As mentioned earlier, Great Britain would never support such an idea or concept, which is why you will see them pushed out of the EU by Germany. The immigration ‘issue’ is just a cover.
It’s not about immigration and never has been. It’s about who controls the European continent and Germany cannot with Britain in the way. You’re looking at a post-USA world where a future United States of Europe, the world’s next superpower, is led by the Fourth Reich at the helm.
The suicidal decline of the United States is the primary factor behind the power vacuum being filled.
BERLIN (Own report) – Prominent German think tanks and politicians are calling for the establishment of an EU army. To this effect, “integration options” in military policy are viewed as appropriate, for example, at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP). In a paper published by the German Ministry of Defense, an SWP researcher writes that the current financial crisis has clearly shown some European countries that “sovereignty built on autonomy is illusory.” However, to prevent possible reservations of some EU member countries, the author recommends avoiding the label “European army.” Efforts tending in the same direction but “under a different name” would have “more chances of success.” The Vice President of the European Parliament, Alexander Graf Lambsdorff (FDP) of Germany, has expressed a similar view. “Only a European approach” to military matters can assure that the “economic giant” Germany will not remain a “political dwarf” when enforcing “western values and interests,” Lambsdorff declared in a newspaper article.
Caution in Terminology
According to the government-affiliated German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), there are “good reasons” for establishing an EU army. In a paper published on the website of the German Ministry of Defense, Claudia Major, Deputy Director of the SWP’s “Security Policy Research Group,” wrote that particularly the transformation of the USA’s global role and the current “financial crisis” offer “new options for European integration.” Because the United States will be “more tied up in Asia and Africa” in the future, the EU has to “assume more responsibility around the world.” The “financial crisis” has clearly shown that “national sovereignty built on autonomy is illusory.” “The EU countries must make cut backs and gradually accept that solutions must be found at a European level.” The author, however, explicitly calls for “caution in the use of terminology,” because countries, such as Great Britain, would not “support a project labeled ‘European army’ in the foreseeable future.” “Efforts leading in the same direction, but under a different label, would have more chances of success.”
Based on these considerations, the SWP researcher outlines “two paths to a European army.” The first path, according to her, would be to encourage military policy cooperation between the governments of the EU member countries. This “enhanced” cooperation could lead to the establishment of more joint combat units, such as the “EU Battle Groups,” which could serve as the “nucleus of a European army,” the author explains. The second path would be the “transfer of national prerogatives to the EU.” This would be the only route to lead ultimately to an “integrated European army” with “European command structures,” which “no longer would be dependant on decisions by individual European countries,” according to the author. Since the EU members are not yet ready to comprehensively “transfer their sovereignty,” only the “coexistence of national armies with initial vanguard forces of a European army” is possible today.
The Chair of the Defense Committee of the German Bundestag, Hans-Peter Bartels (SPD) agrees with Lambsdorff’s position. According to Bartels, the time has come for “taking concrete steps toward a European army.” As argumentation, Bartels refers, in an interview, to the tight budgetary situation of many EU countries, the civil war in Ukraine and the wars of aggression being waged with troops from EU countries. “We have too little money, and we also have new challenges in security policy. However, we have learned, over the past few years, to cooperate closely in missions abroad. Therefore, why should we not also use this in the basic functioning of our armed forces?” With this thesis, Bartels is edging up to the line of codified military policy contained in the German government’s coalition contract, signed by the SPD and the CDU. In that document, one reads: “We are striving for an ever closer association of European armed forces, which can develop into a parliamentary-controlled European army.”
The Bundeswehr as Trailblazer
Leading German media organs have also begun openly propagating the creation of an EU army. This can also be seen in headlines such as “Europe Ultimately Needs a Common Army.” Reference is generally made to the numerous “cooperation projects” agreed upon between the German armed forces and those of other EU states. The transfer of paratroopers and cavalry units from the Netherlands to the German command is considered a particularly good model. (german-foreign-policy.com reported.) It is being reasoned that, thanks to the “global situation” and “austerity pressure,” a “vision is becoming reality” – “the Bundeswehr is the trailblazer for a European Army.”
Full article: The German Path to an EU Army (II) (German Foreign Policy)