From the Financial Times (Comment and Analysis, 3 April 2003)

From the Financial Times (Comment and Analysis, 3 April 2003). Web Version: http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1048313410630&p=1012571727126 Published: April 2 2003 20:53 | Last Updated: April 2 2003 20:53 Comment & analysis How Europe can win without an army By Andrew Moravcsik For many transatlantic pundits, the Iraq crisis is further proof that Europe needs an autonomous military force. This view was forcefully expressed last week by Laurent Fabius, the former French prime minister, who said in the Financial Times that Europe "was unable to make its voice heard in the US because it was divided and lacked a unified defence force". For some years now politicians have found European defence irresistible. European public opinion strongly favours it. European federalists want the European Union to have greater powers. French Gaullists, long convinced that military might means great power prestige, trumpet the idea. Tony Blair, Britain's prime minister, has exploited it to become more "European"; Joschka Fischer, Germany's foreign minister, has exploited it to become more military. The logic is seductive: if the US respects only military power, a European army will surely command respect. Yet European defence is a dangerous pipe dream. And the Iraq crisis demonstrates why. A co-ordinated military force with the global capabilities to fight a high-technology, low-casualty war would require ...