Sir, Lord Robertson of Port Ellen and Lord Ashdown of Norton-sub-Hamdon are right to argue that the threat of transnational crime and terrorism have reached pandemic proportions, but they are wrong to assume that EU meddling is the answer (Opinion, June 12).

We certainly need improved international co-operation, but the EU is about something entirely different. Setting up a separate EU defence force would at best duplicate Nato’s existing military structures and at worst weaken the transatlantic alliance on which the security of the democracies ultimately depends.

There has never been any sound military reason for EU involvement in defence. It ignores Nato but seeks to mimic its role purely to enhance its political ambitions. European countries should be focusing their efforts on support for Nato, whose future is on the line in its struggle in Afghanistan. If the EU itself wants to be helpful it should focus on civil reconstruction, properly co-ordinated with Nato’s efforts.

Practical multilateralism is indeed a strategic necessity, but this is best achieved through the UN and the proven structure of Nato where our strongest and most likely ally in future crises, the US, also sits. President Bush is currently winging around Europe having been misled into thinking that EU defence was a good idea and that France was really going to contribute more to Afghanistan. We now know that the French promise of 700 “extra troops” for Afghanistan was a deceit — it is just transferring some troops already in Kabul to another relatively quiet area. The real aim is to take forward EU defence during France’s presidency in the second half of this year. It ill behoves those that genuinely believe in the transatlantic alliance to be playing the Quai d’Orsai’s game.

Geoffrey van Orden, MEP
Conservative Defence Spokesman
European Parliament

Explore Letters

• Feedback