Disclaimer: This site has been first put up 15 years ago. Since then I would probably do a couple things differently, but because I've noticed this site had been linked from news outlets, PhD theses and peer rewieved papers and because I really hate the concept of "digital dark age" I've decided to put it back up. There's no chance it can produce any harm now.
| Identifier: | 05BRUSSELS2918 |
|---|---|
| Wikileaks: | View 05BRUSSELS2918 at Wikileaks.org |
| Origin: | Embassy Brussels |
| Created: | 2005-08-04 10:29:00 |
| Classification: | UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY |
| Tags: | PREL MOPS FR EUN KCRS USEU BRUSSELS |
| Redacted: | This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks. |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 BRUSSELS 002918 SIPDIS SENSITIVE DEPT FOR EUR/ERA AND S/CRS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PREL, MOPS, FR, EUN, KCRS, USEU BRUSSELS SUBJECT: S/CRS DEEPENS EU CIVILIAN CRISIS RESPONSE CONTACTS 1. (SBU) Summary: On 25 July, staff from the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization (S/CRS) met with various EU bodies dealing with civilian crisis management. Director of Planning Barbara Stephenson emphasized to the Committee for Civilian Aspects of Crisis Management (CIVCOM) that "conceptual convergence" with likely partners such as the EU, NATO, and the UN is a top priority for S/CRS planning efforts. Stephenson also discussed with the director and staff of the civ-mil cell their role in coordinating EU crisis response measures, including an EU operations center. Stephenson then met with members of DG E IX (the Council Secretariat,s civilian crisis management unit) to hear about EUJUST LEX, the EU,s rule of law and police mission in Iraq, and to share ideas on furthering U.S.-EU cooperation efforts. They concluded that in-depth discussion would be hampered by the lack of a U.S.-EU security agreement permitting the sharing of classified materials. End Summary. 2. (SBU) Director of Planning Barbara Stephenson and Associate Director for Planning and International Relations Matthew Cordova from S/CRS met July 25 with several EU Council bodies to present information, share perspectives, and exchange ideas on the issue of civilian crisis response planning. They met first with member state representatives of the Committee for Civilian Aspects of Crisis Management (CIVCOM) and gave a presentation of the S/CRS planning framework for conflict transformation before participating in a Q&A session. 3. (SBU) Asked about cooperation with NATO on crisis response, Stephenson said that while the US conducts operations that are military in nature through the Alliance, there are areas where cooperation can be taken forward regarding civilian crisis response. This would include cooperation between the U.S. and the EU, between the EU and NATO, and within NATO. She mentioned that one opportunity for the EU could be to observe or participate in future Multinational Interagency Group (MNIG) exercises. These crisis response exercises, which give a lead role to civilians, will include a significant rule of law component. In response to questions concerning resources, Stephenson said early consultation is key, both inside and outside USG, to synthesize objectives when personnel and funding from different sources are brought together to respond to crises. She also emphasized that achieving "conceptual convergence" with likely partners such as the EU, NATO, and the UN is the top priority for S/CRS planning efforts and international outreach in the next six months. 4. (SBU) Stephenson met subsequently with senior staff of the newly operational civilian-military cell, which, according to its terms of reference, assists in crisis response strategic contingency planning for civilian, military, and integrated operations. Eight of its twenty-nine officers also serve as the core staff for an eventual EU operations center, which can be augmented by an additional hundred or so officers if it is activated to run an autonomous EU operation when no national HQ can be identified. The staff said it is working closely with DG E IX (the civilian crisis management unit within the Council Secretariat) to ensure that the objectives, documents, training, and other elements of the military Headline Goal 2010 and the civilian Headline Goal 2008 are compatible and mutually reinforcing. 5. (SBU) The head of the civ-mil cell, Brigadier General Horst-Heinrich Brauss explained that the Headline Goal 2010 strives to develop capabilities that match the ambitions of the European Security Strategy and to enable the EU to carry out the so-called Petersberg tasks (peacekeeping operations, humanitarian and rescue missions, and other crisis management tasks for combat forces) through the establishment of the European Defense Agency, deployable battlegroups, and other milestones. Headline Goal 2008 calls for "integrated civilian crisis management packages" (consisting of experts in police, rule of law, civil administration, civil protection, monitoring, and other support tasks) that can deploy by themselves or in close coordination with military efforts. Its key aims include drawing up a Capabilities Requirements List and illustrative training scenarios, for which the cell has been providing input. Cooperation between the civilian and military aspects of crisis management planning is facilitated by the fact that both units work in the same building and can therefore establish personal connections. 6. (SBU) Brauss said that the civ-mil cell, with its civilian planners working alongside military officers, embodies the EU,s desire to institutionalize the integrated approach of its European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP). He noted, however, that coordination across the Council-Commission divide has been difficult to accomplish but is important given that the Commission controls the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) budget that finances civilian ESDP operations. The cell is also located within, and shares personnel with, the EU Military Staff, and this has been a sticking point for those wishing to see equal emphasis on the civilian aspect of the cell. 7. (SBU) General Brauss was insistent on the need for the EU to have the capability to plan and run integrated operations. He characterized himself as a committed Atlanticist, but defended the concept of an EU ops center. He said that it would be technically possible for the EU to turn to NATO for planning assets via Berlin Plus arrangements but the process had proven difficult and cumbersome when implemented for the EUFOR takeover in Bosnia. He also argued that the military planning structures at SHAPE are not necessarily suited for the agile and flexible planning required for short-fuse integrated missions. Brauss was hopeful that the projected permanent EU-NATO liaison cells would provide the mechanism to ensure broader EU-NATO coordination in crisis management. (Note: Planning for the reciprocal liaison cells is in the final stages. On 29 July, NATO SYG Jaap de Hoop Scheffer sent SG/HR Solana the Terms of Reference document and a letter indicating NATO is prepared to agree to the EU team's proposals (sent to NATO in December) and to "(implement) the agreements in parallel once the details of the staffing arrangements have been settled in both organizations." End note.) 8. (SBU) Another problem Brauss discussed with S/CRS was the formal channel through which the cell is supposed to receive its orders to initiate strategic contingency planning. He called it "ideal" if SG/HR Solana or the Political and Security Committee (PSC) had the time to direct the cell,s work by receiving input from member states and consulting the early warning watch list compiled by the Council Secretariat,s Joint Situation Centre (SITCEN), but more SIPDIS often than not the cell,s planning was dictated by unforeseen crises or appeals. He cited the example of Aceh, a civilian monitoring mission for which the cell has been given primary planning responsibility, which originated from a request "out of the blue" by UNSR Ahtisaari, not by member states or SITCEN. Brauss said that the cell has already drawn up a crisis management concept for the ceasefire-monitoring mission despite the fact that the details of the ceasefire have yet to be finalized. 9. (SBU) Stephenson then met with EU JUST LEX Head of Mission Stephen White and DG E IX Deputy Director Veronica Cody. White shared some of the principles underlying the Iraq mission, which is the first EU mission to combine EU civilian crisis response "instruments" (in this case, rule of law and police). Based on his experience in Northern Ireland, White designed the program to train police and judges together to foster trust and cooperation, and he focused on three objectives: 1) make security paramount for everyone involved, from trainers to trainees; 2) involve Iraqis throughout every stage of the mission; and 3) remain flexible and responsive to changes in the environment. 10. (SBU) Cody and Stephenson shared ideas about how the EU and the U.S. could further cooperation on civilian crisis response. Cody identified personnel exchanges as being helpful (including having Americans attend courses at the newly established European Security and Defense College, though it has yet to accept third party participants), and offered to provide top EU speakers for the USNATO-USEU pol-mil conference on October 12-14. She also said that DG E IX has an interest in collaboration in gaming and experiments to improve strategic design and advanced civilian-military planning for transitional security and the rule of law. Cody and Stephenson agreed that more digital video conferences should take place between DG E IX and S/CRS, but they concluded that in-depth discussions would be hampered by the lack of a U.S.-EU security agreement permitting the sharing of classified materials. 11. (SBU) Comment: These meetings provided useful firsthand insights on how the EU views its aspirations and capabilities for civilian crisis management. EU officials appear aware of and open to some form of EU-U.S. and EU-NATO cooperation given their limited experience and resources. That said, they will want to move forward and keep developing their own mechanisms for planning and implementation. We should work closely with them to coordinate in ways that meet our requirements and those of NATO in this area. Such collaboration may also serve to as a bridge linking EU and NATO operations in the future. End comment. MCKINLEY .
Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04