ecap dealing with esdp shortfalls

7/28/2019 ECAP Dealing With ESDP Shortfalls

1/3

European Capabilities Action Plan (ECAP)

Burkard SCHMITT

At the Helsinki European Council in December 1999, EU member states set

themselves the headline goal of being able, by 2003, to deploy within 60 days and

sustain for at least one year forces up to corps level (60,000 men). One year later, at

the Capabilities Commitment Conference in Brussels, they committed themselves, on

a voluntary basis, to making national contributions to these EU rapid reaction

capabilities. The comparative analysis of both the Helsinki Headline Goal Catalogue

(specifying the operational requirements for the Petersberg Tasks) and the Force

Catalogue (setting out national commitments) revealed considerable shortfalls in

national capability commitments. Among the 38 capability shortfalls identified in theso-called Helsinki Progress Catalogue, 21 were evaluated as significant.

At the Laeken European Summit in December 2001, the EU Council decided

to launch the European Capabilities Action Plan (ECAP) to address these shortfalls.

From March 2002 onwards, 19 panels of national experts developed possible

solutions. These were:

Attack Helicopters/Support Helicopters

Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Protection (NBC)

Unmanned Air Vehicles (UAV)/Surveillance and Target Acquisition (STA) Units

Medical Role 3/Medical Collective Protection Role 3

Special Operations Forces (SOF)

Carrier Based Air Power

Suppression of Enemy Air Defence (SEAD)

Air-to-Air Refuelling (AAR)

Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR)


2/3

Cruise Missiles/Precision Guided Munitions

Theatre Ballistic Missile Defence

Deployable Communication Modules

Headquarters (OHQ, FHQ, CCHQs)

Theatre Surveillance and Reconnaissance Air Picture

Strategic ISR IMINT Collection

UAV (HALE, MALE and tactical UAVs)

Early Warning and Distant Detection Strategic Level

Strategic Air Mobility/Outsized Transport Aircraft, General Cargo Aircraft

Roll-On-Roll-Off Vessels (RO-RO)/General Cargo Shipping

The panels met independently and were composed of at least one lead nation

per panel, active participants and observers. The work of the panels was coordinated

by the Headline Goal Task Force, which drew upon the support of the EU military

staff (EUMS). Panels presented their final reports on 1st March 2003.

The ECAP process has been guided by four core principles: (1) The

improvement of the effectiveness and efficiency of European defence efforts,

enhancing cooperation between member states or groups of member states; (2) A

bottom up approach to European defence cooperation, relying on voluntary nationalcommitments; (3) Coordination between EU member states as well as coordination

with NATO; (4) Public support through ECAPs transparency and visibility.

The identified shortfalls vary widely in importance, nature, operational

implications and the possible ways to rectify them. One category can be addressed if

member states revise their contributions and offer capabilities they already have but

which, for different reasons, have not been offered before.

A second category, however, consists of shortfalls for which capabilities do

not exist in national inventories and which can only be rectified if member states

acquire the required capability. Some of these shortfalls can be temporarily addressed

by short-term solutions such as leasing or upgrading. For a number of shortfalls,including some related to strategic capabilities, a long-term solution requires large-

scale procurement projects. Some of these projects are already under way, others not.

During the first phase, neither national planners nor procurement specialists

were involved in the panels work, leaving somewhat unclear if and how ECAP

would actually lead to the development of the required new capabilities. While EU

defence ministers declared at the Capability Conference on 19 May 2003 that the EU

now has operational capability across the full range of Petersberg tasks, they

acknowledged that this capability remains limited and constrained by recognised

shortfalls.1

1See Declaration on EU military capabilities, 19 May 2003, p. 2.


3/3

Following an evaluation by the EUMC, member states established ten project

groups at the Capability Conference focused on the implementation of concrete

projects, including solutions through acquisition or other solutions such as leasing,

multinationalisation and considering possibilities for role specialisation.2 The

following table outlines these ten project groups, each headed again by a lead nation.

PROJECT GROUP LEAD NATION

Air-to-Air Refuelling (AAR) Spain

Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) Germany

Headquarters (HQ) United Kingdom

Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Protection (NBC) Italy

Special Operations Forces (SOF) Portugal

Theatre Ballistic Missile Defence (TBMD) Netherlands

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) France

Strategic Airlift Germany

Space based assets France

Interoperability Issues and Working Procedures forEvacuation and Humanitarian Operations

Belgium

ECAP is generally considered to be a promising approach to tackle capability

shortfalls. It has, however, several weak points: First, it remains voluntary and lacks

credibility as long as commitments are not underpinned with the necessary funding.

Second, ECAP has lacked leadership. Member states have been free to participate and

to take commitments, and the EUMS apparently has had difficulties to follow, let

alone coordinate, the work in the various Panels. Third, the working method (regular

meetings of national experts) has been hardly innovative. Last but not least, ECAP has

been a pure ad hoc exercise, limited both in time (focusing only on current shortfalls)

and scope (dealing only with shortfalls in commitments to the Headline Goal Force).

There are constant attempts, however, to improve the existing mechanism. At

its meeting on 17 November 2003, the Council underlined the need to complement the

ECAP with an approach capable of identifying objectives, drawing up timelines and

reporting procedures to the Council in close co-operation with each project group.Therefore it tasked the relevant Council bodies to develop an ECAP roadmap to

monitor the ECAP progress and allow member states to redirect the work of the

project groups if deemed necessary. Accompanied by a Capability Improvement Chart

including a state-of-play of the project groups and a clear readable overview for

public opinion and the media, the ECAP roadmap should be presented as an integral

part of the Single Progress Report during each presidency.

However, the future of the ECAP process is unclear. One option is to transfer

its function to the European Defence Agency that the European Council of

Thessaloniki decided to set up in the course of 2004.

2See Declaration on EU military capabilities, 19 May 2003, p. 4.

ecap dealing with esdp shortfalls

Documents