REPORT on the implementation of civilian CSDP and other EU civilian security assistance
28.3.2023 - (2022/2196(INI))
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Rapporteur: Alviina Alametsä
MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION
on the implementation of civilian CSDP and other EU civilian security assistance
– having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),
– having regard to Title V of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), in particular Chapter Two, Section Two thereof on provisions on the common security and defence policy (CSDP),
– having regard to the Presidency conclusions of the European Council summit meeting at Santa Maria da Feira on 19 and 20 June 2000,
– having regard to Civilian Headline Goal 2008, approved by the European Council on 17 December 2004,
– having regard to the new Civilian Headline Goal 2008, approved by the European Council on 19 November 2007,
– having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 11 December 2013 entitled ‘The EU’s comprehensive approach to external conflict and crises’ (JOIN(2013)0030),
– having regard to the Council conclusions of 22 January 2018 on the Integrated Approach to External Conflicts and Crises,
– having regard to the conclusions of the Council and of the representatives of the governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, of 19 November 2018, on the establishment of a Civilian CSDP Compact,
– having regard to the Council conclusions of 10 December 2018 on Women, Peace and Security,
– having regard to the Council conclusions on women, peace and security of 14 November 2022,
– having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 25 November 2020 entitled ‘EU Gender Action Plan (GAP) III – an ambitious agenda for gender equality and women’s empowerment in EU external action’ (JOIN(2020)0017), to the EU Strategic Approach to Women, Peace and Security of 10 December 2018 and the accompanying Action Plan of 4 July 2019, and to the European External Action Service (EEAS) Strategy and Action Plan of 21 December 2021 to Enhance Women’s Participation in Civilian CSDP Missions 2021-2024,
– having regard to the Council conclusions on youth in external action of 5 June 2020,
– having regard to the Council’s Climate Change and Defence Roadmap of 9 November 2020,
– having regard to the Council’s Concept for an Integrated Approach on Climate Change and Security of 5 October 2021,
– having regard to the third Annual Review Conference of the Civilian CSDP Compact held in Brussels on 19 November 2021,
– having regard to the fourth and final Annual Review Conference of the Civilian CSDP Compact on 16 November 2022,
– having regard to the Council conclusions on Civilian CSDP Compact of 13 December 2021,
– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/947 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 June 2021 establishing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe, amending and repealing Decision No 466/2014/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Regulation (EU) 2017/1601 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 480/2009[1] (the NDICI Regulation),
– having regard to the ‘Strategic Compass for Security and Defence – For a European Union that protects its citizens, values and interests and contributes to international peace and security’, approved by the Council on 21 March 2022 and endorsed by the European Council on 25 March 2022,
– having regard to the Council Conclusions on the Civilian CSDP Compact of 12 December 2022,
– having regard to the EEAS Report on the Follow-up Baseline Study on Integrating Human Rights and Gender Equality into the European Union’s Common Security and Defence Policy of 30 March 2022,
– having regard to Rule 54 of its Rules of Procedure,
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A9-0091/2023),
A. whereas civilian crisis management has become established as a key pillar of the EU’s CSDP since 1999 in conflict prevention, stabilisation and promotion of sustainable peace; whereas 20 years have gone by since the civilian EU Police Mission (EUPM) in Bosnia and Herzegovina was launched in 2003 as the very first CSDP mission; whereas civilian crisis management has its basis in the Treaties and the Feira priorities of 2000; whereas the Member States are responsible for providing missions’ capability requirements, pursuant to Article 42 TEU; whereas the EU currently maintains 12 civilian missions and, in its 20 years of civilian crisis management, has launched 24 missions on three different continents, which shows that the demand for civilian crisis management has grown, also as a result of Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression against Ukraine; whereas civilian missions are crucial within the EU’s wider response to security challenges through non-military means and require effective training and operational capabilities to keep pace with the evolving threat environment to Europe’s east and south; whereas the deteriorating security environment and humanitarian crisis in and around the European Union has resulted in greater demands on CSDP missions, thereby putting significant strain on the common foreign and security policy (CFSP) budget;
B. whereas one of the objectives of the EU Strategic Compass is to reinforce EU civilian and military CSDP missions and operations by providing them with more robust and flexible mandates, promoting rapid and more flexible decision-making processes and ensuring greater financial solidarity; whereas the EU identity of CSDP missions reinforces the EU as a legitimate civilian power; whereas the EU is committed to becoming a more assertive and decisive security provider, better prepared to tackle present and future threats and challenges, and to defend the European and global security order together with its partners; whereas the civilian CSDP is a unique instrument for the EU to respond to the most urgent crises with civilian means; whereas the CSDP’s access to both planning, resources and logistics gives it the potential to become the primary enabler of civilian crisis management during emergencies and whereas it should be used as a practice hub of societal resilience and recovery in the face of both human-induced and natural disasters; whereas it should allow CSDP missions and operations to adapt swiftly to new threats and challenges, and increase their effectiveness, also in view of the new security context and the growing presence of our strategic competitors in operational theatres; whereas in the current geopolitical context, a more effective civilian CSDP is urgently needed; whereas the EU and the Member States agreed to reinforce civilian CSDP through a new Compact allowing for faster deployment, also in complex environments;
C. whereas the 2001 Gothenburg Council decided to deploy 200 judges and prosecutors, a pool of experts in the area of civilian administration and civil protection teams of up to 2 000 people; whereas the 2010 Civilian Headline Goal (CHG) added 285 experts on conflict analysis, transitional justice and dialogue, as well as the creation of Civilian Response Teams (CRT), a 100-person strong pool of experts;
D. whereas civilian CSDP contributes to the Integrated Approach to Conflicts and Crises in areas such as policing, the rule of law, civil administration, security sector reform (SSR)and monitoring in line with Articles 42 and 43 TEU, and is accompanied by complementary measures implemented in the context of the EU’s Global Europe instrument, strengthening international security;
E. whereas the adoption of the Civilian CSDP Compact in 2018 was a significant step forward in strengthening the EU’s civilian crisis management capacity, enhancing Member States’ ownership, responsibility and contribution of resources; whereas a higher level of political and technical commitment and of human and economic resources, are needed from the Member States to deliver on the agreed objectives that are yet to be fulfilled and to increase the legitimacy of these missions;
F. whereas civilian CSDP tasks have, over the years, broadened to include, inter alia, transitional justice, mediation, dialogue and conflict analysis, supporting the implementation of reforms with practical advice, training and equipment, and whereas they must adapt, without delay, to new and emerging challenges such as hybrid threats, including cyberattacks, the instrumentalisation of migration, foreign interference, influence and information manipulation, terrorism and radicalisation, maritime security, organised crime and the protection of cultural heritage; whereas EU CSDP missions and operations are also targeted by hybrid threats, including disinformation, putting their effectiveness in stabilising the country in which they are deployed at risk; whereas climate change and environmental degradation severely affect the operational environment of crisis management and require increasing attention in the planning and implementation of civilian missions;
G. whereas many conflict-affected areas have a large population of young people; whereas young people should be actively engaged in creating sustainable peace and security, contributing to conflict prevention and peacebuilding, including the promotion of the rule of law, justice, and reconciliation; whereas the EU is committed to promoting children’s rights in its external action, but this commitment is not yet being implemented in the context of CSDP;
H. whereas the EU is committed to putting the Women, Peace and Security agenda at the centre of its CFSP and the Member States are committed to promoting better representation of women in CSDP missions, but the civilian CSDP Compact of 2018 fails to set a concrete target for women’s representation in civilian missions and makes no reference to gender parity;
I. whereas the representation of women in CSDP missions and operations remained unchanged over the five-year period between 2015-2020; whereas in the civilian HQ structures (the Integrated Approach to Security and Peace Directorate (ISPD), the Security and Defence Policy Directorate (SECDEFPOL) and the Civilian Planning and Conduct Capability (CPCC)) women constitute around 50 % of all staff, but they continue to be under-represented in management positions (30 %);
J. whereas as of 2017, a pre-deployment training session involving human rights and gender equality elements has been mandatory for all staff; whereas more than a third of respondents surveyed for the EEAS Report on the Follow-up Baseline Study on Integrating Human Rights and Gender Equality into the European Union’s Common Security and Defence Policy did not receive such a session;
K. whereas the Member States are due to adopt a new Civilian CSDP Compact by May 2023 in order to continue efforts towards a more effective and capable civilian CSDP missions, taking into account the increasing security challenges at a global level in particular; whereas the changing geopolitical landscape and changing security environment, including conflicts around the European Union and on European soil, as well as Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression against Ukraine, disinformation, terrorism and hybrid and malign threats, requires full commitment in order to strengthen civilian CSDP through a new Civilian CSDP Compact;
Enhancing the strategic vision for civilian crisis management
1. Stresses that EU civilian crisis management makes important contributions to international peace and security, and plays a key role in implementing the EU’s Integrated Approach to External Conflicts and Crises;
2. Recalls that crisis management lies at the heart of the EU’s CSDP, in particular through its military and civilian missions and operation; recalls that a key take-away from the 2020 threat analysis was the need to strengthen the EU’s ability to react quickly to crises and to enhance its overall preparedness; underlines, therefore, the importance of the assignments entrusted to the personnel serving in civilian CSDP missions, which implies for Member States the necessity to provide relevant profiles to increase national contributions to civilian CSDP missions, and for the EEAS to implement an attentive HR policy; notes that the EU also plays a key role in providing jobs for international and local staff;
3. Calls for the Member States to use the new Civilian CSDP Compact to strengthen their strategic vision of civilian crisis management by clarifying the role, effectiveness and added value of civilian CSDP, and by defining a shared level of ambition for civilian crisis management;
4. Recalls that the threat analysis preceding the adoption of the Strategic Compass in 2022 was a unique effort to bring the EU’s security and defence doctrine up to date; invites the Member States and the EEAS to take advantage of the analysis in their discussions on the future of civilian crisis management and the envisaged use of the civilian CSDP instrument;
5. Believes that traditional civilian CSDP tasks such as policing, the rule of law, civil administration, SSR, monitoring, disarmament and demobilisation remain more relevant than ever to stabilise and modernise the security and justice sectors; underlines the need to continue updating and enlarging tasks in the framework of the Integrated Approach and the Treaties in light of the new risks and threats that have emerged and have thus led to a new security environment; stresses the need to integrate and strengthen cross-cutting issues, in particular:
a) human security,
b) security needs and ownership of the host governments and local populations,
c) gender sensitivity, equality and women, peace and security agenda (WPS),
d) the youth, peace and security agenda, children and armed conflict,
e) mediation, dialogue and reconciliation,
f) meaningful engagement with civil society,
g) the security-climate nexus,
h) civil-military interaction, by promoting the rule of law and accountability, including by strengthening the justice chain and capabilities to respond effectively to security challenges,
i) the civilian aspects of disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration,
j) the fight against corruption,
k) monitoring and countering disinformation campaigns,
l) the protection and preservation of cultural heritage;
6. Stresses the need to mainstream in a more proactive manner the concepts of human security, the security needs of the local population, gender sensitivity, parliamentary oversight, transparency and the accountability of the local security sector in the mission’s mandate and operations;
7. Highlights that success of civilian CSDP missions is highly dependent on openness to the host country’s perspectives and ownership; encourages the use of tailor-made approaches, the active involvement of and cooperation with the host government, civil society and the local population; stresses, therefore, the importance of local ownership throughout the implementation of the mission’s mandate, from design to implementation, monitoring and evaluation; stresses the necessity for personnel of civilian CSDP missions to build trust-based relations with the host governments, civil society and local populations, which requires situational awareness, cultural understanding and knowledge of local languages; welcomes the EEAS operational guidelines for proactive civil society engagement in CSDP missions; recalls that civilian missions must pay special attention to conflict dynamics, robust risk assessment and mitigation processes, and must include more impact-based monitoring and evaluation of CSDP interventions, as well as more consultation and feedback mechanisms; recommends that safe and secure formal, informal and anonymous channels be set up for mission feedback and complaints from civil society, in order to help the EU develop a better understanding of the effectiveness of its operations;
8. Notes that in some cases, the success of civilian CSDP missions is jeopardised by the failure of the host governments to meet their reform commitments; calls, therefore, for intensified cooperation with the host countries and equal attention for training and institutional reforms; calls for the EU’s integrated approach, which encompasses the civilian CSDP missions, development and assistance aid, to be used to provide civilian CSDP missions with the leverage needed to keep the host governments on track to meet their commitments and to adhere to fundamental freedoms and human rights; highlights the importance of the civilian CSDP missions coordinating with other international partners engaged in similar activities in the host country; notes that civilian CSDP missions often take place in countries and regions contested by state and non-state actors ready to undermine the EU’s capacity and credibility as a security provider; emphasises, in this regard, that all EU engagements must be credible in the eyes of local and regional populations and authorities, building on close and honest cooperation with host nations, and must maintain frequent communication between mission personnel, national authorities and the broader population; calls, therefore, for the EU and its Member States to enhance their strategic communication on civilian crisis management, in order to garner political support within the EU and in countries where missions take place, providing tailor-made strategic communication for each mission, highlighting the objectives and values of the mission and the benefits to the local population, as well as supporting more effective recruitment of qualified personnel to civilian CSDP missions, including women;
9. Believes that civilian CSDP should be part of a broader political strategy addressing the root causes of conflict, including climate change; recalls that missions should be informed by climate-sensitive conflict analyses and calls for the further mainstreaming of climate change and environmental degradation in civilian crisis management; stresses that the climate-security nexus must be included in the Compact 2.0, outlining clearly how it can be operationalised in the context of civilian crisis management; reiterates the call of the Council in its conclusions of December 2022, for missions and operations to take concrete steps to reduce their environmental footprint with the aim of achieving climate neutrality by 2050, in line with the goals set out under the European Green Deal;
10. Stresses the importance of assessing civilian CSDP efforts in specific fields, in particular addressing the new and emerging security challenges such as the instrumentalisation of migration, maritime security and organised crime; regrets the prevailing shortfalls in the EU’s capacity to pre-empt and detect hybrid threats, particularly information manipulation, which directly affect the success of civilian CSDP missions; welcomes, in this regard, the decision to develop an EU hybrid toolbox for a coordinated response to hybrid campaigns; welcomes, furthermore, the joint communication on an EU cyber defence policy, noting the importance of cyber resilience for CSDP missions, while stressing the need to further develop the EU’s cyber defence policy and capabilities, including the setting up of cyber rapid response teams and their expansion towards supporting civilian CSDP missions; reiterates the urgent need to develop their strategic communication capabilities, including secure communication systems drawing on the EU’s secure connectivity programme, as well as including a common platform for the sharing of knowledge between the CPCC and operations in the field, making use of technological innovation, while strengthening the cyber awareness and resilience of CSDP missions; calls for the cyber resilience of the overall CPCC structures and CSDP missions to be enhanced;
11. Calls for the Member States and the EEAS to address the consistent and growing threats to the protection and preservation of cultural heritage and clamp down on the smuggling of cultural artefacts, particularly in conflict zones;
12. Calls for the new Civilian CSDP Compact to be used to strive for the full, equal and meaningful participation of women in civilian CSDP; highlights women’s significant contribution in CSDP missions’ and operations’ success and as a driver of the EU’s credibility as a proponent of equal rights for men and women worldwide; recalls the EU’s Gender Action Plan (GAP) III (2020-2024), which requires the systematic integration of a gender perspective into all EU policies and external actions, including the CSDP; urges the Member States and the EEAS to promote an increase in the number of women in CSDP operations, including, as a first step, to aim to increase the participation of women to at least 40 % across missions and at all levels by 2024; recommends that the Member States endorse the CPCC’s Strategy and Action Plan to enhance women’s participation in civilian CSDP missions for 2021-2024; calls, therefore, on the Member States to commit to gradually achieving gender parity in the appointments of heads of mission and other senior leadership positions; encourages their close cooperation with local civil society actors in promoting gender equality and gender mainstreaming where possible;
13. Calls for effective operationalisation of child protection and the children in armed conflict agenda, as well as the Youth, Peace and Security agenda, in civilian crisis management, to actively engage young people in the design and implementation of missions and operations, and to apply a youth-sensitive approach to conflict analysis;
14. Stresses that anticipating future changes in the security environment is key to ensuring that civilian crisis management will achieve its strategic objectives; calls for the new Civilian CSDP Compact to implement more scenario-based planning, strategic foresight and conflict analysis, and early warning in decision-making on missions and mandates;
15. Calls on the CPCC, the EUMCC and the EU Military Staff to develop a model for generating and sharing best practice campaign and/or mission planning concepts that are shared at the earliest stage possible with partners vital to campaign success;
16. Calls on the CPCC and the EU Military Planning and Conduct Capability (MPCC) to emphasise the professional civil-military education of all staff in CSDP missions by utilising the European Security and Defence College to help shape the expertise of civil and defence professionals in order to ensure that CSDP personnel can better recognise and respond to the complexity of the security challenges evident in their countries of deployment;
17. Calls on the EEAS, MPCC, CPCC and CSDP HQs to foster a new culture of understanding between civilian and military partners based on enhanced institutional relationships and shared awareness and assessment in an effort to develop a comprehensive planning framework and culture;
18. Urges the Member States, the Commission and the EEAS to develop a concrete plan on how to implement the integrated approach and ensure that all relevant EU and Member States’ instruments (Military CSDP, Global Europe, the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance) are applied coherently and lead more efficiently to the achievement of the EU’s overall objectives; calls for further efforts to manage the transition between the different political and technical instruments of the EU;
19. Highlights the importance of cooperation, including closer coordination on mandates with partners such as the UN, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and NATO, in addressing present and future security threats and challenges;
20. Urges the Member States to invite and involve EU candidate countries on a case-by-case basis to contribute and take part in civilian CSDP missions; calls for assistance for the interested countries in order to train and prepare them for such participation; recalls, in this regard, the added value that partnerships with third countries can bring to civilian CSDP missions; welcomes the support from third countries when it comes to Ukraine and recalls that countries such as Norway, Iceland, Australia, Switzerland, the United States, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom could also bring considerable political and financial resources to the civilian CSDP missions; invites the Commission to re-visit its framework for participation agreements with third-country partners, as the number of third-country seconded experts has decreased from 200 to 10 since 2010;
Implementing the Compact
21. Takes note of the achievements of the 2018 Compact in engaging Member States in the development of their National Implementation Plans (NIPs), including through structured dialogue and the exchange of good practices and lessons learned, and further building on them through structured and regular capability processes to be agreed upon, and promoting regional cooperation and joint actions between the Member States;
22. Supports initiatives aimed at developing a train and equip instrument for civilian missions in order to enhance the EU’s capacity to support third countries and to respond to their concrete expectations and needs; calls, therefore, for these efforts to be continued, for more numerical targets to be set and timelines for all actions to be established, including identifying the responsible entities;
23. Underlines the challenges that civilian CSDP missions face, such as the availability of capabilities and resources, responsiveness, the lack of key performance indicators, swifter decision-making and more scalable, adaptable, modular missions and clearer mandates, and that these were already highlighted in the first Compact, which has led to an increased focus on civilian CSDP, but not to full operationalisation and the corresponding increase in participation and ownership by Member States, which need to be addressed as a matter of urgency in the new Civilian CSDP Compact;
24. Takes note of the number of long-running civilian CSDP missions, which highlights the need for well-defined objectives, both political and operational, and for exit strategies and their evaluation; calls for the introduction of exit strategies for civilian missions, with metrics to measure their success, allowing for the swifter closure of missions when operational and political objectives have been met and also when they have not been met, or when it is no longer possible to meet the relevant security, political or strategic conditions in the country of establishment; calls, therefore, for a frank political discussion on closing missions which do not create the desired impact, which risks legitimising the absence of progress in the host country;
25. Notes that the only assessments of civilian CSDP missions’ mandates currently in place are Strategic Reviews feeding into the renewal, adaptation or closure of the mission; stresses the importance of developing and establishing a system and methodology to assess the performance of missions, their effectiveness and their financial management; stresses, in this regard, the importance of an impartial and independent mechanism to evaluate the impact of missions; welcomes the options paper on evaluation presented by the EEAS to this end; recalls that the evaluation of civilian CSDP missions and their effectiveness must be adequately resourced and that systematic evaluations should feed into the political decision making on both current and future missions;
26. Welcomes the EEAS-CPCC operational guidelines to provide tools for civilian CSDP missions to be proactive in engaging with civil society actors as key partners at all levels and stages of processes; welcomes the EEAS operational guidelines on human rights mainstreaming and human rights due diligence, and calls for their effective implementation, in particular, by establishing clear internal procedures for managing the human rights-related risks associated with the security sector support;
Enhance and deliver the capabilities to match the Compact’s level of ambition
27. Calls on the EEAS to develop, together with the relevant Commission services and Member States, a structured and regular civilian Capability Development Process to assess the availabilities of Member States’ capability needs, develop requirements, conduct a gap analysis and periodically review progress; encourages the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy to explore the possibility of providing financial incentives to support the Member States in their capability development efforts, as indicated in the 2018 Civilian Compact, while at the same time reminding the Member States to maintain a commitment in the new Compact to develop the full range of capabilities needed to undertake and sustain civilian crisis management missions;
28. Regrets the fact that in spite of being one of the core commitments in the Compact, civilian CSDP missions persistently suffer from Member States not delivering on their pledges to provide sufficient personnel, with 10 Member States currently providing 78 % of seconded personnel, and 17 Member States only 22 %; calls on the Member States to maintain a commitment in the new Compact to raise jointly the number and share of seconded personnel across all missions and at all levels, while aiming to provide seconded staff to fill 100 % of all operational positions and at least 60 % of the seconded staff for non-operational positions; calls on the Member States to harmonise their secondment of staff in order to reduce the disruptive impact of the uncoordinated turnover of staff across missions; further calls on the Member States to ensure that seconded staff are rewarded for their participation in EU missions through career development policies; calls on the EEAS to review the current situation and establish indicators for Member States that measure turnover and post occupancy rates based on job category and employment type;
29. Stresses the need to reform the human resources policy and management system, and to ensure that the working conditions in civilian CSDP missions contribute to a safer and more inclusive environment, particularly for women; welcomes the EEAS’s efforts to address weaknesses in the support provided to staff in missions, including the revision of the Code of Conduct, with a particular focus on human rights principles, and to develop a model for generating and sharing best practice campaign and/or mission planning concepts; stresses the need to set up a network of Confidential Counsellors; calls for a formalised, meaningful and systematic process of consultation with representatives of the personnel serving in EU civilian security missions; calls on the EEAS to examine ways to reduce staff turnover and vacancy rates, including among other things, by extending deployment time;
30. Deplores the stretched resources of the EEAS in the field of civilian CSDP in general, including the CPCC, which currently provides support to 12 missions of 2 200 personnel with a staff of 110 people; calls for the Member States to ensure the rapid development of the CPCC into a fully functional operational headquarters, by ensuring it has the necessary funds, personnel and expertise at its disposal; stresses the need for the MPCC to plan and conduct all military missions with a clear chain of command and to be provided with the necessary personnel, funds and infrastructure; stresses the need to increase civilian-military coordination and interaction at EU level and to increase complementarity and synergies with military CSDP, while keeping the civilian and military chains of command separate;
31. Stresses that training is key for effectiveness, which is in turn essential for successful civilian CSDP missions; calls for a comprehensive assessment of the overall civilian CSDP training architecture in order to identify needs, gaps and overlaps in training within the Member States with a view to improving and harmonising the EU Policy on Training for CSDP, in particular with a focus on the needs of local populations; believes that the core elements and concepts of human rights and gender mainstreaming should be systematically included in pre-deployment and induction training; recalls that training for civilian CSDP missions needs to equip personnel with the knowledge, understanding, skills and attitude required in complex cultural environments, including in relation to the needs of the local populations, and therefore should include sessions on international humanitarian law, human rights, gender equality, civilian-military cooperation, human security, conflict sensitivity, anti-racism and intercultural communication;
32. Calls on the Commission, the EEAS, the CPCC and the MPCC to better adapt to building interagency working groups, using exercises and training to help develop the best practice, interagency cooperation and robust cross-function personal relationships critical to effective civilian-military partnerships in places such as the Eastern Partnership countries;
33. Stresses the importance of fighting adverse disinformation aimed at Civilian CSDP missions; calls further for enhanced training for the missions’ staff on pre-empting, detecting and addressing hybrid threats, particularly information manipulation; notes an increase in the cooperation between EEAS StratCom and EU missions to counter the disinformation operations targeting them; calls for this cooperation to involve all EU missions abroad and to ensure the provision of well-trained personnel at each mission, responsible for monitoring, reporting and countering disinformation where possible; considers that the large-scale disinformation strategy should be countered by a comprehensive, efficient and coordinated action plan of the EEAS and the EU, with the active support of missions and delegations;
34. Calls for the implementation of sustainable, long-term capacity building and training, where possible and where required, such as ‘train-the-trainer’ programmes, in order to ensure the long-term viability and success of the missions; calls for the CSDP mission mandates to include advisory and training tasks for dealing with emerging technologies;
35. Recalls that knowledge management (KM) is key, and forms an essential part of operationalising the Integrated Approach; stresses the importance of developing a KM architecture to retain expertise, foster best practices and learn lessons, in a more systematic way, as well as encourage a culture of learning among the staff working in and on civilian CSDP missions; takes positive note of the current efforts in the EEAS and the CPCC to this end; calls on the Member States to support the establishment of dedicated KM and evaluation experts in the field and in the CPCC;
Paying renewed and focused attention to current missions
36. Welcomes the revision of the mandate of EU Advisory Mission in Ukraine, to implement new tasks to support Ukraine in the face of Russia’s war of aggression; recalls that strong civilian security support to Ukraine will be instrumental to its reconstruction and path towards EU membership; calls for the EU and its Member States to further step up their support to civilian capability development in Ukraine, including fighting corruption, establishing an effective rule of law system and enhancing cyber and hybrid resilience; commends the work and physical presence in the territory of Ukraine of the 79 staff of the EU civilian mission (EUAM) Ukraine; encourages the mission to continue its work in support of Ukraine in the documentation and investigation of war crimes; calls on the Commission, in the context of accession negotiations with Ukraine, to engage as soon as possible with EUAM Ukraine to build on its experience on security issues, its long-standing partnership with the Ukrainian authorities and its strong presence on the ground; underlines the relevant support the mission is bringing in the field of criminal investigations;
37. Welcomes the swift deployment of European Union Monitoring Mission (EUMM) Georgia monitors to the Armenia-Azerbaijan border as an important stabilising measure to reduce tensions between the two countries; encourages the EEAS to explore possibilities for further cooperation between civilian CSDP missions along similar lines; considers this a positive example of modular and scalable mandates, as promoted in the Strategic Compass, which could be further enhanced by using rapid response tools such as Specialised Teams and Visiting Experts; stresses that all such innovations and improved flexibility must be based on a fully integrated approach in crisis response actions, in order to maximise the impact on the ground and ensure the efficient use of budgets;
38. Welcomes the recent establishment of the civilian European Union Mission in Armenia (EUMA) with the aim of contributing to stability in the border areas of Armenia, of building confidence on the ground, and of ensuring an environment conducive to normalisation efforts between Armenia and Azerbaijan; calls for the mission to contribute to any dialogue and initiative leading to greater peace and security in the region; calls on the Azerbaijani authorities to allow EUMA access to the Lachin Corridor in order to assess the situation on the ground and contribute to its resolution;
39. Acknowledges that the critical support of the European Union Rule of Law Mission (EULEX) Kosovo has recently contributed to lowering tensions and restoring confidence in northern Kosovo; urges the EU Member States to continue supporting the mission by mobilising and sending badly needed Formed Police Units on the ground;
40. Stresses the importance of EUAM Iraq, the European Union Border Assistance Mission (EUBAM) to Rafah, the European Union Police Mission for the Palestinian Territories (EUPOL COPPS) currently deployed in the Middle East region; calls for all possible synergies between the two missions deployed in Palestine;
41. Expresses concerns about the political and security developments in Libya; urges the Libyan authorities to facilitate the work of EUBAM Libya in the implementation of its mandate and in its entire functional scope;
42. Expresses appreciation for the achievement of the five civilian CSDP Missions in Africa and calls for the continued implementation of their mandates; calls on the EEAS to consider all options concerning the European Union Capacity Building Mission in Mali (EUCAP Sahel Mali) and the EU Advisory Mission in the Central African Republic (EUAM RCA), given the deterioration of the political and security situation, including that of a decision to terminate them; notes with concern the security developments in the Sahel and the Gulf of Guinea; denounces the increasing presence of the Kremlin-backed Wagner Group in the region and its strategy aimed at monopolising the assets of the countries where the Group is based, to the detriment of the population, and denounces the atrocities committed against the local population; calls for the creation of a network of security counsellors within the CSDP missions in the African countries that are willing to cooperate with the EU in relation to military and security matters;
43. Recalls the ambitious targets set for 5 000 police at the 2000 Feira Council and acknowledges the value of the Civilian Headline Goals (CHG) agreed upon from 2008 onwards; calls for the urgent fulfilment of these goals, in particular regarding a rapid reaction capacity and the use of multinational formations in the context of Article 44 TEU; underlines the importance of fully implementing the objectives set in the Strategic Compass for civilian CSDP (inter alia being able to deploy 200 experts in 30 days) by building on the recent efforts by the EU to act in a more agile, reactive and coordinated way; in this context, welcomes the rapid decision making on and launch of the EU Monitoring Capacity in Armenia; stresses the need to modify decision-making procedures, including examining a shift towards qualified majority voting for certain aspects of the missions; stresses the need to create contingency plans for each Civilian CSDP mission in coordination with the MPCC, the CPCC and the Rapid Deployment Capacity in anticipation of potential emergency situations where the Rapid Deployment Capacity may be required;
Increasing funding to match ambitions
44. Regrets the fact that the CFSP budget for civilian CSDP missions has only marginally increased from the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2014-2020 to the MFF 2021-2027 (from a starting point of approximately EUR 350 million per year), while at the same time the number and tasks of missions has increased, the security environment has become more challenging, the cost of operations has increased, inflation has grown and the number of contracted personnel has increased, therefore limiting the potential for expanding the current missions’ mandates or possibly establishing new missions in response to urgent security needs; calls also for the structure of the CFSP budget to be changed and for the generation of one budget line per civilian CSDP mission, in order to allow for better scrutiny and increased transparency;
45. Highlights the need to ensure a more robust and realistic CFSP budget that matches the needs of new and ongoing civilian CSDP missions; calls for a substantive increase of funding for the CFSP budget, while at the same time ensuring the efficient use of the funds allocated to the CSDP civilian missions, in order to make sure that they effectively respond to crisis situations and unforeseen events, and to actively identify where complementary projects and programmes could be funded from other relevant EU budgets, ensuring sound financial management and the careful prioritisation of existing resources;
46. Believes a need exists to establish a solid policy on the equipment and services needed by partner countries where civilian CSDP missions take place; calls for the establishment of a dedicated CFSP budget line within an overall increased CFSP budget, or ‘civilian support facility’, to provide partner countries with the equipment and services to enhance their civilian capabilities;
47. Welcomes the fact that owing to the current highly unstable geopolitical situation and the return of war to Europe, the EU’s spending on defence has recently increased considerably, but regrets the fact that the funding for civilian CSDP has not;
48. Calls on the EEAS and the Commission services to present multiannual budgetary forecasts, an assessment of ongoing activities and clear estimates of missions’ absorption rates; underlines that such measures are needed to help prepare decisions to downgrade ineffective activities, to enhance effectiveness and flexibility through clear mandates and to provide clearly defined transition and exit strategies; recalls that the operational and financial planning of missions should go hand in hand from the start; calls for tangible commitments from the Member States on the contribution of personnel at the initial stages of approving a mission;
49. Calls for the new Strategic Compass to provide the CSDP missions with the political and strategic ambition, capabilities and resources needed to generate positive change; reaffirms the goal of the Strategic Compass to deliver a positive impact with regard to the swiftness and robustness of common responses to global conflicts;
50. Underlines the fundamental role of Parliament as a budgetary authority and in the scrutiny of CSDP, including civilian CSDP missions; calls, therefore, for a greater involvement of the European Parliament in the decision-making process on CSDP civilian missions; strongly insists that it be provided with all the information necessary to carry out its responsibilities in accordance with the Treaties and towards its citizens; recalls, in this regard, that the current provision of information is inadequate for the European Parliament to exercise its responsibilities and pending the revision of the 2002 Interinstitutional Agreement on Parliament’s access to information in the area of security and defence policy;
°
° °
51. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the Council and the Commission.
MINORITY POSITION
pursuant to Rule 55(4) of the Rules of Procedure
Clare Daly, Özlem Demirel, Mick Wallace
The ostensive goals of civilian CSDP include conflict resolution, crisis management and disarmament, essential to the security of people and communities internationally. However, the objective role of EU civilian CSDP is inextricable from the EU’s geopolitical aspirations, embodied in its CFSP.
Besides many positive elements, this report situates demands for improvements to civilian CSDP in the context of geopolitical conflict with “strategic competitors,” characterises migration as a security threat, and calls for increases in defence spending, civil-military cooperation, synergies with military CSDP, close coordination with NATO, and for the use of development assistance aid as leverage over the government policy of host countries.
The report continues to endorse the security sector reform model for conflict prevention, despite historical evidence of its theoretical and practical failures. These commitments subvert the role of civilian CSDP, subordinating it to the pursuit of EU strategic interests abroad, not the interests of host populations and communities.
The Left calls for foreign policy guided by principles of neutrality, impartiality and independence, and the prevention of civilian CSDP’s instrumentalisation in the furtherance of any strategic, military, economic or other objectives at cross purposes with maintaining international peace and security and addressing the needs of affected populations.
INFORMATION ON ADOPTION IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE
Date adopted |
22.3.2023 |
|
|
|
Result of final vote |
+: –: 0: |
49 8 1 |
||
Members present for the final vote |
Alviina Alametsä, Alexander Alexandrov Yordanov, François Alfonsi, Maria Arena, Petras Auštrevičius, Traian Băsescu, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Michael Gahler, Kinga Gál, Klemen Grošelj, Bernard Guetta, Sandra Kalniete, Dietmar Köster, Andrius Kubilius, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, David Lega, Miriam Lexmann, Leopoldo López Gil, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Lukas Mandl, Pedro Marques, Fulvio Martusciello, David McAllister, Vangelis Meimarakis, Sven Mikser, Matjaž Nemec, Gheorghe-Vlad Nistor, Demetris Papadakis, Kostas Papadakis, Tonino Picula, Manu Pineda, Thijs Reuten, Nacho Sánchez Amor, Isabel Santos, Mounir Satouri, Jordi Solé, Sergei Stanishev, Tineke Strik, Hermann Tertsch, Dragoş Tudorache, Thomas Waitz, Charlie Weimers, Isabel Wiseler-Lima, Salima Yenbou, Bernhard Zimniok |
|||
Substitutes present for the final vote |
Engin Eroglu, Georgios Kyrtsos, Sergey Lagodinsky, Erik Marquardt, Pina Picierno, Mick Wallace, Elena Yoncheva, Javier Zarzalejos, Milan Zver |
|||
Substitutes under Rule 209(7) present for the final vote |
Annika Bruna, Clare Daly, Margarida Marques, Javier Moreno Sánchez |
|||
FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE
49 |
+ |
PPE |
Alexander Alexandrov Yordanov, Traian Băsescu, Michael Gahler, Sandra Kalniete, Andrius Kubilius, David Lega, Miriam Lexmann, Leopoldo López Gil, Antonio López‑Istúriz White, Lukas Mandl, Fulvio Martusciello, David McAllister, Vangelis Meimarakis, Gheorghe‑Vlad Nistor, Isabel Wiseler‑Lima, Javier Zarzalejos, Milan Zver |
Renew |
Petras Auštrevičius, Engin Eroglu, Klemen Grošelj, Bernard Guetta, Georgios Kyrtsos, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Dragoş Tudorache, Salima Yenbou |
S&D |
Maria Arena, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Dietmar Köster, Margarida Marques, Pedro Marques, Sven Mikser, Javier Moreno Sánchez, Matjaž Nemec, Demetris Papadakis, Pina Picierno, Tonino Picula, Thijs Reuten, Isabel Santos, Sergei Stanishev, Nacho Sánchez Amor, Elena Yoncheva |
Verts/ALE |
Alviina Alametsä, François Alfonsi, Sergey Lagodinsky, Erik Marquardt, Mounir Satouri, Jordi Solé, Tineke Strik, Thomas Waitz |
8 |
- |
ECR |
Hermann Tertsch, Charlie Weimers |
ID |
Annika Bruna, Bernhard Zimniok |
NI |
Kostas Papadakis |
The Left |
Clare Daly, Manu Pineda, Mick Wallace |
1 |
0 |
NI |
Kinga Gál |
Key to symbols:
+ : in favour
- : against
0 : abstention
- [1] OJ L 209, 14.6.2021, p. 1.