The Labour Parliamentary Group's common position on the European Constitutional Treaty brings into sharper focus the need to respect both the spirit and substance of our neutrality.

I feel that, rather than getting involved in a lot of constitutional wrangling, this can best be achieved by having a Labour government in power.

While many simplistically dismiss our neutrality as being in the same boat as that of other neutral EU member states, it is worth highlighting how these neutrals differ in their application of neutrality from our own.

Austria

While Austria has augmented its previous commitment to civilian crisis management, it has also pledged 200 soldiers for a battle group. In the field of civilian crisis management, it stresses the importance of allocating more funds (from the CFSP budget) and the willingness to engage in further missions.

Austria offers its support to any future efforts to realise the possibility of a common European defence.

Consistent with the further development of its relations with NATO within the framework of the tailored co-operation programme, it also supports full use of the possibilities for co-operation and dialogue offered within the framework of the Partnership for Peace (PfP) program. It considers close co-operation between the EU and NATO in the spirit of a strategic partnership as a prerequisite for the success of the ESDP.

Austria will continuously assess the value of NATO membership for its security and defence policy and the option of joining NATO will be kept open. Accession to NATO would only take place after prior consent of the Austrian people.

Austria is disappointed that the European Convention did not recommend more majority voting in the field of CFSP.

Cyprus

The Cyprus government, an ardent supported of CFSP/ESDP, strongly believes that both policies can, and ought to, be developed further, in view of the adoption of a European Security Strategy. For only this way can the Union expand its influence worldwide and achieve important results as a global player.

They have welcomed both the undertaking of the missions in Bosnia-Herzegovina, FYROM and the Democratic Republic of the Congo as well as Cyprus' own symbolic participation in all of them.

Cyprus hopes that the entry into NATO of many new member states will not have a negative impact on the development of an autonomous capability of the European Union. Like Malta, Cyprus was among the member states that had reservations on extending QMV in the field of CFSP.

The Republic of Cyprus supports the expansion of the Petersberg tasks and the further developments of civilian and military assets and structures.

In November 2004, it formally offered the Union a number of Cypriot assets for use by CFSP/ESDP - among other things, it committed itself to submitting for EU use the Andreas Papandreou airport near Paphos and a naval base at Zygi.

Finland

Finland has been actively involved in the development of the rapid reaction forces and the EU's military operation Althea in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Like Malta, it was active in ensuring that the treaty clauses on CFSP and especially on ESDP would not jeopardise the country's policy of military non-alliance. And yet on the other hand it felt that the strengthening of the CFSP was a key aim of Finland.

Another indication of Finland's favourable evaluation of CFSP/ ESDP is its active participation in the development of the battle groups.

Although the oft-debated question of Finland's NATO membership remained open, a September 2004 report considers it as an option if some adverse changes take place in Finland's security environment.

Its PM has stated that the enlargement of NATO and the inclusion of the Baltic States into the military alliance have generally been welcome developments. Finland aims to continue active co-operation with NATO with an option of joining.

It has also regularly participated in UN-mandated NATO-led crisis management operations.

For Finland, the EU should concentrate on the complete cycle of conflict - from conflict prevention and military peace-keeping to civilian reconstruction.

Finland did not accept binding security guarantees linked to the mutual defence clause because they would have conflicted with the Finnish policy of non-alliance.

On the positive side, Finland feels that decisions related to security and defence policy should be made by unanimity. This applies especially to possible future decisions about the deployment of EU battle groups.

Ireland

The government worked closely with NATO to prepare for the anticipated EU takeover of the SFOR military mission in Bosnia-Herzegovina and the provision of a police assistance mission in the DRC.

On the positive side, at the IGC, in general Ireland wished to ensure that new arrangements under the Draft Constitutional Treaty were consistent with and would not prejudice its security and defence strategy.

It believed that decisions linked to CFSP should be unanimous. The government views the treaty outcome as a reasonable balance between unanimity on key issues and a certain degree of flexibility.

The government considered whether Irish involvement in battle groups was consistent the so-called triple lock procedure. This provides that Ireland cannot commit troops to any overseas military mission without the approval of the government, the Parliament (Dail) and a legitimating UN Security Council resolution.

No consideration is being given to Irish participation in permanent structured co-operation given Irish non-participation in military alliances (neutrality).

While Ireland will not stand in the way of others regarding the defence clause, it cannot participate in a common defence without the prior consent of the people in a referendum.

Sweden

The Swedish forces are planned to participate in all types of tasks, from confidence-building to peace-enforcement. They argue that there is no contradiction between non-alignment and peace enforcement.

Sweden feels strongly for the build-up of increased capabilities to prevent armed conflicts and international peace support and has expressed the view that it wants to see a more solidary EU, which takes more responsibility on a global level. Participating in crisis management operations is considered a vital part of this.

Sweden sees itself as having a very good relationship with NATO, participating in the majority of NATO tasks, article 5 being the exception. Sweden served under NATO command in both Afghanistan and Kosovo.

Sweden is for unchanged decision-making rules within the CFSP, i.e. unanimity. It supports permanent structured co-operation in the version that appears within the constitutional treaty, an important element being that all are invited to join. In connection with rapid reaction capability Sweden has declared that it is positive and wants to participate.

The Swedish government believes that a strong transatlantic link is necessary. A continued American engagement is important and a strong and united Europe is a precondition for a close and well developed co-operation across the Atlantic.

The fact that other neutrals in the EU deviate so much from Malta in their application of their policy of neutrality, puts an added burden and responsibility on the Labour Party when qualifying its support for the European Constitutional Treaty.

This must be done in a manner that will ensure that our neutrality will not only remain unimpaired but also that any adverse decisions taken by a Nationalist government will be reversed upon a change in government.

Mr Brincat is Shadow Minister of Foreign Affairs and IT.

leo.brincat@gov.mt

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.