Jean-Claude Juncker's call in a German weekend interview for a European army re-ignites a debate that has existed since the very beginnings of the European Union.
With memories of the second World War still fresh, the idea of a European army was central to the vision of Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet in the early 1950s when the European Coal and Steel Community was established. But plans for a European Defence Community were vetoed by France. Instead, European countries nestled under the protective wing of Nato, as the transatlantic alliance became the dominant guarantor of European collective defence in the Cold War era.
As the EU has expanded and developed, the question of a European army has reared its head at various points, not least during the various Irish referendums on EU treaty change. The prospect of Irish troops being sent to fight for Europe has been a reliable tool in the arsenal of "No" campaigners, from Maastricht to Lisbon.
Ireland’s participation in a European common defence is prohibited by article 29 of the Constitution and reinforced by the Irish protocol to the Lisbon Treaty.
Participation by Ireland would necessitate a referendum and constitutional change.
While deployment of more than 12 Irish soldiers is subject to the so-called "triple lock" system, requiring the approval of the Government and the Dáil as well as a UN mandate, Ireland is already involved in a number of civilian and military humanitarian and peacekeeping missions through the EU's Common Security and Defence Policy. A small number of Irish personnel are serving in EU military missions in Mali and Bosnia as well as civilian missions in countries including Ukraine.
Atlanticist leaning
But Irish sensitivities aside, the idea of a European army is likely to gain short shrift in Europe, albeit for radically different reasons. Britain was quick to dismiss Juncker’s proposal, reflecting Whitehall’s traditional Atlanticist leanings and scepticism towards any kind of federalist European defence policy.
The realisation that all member states have neither the political will nor economic means to increase defence budgets at a time of economic retrenchment means the idea is unlikely to fly.
That 22 of the EU’s 28 member states are Nato members is another obvious reason why an EU army is a non-starter.
Even if the suggestion was politically feasible, there is a sense that an EU army would not have the capabilities to make an impact in a space already dominated by Nato, an organisation buttressed by the massive power of the US.
So what explains Jean-Claude Juncker’s intervention?
To many, the European Commission president's comments are unsurprising given his staunch federalism. Juncker has always been in favour of more integration of defence resources, led by the French and supported by the Benelux countries.
His comments also make clear that his intervention is as much about optics as reality. "You would not create a European army to use it immediately . . . but it would convey to Russia that we are serious about defending the values of the European Union."
Ukraine crisis
The sense that the EU needs to send a strong signal to Russia as the Ukraine crisis continues to threaten the security of the bloc’s eastern borders has not only gained ground internally, but is also a constant refrain from
Washington
.
Just this week, the US ambassador to the UN, Samantha Power, speaking in Brussels and London, warned Europe about the dip in defence spending and urged it to send more peacekeepers to the world's trouble spots. The implication that the US should not have to assume too much of the burden when it comes to defence spending has long been a US complaint in discussions on Nato.
Juncker's intervention could also be seen as an attempt by the European Commission president to put his stamp on EU foreign policy, which has mainly been the territory of council president Donald Tusk since both men assumed office late last year.
According to some EU sources a “division of labour” of sorts has emerged between the two men, with Juncker taking an active role in the Greek crisis and economic issues while the former Polish prime minister has taken the lead on Ukraine and Russia.
Both presidents will be keen to shape the debate ahead of the June EU summit which will focus on defence policy, a follow-up on the December 2013 council, which was the first to deal with defence matters in five years.
With the external context having changed dramatically given the developments in Ukraine and the threat of terrorism, the issue of EU defence policy has become more relevant than ever.