12. 10. 2017 | IECEU, PR
CEP representative Ivana Boštjančič Pulko joined Belgrade Security Forum, titled “Building a Common Future in the Age of Uncertainty”, held in Belgrade between October 11th and 13th, where more than 100 speakers have joined in various sessions, plenary panels, round tables and break out events to discuss how can we build a common future in an age characterized by uncertainty?
Ms Boštjančič Pulko participated as a speaker on a panel “The EU as a crisis management actor: CSDP in neighbourhood” that analyzed the EU missions in Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Somalia, and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, in order to discuss the issues of local ownership in peacekeeping missions, planning capacity of CSDP missions, missing elements in the EU missions, as well as how the EU missions might aid and abet authoritarianism.
Ms Boštjančič Pulko focused her presentation on Evaluating Planning Capacity of CSDP Missions: the Case of EULEX Kosovo and EUFOR Althea, where she presented a catalogue of lessons learnt and identified best practices in CSDP planning process. The findings are based on interviews conducted in Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2016 in the framework of a H2020 project ‘Improving the Effectiveness of Capabilities in EU Conflict Prevention – IECEU’. The findings list that both missions suffer because CSDP is low on political agendas of EU member states, there are too many partial interests within EU member states hampering effective planning, decision making in CSDP is generally too long, ‘Brussels’ lacks proper situational awareness on the ground, clearly set goals and exit strategy are missing and the EU does not have an overall preferred strategy for both countries. There are at least four phases led by four different bodies in the case of EULEX planning process but there is a well elaborated analysis and lessons learned process, only the implementation of the findings on the operational level is rather weak. The planning capacity of EUFOR Althea profited greatly from the access to NATO planning assets, structures, and capabilities under Berlin Plus, along with infrastructure on the ground, provided by SFOR. In principle, a clear military command structure, a solid reporting system, and the availability of NATO assets provide a very good basis for real-time situational awareness.
Ms Boštjančič Pulko explained the reasons behind choosing to compare two missions in the Balkans.
“Personally I wanted to research EU’s engagement in the Balkans, also because it is part of a comprehensive approach with by the EU towards the region. As an initial thought you might think that a military and civilian mission are completely, or at least largely, incomparable but through research we actually came up with quite a lot of similarities, even though there are specific characteristics, belonging to each of them. Also, both missions were planned at a time where Balkan’s future mattered a lot to the EU, EU was somehow at its peak related to CSDP when planning the mission, very ambitious, very optimistic, both Balkans missions were somehow a testing ground for the EU, because of its proximity and what can they achieve through CSDP. With the latest EU missions, becoming smaller in size and relevance, it’s challenging to compare the two of the long lasting and most ambitions CSDP missions to date, also with an executive mandate. When comparing the CSDP model to the NATO and UN models, it is immediately clear that there is a much more extensive political approval process in CSDP.”
11. 9. 2017 | IECEU, PR
IECEU (Improving the Effectiveness of Capabilities in EU Conflict Prevention) and WOSCAP (Whole of Society Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding) are together organizing their Final Conference “Effectiveness and Inclusivity of EU Peacebuilding and Conflict Prevention” that will start with an evening reception on November 7 (venue tbc) and continue on November 8, 2017 at the Scotland House in Brussels, Belgium.
The conference will aim to present both H2020 projects’ research results and recommendations as well as to contribute to further debate and improvement in EU’s conflict prevention and peacebuilding interventions through sustainable, comprehensive and innovative means.
The speakers will include representatives from various EU institutions such as the EEAS (PRISM), DEVCO, and the ESDC, alongside academics and peacebuilding practitioners from around the world, who have contributed to these projects. Civil society representatives and practitioners from different partner regions in the world, such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Mali, Georgia, Yemen and Ukraine will also participate in these debates. Various EU Member States, as well as representatives from the UN and OSCE are also expected to take part.
The conference will specifically focus on:
• Main aspects of conflict prevention
• Integrated approach
• Effectiveness of EU missions and operations
• Potential for pooling and sharing in CSDP
• Civil-military cooperation in CSDP
• Inclusivity, local ownership and civil society perspectives in peacebuilding.
To find out more about the organizers and this conference, please visit the projects’ websites: IECEU & WOSCAP.
IECEU and WOSCAP are kindly inviting you to register for the conference here and are looking forward to welcome you in Brussels, Belgium on November 7 and 8, 2017 at the Scotland House.
For specific inquiries regarding the conference please write to [email protected].
13. 6. 2017 | IECEU, PR
The analyses of the effectiveness of Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) – crisis management operations, implemented by the IECEU-project, also researched the current initiatives of pooling and sharing of capabilities (P&S) and how it is perceived at mission level. Firstly, an extensive desk research has been conducted, to uncover what initiatives are ongoing at EU-level and national level. It was followed by eight case studies in Europe, Africa, Middle East and Asia have been reviewed, covering 15 CSDP crisis management missions.
The results of this research are listed in the 6.1 Standardisation Review, that looked at training initiatives, common procurement initiatives as well as how P&S is perceived at mission/operation level. Three standardised questions were asked in all 15 researched CSDP crisis management operations (of which ten are civilian and five are military):
1. whether when establishing the mission pooling and sharing had been considered;
2. how did the pooling and sharing work in the field; was it considered, and;
3. were there existing practices of pooling and sharing (if any).
At statistical level, 8 out of 15 crisis management operations have recorded findings in terms of pooling and sharing. However, six of these operations reported there was no P&S activities, which means that there are only two positive findings for P&S at crisis management operations level. More specifically, the two recorded positive findings for practices of P&S are for the CSDP-missions EUFOR RCA and EULEX Kosovo.
In terms of what is pooled and shared, both crisis management operations display different results. EUFOR RCA pooled and shared airlift capacity, which makes sense as it is a scarce and expensive resource. The EULEX Kosovo mission shows more complex findings for pooling and sharing, as it mentioned different points, such as transfer of staff, mission support, standard operating procedures and sharing / joint use of resources. This could be partly explained by the length of the mission (9 years), giving more time to develop pooling and sharing initiatives.
These results have to be taken with caution, as factors such as timeframe (P&S was developed from 2010 onwards and thus does not fully apply to missions and operations that had been launched before that date) and links with the planning level (P&S at operations level depends on a large scale on previous planning and capability development. If there is already little pooling and sharing at those levels, it logically drops down to mission level).
The findings of P&S were discussed during an IECEU-policy dialogue held on 27 March 2017, in Brussels, with relevant stakeholders of EU institutions, member states, NGOs and academia. During the debate, the warning was expressed that pooling and sharing is not only about financial (saving) aspects, but also about what is available. Member states can only pool and share what they do have. Pooling and sharing is thus not replacing non-existing capabilities.
The discussion further on uncovered that much has been done in the military domain by projects led by European Defence Agency, however, it seems that the current trend is focusing on many small initiatives but lacking an overall approach. A broader understanding of the added value of joining forces and working stronger together among EU member states could be beneficial. To put it more strongly, there is a need for a continent of Pooling and Sharing and not many little islands of Pooling and Sharing in the European Union.
Interested? Contact us to know more.
Author: Mascia Toussaint
15. 3. 2017 | IECEU, PR
EUFOR Althea je vojna operacija, uspostavljena u okviru Zajedničke vanjske i sigurnosne politike (ZVSP – Common Security and Defence Policy) i predstavlja najdužu vojnu operaciju pod ZVSP, te predstavlja integralni pristup Evropske unije (EU) prema Zapadnom Balkanu. Rat u Bosni i Hercegovini (BiH) je ostavio više od sto hiljada žrtava, dok je iz svojih domova prognano više od dva miliona ljudi. Rat je završen nakon više od tri godine posredovanjem međunarodne zajednice pod okriljem NATO-a. NATO je u zemlji ostao još devet godina u obliku dvije uzastopne misije, ovlašten od strane Ujedinjenih nacija, kako bi se osiguralo sprovođenje mirovnog sporazuma, demilitarizacije, razoružanja oružanih snaga i civilnog stanovništva, te povratak raseljenih lica u svoje prijeratne domove.
Preberi.
3. 3. 2017 | IECEU, PR
Centre for European Perspective has together with University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Social Sciences, prepared and published an article within Slovenian Ministry of Defence Monthly Journal Slovenska vojska.
Article tackles the effectiveness of an operation that European Union launched in Bosnia and Herzegovina titled Operation Althea, on 2 December 2004, 9 years after the war ended. EUFOR Althea is a military operation and up until now the longest CSDP operation in its history. For assessing effectiveness, the article draws lessons from the findings of the research of EUFOR Althea’s capabilities. Article argues that the biggest unresolved question of the operation, and the one that is the hardest to eliminate, are the disparities in EU member countries opinion regarding scope of the operation and its aims.
Article available at: http://www.mo.gov.si/fileadmin/mo.gov.si/pageuploads/revija_sv/2017/sv_17_2.pdf.
Članek o uspešnosti operacije EUFOR Althea v Bosni in Hercegovini
Center za evropsko prihodnost je v sodelovanju z Univerzo v Ljubljani, Fakulteto za družbene vede, pripravil članek, ki je bil objavljen v reviji Slovenska vojska. Članek analizira uspešnost operacije EUFOR Althea, ki jo je EU vzpostavila v BiH 2. decembra 2004, 9 let po koncu vojne. EUFOR Althea je vojaška operacija ter do danes najdlje trajajoča SVOP operacija. Za potrebe analize so bili vzpostavljeni tako imenovani kriteriji/indikatorji za merjenje uspešnosti, pri oceni učinkovitosti pa članek črpa zaključke iz ugotovitev raziskave o zmogljivostih operacije. Članek izpostavlja, da je največje nerešeno vprašanje operacije, ki ga je hkrati tudi najtežje odpraviti, neenotnost v pogledih držav članic EU na obseg in delovanje misije, pa tudi glede njenih ciljev.
Članek je dostopen na: http://www.mo.gov.si/fileadmin/mo.gov.si/pageuploads/revija_sv/2017/sv_17_2.pdf.
25. 1. 2017 | IECEU, PR
Centre for European Perspective (CEP) organised an End User Advisory Working Group today in cooperation with University of Ljubljana.
It presented the preliminary findings of IECEU project research on eight different CSDP missions to representatives of Slovenian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of the Interior, Ministry of Defence and Slovenian Armed Forces. The representatives were particulary interested in the case of Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina. They provided valuable and relevant comments, feedback as well as recommendations for continuation of the project. The importance of such research and their interest in the final results was particularly stressed.
