Europe is not meant to be the civilian branch of Nato - we must be able to launch autonomous and robust military operations of our own, writes Herve Morin.
IN THE run-up to the April 2nd-4th Nato summit in Bucharest and the French presidency of the European Union, which will begin on July 1st, how does France imagine the future of our transatlantic community? My conviction is that under the instigation of President Sarkozy, we can and must tackle head-on a reinforced European defence and the establishment of a renovated Nato.
From a French point of view, even though we are not part of the integrated structure, the renovation of the alliance is essential. We are in this alliance; we want it to operate in an optimal way. And this raises three issues.
First, an internal issue: reforming the alliance. At a time when our democracies face budgetary constraints, Nato must rationalise overall costs, personnel, the number of headquarters. Remember that Nato has a €2 billion budget, more than 22,000 full-time employees (for 66,000 troops engaged in operations) and about 320 committees.
We need a more reactive and flexible Nato. In particular, Nato must go further in reforming its command structure and the defence planning process. The difficulties encountered in Afghanistan, in particular with regard to drones and transport helicopters, show that this process does not ensure that necessary equipment will be available.
Then comes the issue of borders. How far should the alliance enlarge? We belong to a Euro-Atlantic community, a community of values underpinned by shared cultural and philosophical foundations.
The US and the European nations are not based on the same social contract, but they are based on values of liberty and democracy, on a European genius that is specific to us.
In dealing with countries we used to call the Third World, and towards whom the balance of power is shifting, we will need renewed solidarity in order to assert our shared values.
Joining an alliance is a highly significant choice which implies responsibilities, which must serve the interests of the allies. At the same time, no one has the right to veto security choices made by free states.
The last question is: what should Nato become? Its foundation as a military alliance is based on Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which established the legal basis of our common defence.
Nato gradually acquired crisis management capabilities, and today it operates outside the territory of the alliance. Should it become an instrument for global stabilisation, a sort of "gendarme of the world" which could go so far as to compete with the UN? Member countries of Nato can deploy anywhere they decide there is a threat to their security, or in response to a state's request, for example in Pakistan at the time of the 2006 earthquake.
The key point is the strength of the consensus among countries in agreeing to deploy together where they collectively judge it to be necessary.
These thoughts find an immediate, concrete application in Afghanistan. Nato brings the military response to the situation, but broader action in the field is also necessary. As soon as our forces pull out, the situation returns to what it was, or almost, like the tide uncovering and recovering the sand.
Nor is the solution to create from scratch a Western-type democracy in Afghanistan. We must take into account the weight of history and different cultures, and there must be action on the ground to make it possible to rebuild the country.
I am convinced that the difficulties we are experiencing in setting up forces in Afghanistan, as in Chad, are the military expression of the lack of European ambition. Europe does not take enough responsibility for itself; it likes being dependent.
The US regrets this, but was long satisfied with the situation. Yet Europeans will only make an effort for their own defence if they are in a position of responsibility.
Only when Europeans are responsible adults will they automatically dedicate more effort to their security.
The Bucharest summit must mark the transformation of Nato. At the same time, it should be the moment when the Europeans decide to assume their share of the burden.
Europe is not meant to be the civilian branch of Nato. It must be able to launch autonomous and robust military operations, on good terms with the Atlantic alliance. We need more capabilities, more research and development, more co-operation to give European leaders the military instruments they need in a dangerous world. Our American allies have a direct interest in this; there's not much point in having weak allies.
Building European defence means becoming aware of our European citizenship and our shared destiny. It also means reaffirming together that we belong to a certain model of society that is unique to our Continent, to a certain concept of human dignity. The corollary of this shared destiny is building the structure that will ensure our protection, that is to say European defence.
It also means giving ourselves the military means to define a foreign policy that carries weight in the world.
The European Union does not mean less of Nato, but more of this reservoir of forces that may serve Nato or the EU. Because there are more crises than capabilities to face them, the EU and Nato are both necessary and complementary. Thus, it may be more natural for the EU to deploy in certain zones like Kosovo or Chad. The scale of the threat and the importance of the stakes oblige us to find the best path, using one organisation or the other, depending on their respective advantages in specific crises.
All this makes it essential to have a clear, determined vision of what European defence should be. The French writer Antoine de Saint-Exupéry said: "There are no solutions in life. There are forces at work; you have to create them, and the solutions will follow."
To find the response to the security issues which confront each of our nations today, we must create forces at work.
Europe is a school of peace for the world. With our history, who better can carry this message of peace and solidarity?
Hervé Morin is the defence minister of France