maritime geostrategy for the European Union

[Dan D]

Something for the Armchair Admirals and Generals:

From Suez to Shanghai: Crafting a maritime geostrategy for the European Union (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOisVC8GoiA&eurl=http://www.globalpowereurope.eu/&feature=player_embedded)

by James Rogers, "video is based on a presentation given to the European Union Institute for Security Studies in Paris in November 2008. It is about the maritime geopolitics of Eurasia, focussing on the rise of the Chinese, Indian, Japanese, Russian and South Korean navies. It concludes with a number of recommendations for the future direction of the maritime geostrategy of the European Union".

Another piece by the author who is from England btw:

Europeans need a ‘British’ navy (sea power), not a ‘German’ army (land power) (http://www.globalpowereurope.eu/2008/10/europeans-need-british-navy-not-german.html)

[Skybird]

Bah, we only need a couple of daredevils operating in a special airmobile force like this.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/7828408.stm

We dominate the air, the sea and the land with that!

[UnderseaLcpl]

Is this really what goes on at the E.U.? Don't get me wrong, it's a nice little presentation, but it looks more like a high-schooler's powerpoint project than even a skeletal outline for naval power projection.

What about proxy trade? What about the possibility of a Middle-Eastern alliance or hegemony limiting access through the Suez canal? What about budget projections?
Turkey's admission into the E.U. and the ramifications that might have on the Mediterranean aren't even mentioned.

Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, but that seems like a pretty shaky strategy.

[JALU3]

Good presentation, but given the lack of interest in EU member states in funding an enlarged military, or the logistic support to conduct large/medium size deployment away from home waters, the ability for the EU to project power past the Med is questionable without a major joint effort by EU member states. Furthermore, you would need a unified member state action plan, which all member states need to agree to, and will garuntee to support politically and monetarily.
The latter part I would imagine would be the more difficulty part. Look at the recent Georgia/Russia/South Ossetia Conflict and you can see the wide range of reactions to the events in de jure Georgia by EU member states. Presently the EU is not a nation-state in and of itself, and unless it were to have some type of rebirth such as the Articles of Confederation were replaced by the present Constitution of the United States, it is unlikely that the EU will begin to have a unified voice for some time to come. But that is moving away from the initial point of discussion.

I am going to assume that SCOO, will, overtime coeles to become the counter weight to NATO. If this is the case, the question is, with the newer major powers arising, India, Brazil, maybe the Arab League. . . where will their allegiences fall under? Or will it be fluid to fit their own geopolitical needs.

It is very true that maintaining safe and secure, and preferably neutral, SLOCs are very important to international commerce. But if SLOCs are to not be neutral, then it would be very important for the benifiting party/ies to control those SLOCs and their points of confluence.

Oh, and news flash, as predicted, PRC is now the third largest economy (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8d9337be-e245-11dd-b1dd-0000779fd2ac.html).

[Dan D]

Is this really what goes on at the E.U.?

I have no idea. I not familiar with the topic. I was hoping that some of the smart guys here at subsim could shed some light on it.

This is basically all I know:
Right now, we do not have something like a European Army. What we do have is Joint Corps, e.g. the German-Dutch Corps which consists of German and Dutch soldiers which are led by German or Dutch officers on a rotational changing basis. A friend of mine works for this Corps and he does the planning for the medical care for foreign deployments. This Joint Corps will see action for the first time ever later in 2009 in Afghanistan.
Do we need a European Army? I don't know. I thought, you guys could tell me.


...given the lack of interest in EU member states in funding an enlarged military, or the logistic support to conduct large/medium size deployment away from home waters....


My impression, too.

.Presently the EU is not a nation-state in and of itself, and unless it were to have some type of rebirth such as the Articles of Confederation were replaced by the present Constitution of the United States, it is unlikely that the EU will begin to have a unified voice for some time to come.


Careful, here. People may have observed that the sole mentioning of the „EU“ here at subsim causes reactions like a red rag waved to a bull. But I think, it is safe to say that no one really wants an EU superstate, something like the United States of Europe. Just to give an example, I would strongly oppose any attempts to create a unified European criminal law because I can see no reason why this should be necessary or could be justified with the goal European integration. Penal power is core part of a nation's sovereignty. Let's leave as that. Also, I don't like the idea ,that I might get arrested and would have to spent some time in pre-trial custody in an obscure country in Eastern or Southern Europe that probably has worser living conditions compared to German prisons, if not unavoidable.
But that is moving away from the initial point of discussion.
Very true, see above.

My point is that I fail to see, why it should be „unlikely that the EU will begin to have a unified voice for some time to come unless it were to have some type of rebirth such as the Articles of Confederation were replaced by the present Constitution of the United States".


.I am going to assume that SCOO, will, overtime coeles to become the counter weight to NATO. If this is the case, the question is, with the newer major powers arising, India, Brazil, maybe the Arab League. . . where will their allegiences fall under? Or will it be fluid to fit their own geopolitical needs.

It is very true that maintaining safe and secure, and preferably neutral, SLOCs are very important to international commerce. But if SLOCs are to not be neutral, then it would be very important for the benifiting party/ies to control those SLOCs and their points of confluence.
What is SCOO and SLOC? Yes, I have watched the movie.
Oh, and news flash, as predicted, PRC is now the third largest economy (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8d9337be-e245-11dd-b1dd-0000779fd2ac.html).

You are talking about PR China here, right? Too true, it has displaced Germany from third place.

[Thomen]

You are talking about PR China here, right? Too true, it has displaced Germany from third place.

Maybe not..
It was the second time China had revised upwards growth figures for 2007’s GDP, first calculated to be 11.4 per cent. Some suspect Chinese authorities of massaging figures to underplay economic volatility, exaggerating growth when conditions are tough, underestimating it when the economy is booming.

The Chinese feds are infamous for doing some (not so honest) tricks.

[Rockstar]

They don't want an army yet still be able to project naval fleet power through a narrow ditch? It might have worked in 1938 but what happens today when someone blocks it? The EU will have to go down there and unblock it thats what. It takes more than empty words and rhetoric it needs a land force too. Stick to what ya know let french whine about diplomacy and while they're doing that send the Brits by sea and Germans soldiers by land. That would make anyone think twice before screwing with the EU.

[Skybird]

Is this really what goes on at the E.U.? Don't get me wrong, it's a nice little presentation, but it looks more like a high-schooler's powerpoint project than even a skeletal outline for naval power projection.


You need to understand four things about the EU:

1. It does not need to be strong, for just saying it is strong is it's real scoring argument. It's also more cost-efficient.

2. It accepts no potential opponents - it only knows potential partners each of whom has an individual appeasement threshhold to make him play ball.

3. Rivals get blinded from the glorious shine emanating from the EU anyway, and being blind then they can't fight it any longer, regret their hostility, look inside themselves and find themselves coming out of it as a better human being.

4. The club has around two dozen members too much in order to be capable to decide and to act. 29 single interest are 28 interests too much.

Let's laugh and chant and hold each others hand and hop and play a ring-a-ring-o'roses. And the ballons - don't forget to let the ballons fly.