An EU Army? Destined for the Failure of the Lowest Common Denominator

Someone needs to review the history of the Army of the Confederate States of America about a lack of central control of forces.

How can anyone with an understanding of recent history WRT national caveats and ROE can think this is a good idea?

In case you have not heard enough hyperbole this election season, the political leadership in the Mother Country is generating a bit of her own that does indirectly impact the USA.

David Cameron says Brexit could lead to continental war. Former Nato secretaries general suggest the EU is a “key partner” for the defence organisation.

That is the worst of the scare mongering, and just hogwash. Colonel Richard Kemp, British Army, is spot on;

But in the future, the opposite will be true, for this simple reason. A vote to Remain would embolden Brussels in the goal of ever-closer union. This will include a European army, enshrined in the EU project through the Maastricht and Lisbon treaties. And an EU army would undermine deterrence and cripple Nato, weakening European defences when we face increasing threats from Russia, the Middle East and radical Islam.

An EU command structure, fraught with divergent and opposing policy agendas, will turn paralysis into rigor mortis

That is airtight, as anyone who served with European militaries for any length of time will tell you. I’ve shared with you my experience through the years, but I was just a staff weenie, Col. Kemp was the former Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan – take his word if you need to.

NATO has its own challenges, but having worked with the shambolic EU military fonctionnaires both operationally and in exercise, they make NATO look like Eisenhower’s staff.

A German defence white paper, leaked last week but supposed to be kept under wraps until after the referendum, leaves no doubt of Germany’s intention to drive through the merger of Europe’s armed forces “and embark on permanent cooperation under common structures”. Germany has begun to combine substantial elements of the Dutch forces with their own.

A centralised army is an indispensable component of the superstate to which the EU is openly committed. It would also provide an excuse for struggling economies to slash defence budgets. Few nations take defence seriously enough to spend even the 2 per cent of GDP required by Nato, a shortcoming criticised by President Obama in Germany last month. An EU army will see these nations cut back even further, cynically pretending that defences are strengthened even as forces and capabilities are merged and downsized.

Funds will be diverted from Nato combat forces as the EU army lavishes cash on costly new command structures, including a surfeit of generals with expensive headquarters. Indeed, reducing the influence of Nato and the US is the aim for several EU members, especially France and Germany. And if we undercut Nato, that aim will succeed, leading to US retrenchment.

If and EU army is going to be the next move, even more of a reason to support Brexit. It is in the interest of the United Kingdom, NATO, The Commonwealth, and the USA.

It is increasingly clear that the leaders of all main parties believe staying inside the EU is the only way for Britain to prosper. If the benefits of economic, political and legal union are so great, then it must follow, to politicians who argue that Britain can never again fight alone, that military union has the same advantages.

It will be denied that our forces will be handed over to the Brussels high command. But remember it was never explained to the British people that our Parliament would be subordinated to a union that today hands down over half our laws, regulates our day-to-day activities, and can override the highest courts in the land.

In case the EU gets all grumpy, if they would like, the UK should drop Canada, USA and Mexico a line about NAFTA. We’d love to have them onboard.