Despite Britain rejecting the huge divorce fee levelled
against it by the EU, another £86bn extra demand has been made by Brussels
asking member states to spend fund the union’s controversial army battlegroups.
It appears the EU will is wanting to mount pressure on the
British payer for the country to be able to make its own share of the fund, the
essence of the fund includes winding up failing operations in Africa, despite
Britain preparing to leave the bloc.
EU leaders appears to be so resolute to force Britain to pay
for The Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP).
The defence report explained that there is "need for
deeper discussions on the future relation between the Union and the United
Kingdom in CSDP matters, and in particular in the field of military
capabilities, should the UK decide to trigger Article 50 TEU".
Notwithstanding the enormous expenditure demands, the EU
admits at least one project in landlocked Mali in Africa is failing after three
years due to lack of powers.
The report states: "European soldiers are currently
prohibited from taking part in military operations as observers, which means
that they cannot identify any problems that the units that have been trained
may have, and that they are therefore unable to resolve any operational
problems at a later stage.
"These units – both in Mali and in the Central African
Republic – are being set up for combat operations, and whereas after three
years without appropriate equipment and training, as is the case for EUTM Mali,
they are nowhere near operational.
"Without the necessary armaments, training missions
will only be carried out abroad if the government of the country concerned
provides armaments and hardware to the units that they can then continue to use
after their training is complete.”
Ukip defence spokesman Bill Etheridge hit out at the plans
and said: "Since the declaration of St Malo was signed in 1998 to advance
the creation of a Common Securirty and Defence policy an EU Army has been
happening - regardless of what you call it.
"Former Commission President Romano Prodi called for an
EU Army in 1999, saying it was ‘inevitable’. In the face of all these
semantics, perhaps he put it best when he said: ‘When I was talking about a
European Army, I was not joking.
“’If you do not want to call it a European Army, do not call
it a European Army.
“’You can call it 'Margaret', you can call it 'Mary-Anne',
you can find any name, but it is a joint effort for peace-keeping missions -
the first time you have a joint, not bilateral, effort at European level.'
"The Lisbon Treaty we signed up to put this on the
statue books.
"It is happening and pretending it isn't or that we
haven't contributed financially or diplomatically won't change that.
"The UK taxpayer must not pay one penny piece into
funding EU battlegroups: the priority for us is to build up our own weakened
military and reverse the chronic underfunding of previous governments.”
Mr Etheridge also said Government "must rule out any
money from the UK being spent on an EU military, particularly when we have a
recruitment and retention crisis in the UK Armed Forces and they are so short
of cash they are even trying to cancel secure communications from loved ones to
those serving abroad”.
The MEP said the UK "must have no operational role in
any EU battlegroups and instead concentrate on meeting our NATO commitments”.
Speaking further, he stressed that: ”Unlike the EU, which
admits it has spent three years in Mali achieving nothing, NATO has bite.”
Mr Etheridge urged the Secretary of State for Defence to
rule out any aid post Brexit and said there must be no "back door routes
keeping us tied into any EU military projects”.
He further said: "The British people voted against an
EU military, despite being spun lies that it was not happening - they knew it
was and they are vehemently opposed to it.”
"Far from a serious fighting force, this is more of a
red herring: quite frankly you see more pirates captured in an episode of
Poldark."
No comments:
Write comments