move to demonstrate European solidarity and to frame the threat as a European issue, rather than a transatlantic one.
• Procedural Flexibility: The clause allows for quicker decision-making and bilateral coordination among EU member states, avoiding the delays and complexities associated with EU and NATO procedures.
• Uncertainty in Implementation: As this is the first time the clause has been invoked, there is no prior experience on how it will be practically applied, which raises questions about coordination, command structures, and long-term sustainability.

Key Information

What is the mutual assistance clause?

• Article 42.7 of the Lisbon Treaty stipulates that if a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, other Member States must provide aid and assistance by all means in their power.
• It does not require formal EU decision-making or CSDP missions, allowing for bilateral consultations and flexible responses.
• It leaves the specific character of national security policies intact, unlike the Solidarity Clause or NATO's Article 5.

France's Choice: A Political Act

• Political reason: To send a clear message that Europe is united in the face of a common threat.
• Procedural reason: To bypass the time-consuming processes of EU and NATO, which could have led to delays and divisions.
• Strategic reason: To avoid involving the U.S. and potentially triggering domestic debates in Washington, while also circumventing Russian opposition to NATO involvement in Syria.

EU Mutual Assistance in Practice

• Process: France and member states will agree bilaterally on the type of support needed, with the High Representative playing a coordinating role.
• Focus and scale: Member states are expected to contribute military and security capacities to support French operations in Syria and Iraq, as well as in other regions such as North Africa and the Sahel.
• Challenges: The lack of a clear chain of command and the sustainability of such arrangements are concerns.

Implications and Significance

• The activation of the mutual assistance clause signifies a shift in the EU's approach to security, moving beyond justice and home affairs to include military and operational responses.
• The document emphasizes that while the clause provides flexibility, it also opens the door for a longer-term strategic vision involving broader EU instruments and cooperation.
• The European character of the threat is highlighted, with the return of terrorists from Brussels to Paris underscoring the need for a coordinated European strategy.

Recommendations

1. Don't go national, be united

   • The EU should move from short-term, intergovernmental military support to a more strategic and unified approach.
   • Funding mechanisms and a stronger intelligence framework should be developed to enhance cooperation and coordination.

2. Use soft and hard power

   • Hard power (military action) is necessary to weaken Daesh, but soft power (addressing root causes) is equally important.
   • The EU should focus on conflict prevention, post-conflict reconstruction, and social inclusion to prevent the breeding grounds of terrorism.
   • A balanced approach to migration is crucial to avoid undermining the very values the EU seeks to protect.

3. Engage partners

   • The EU needs to build new partnerships with regional and global actors, including the U.S., Russia, Turkey, and Gulf states.
   • A comprehensive multilateral strategy is required, with substantial financial and political commitments.
   • Closer monitoring and timely intervention in fragile regions will be essential for effective long-term strategies.

Conclusion

The Paris attacks have prompted a re-evaluation of European security strategies, leading to the activation of the mutual assistance clause. This move reflects a growing recognition of the European dimension of the threat and the need for a unified response. However, the success of this initiative will depend on the EU's ability to coordinate effectively, address root causes of terrorism, and engage with global partners in a comprehensive manner.