An International Order Based on
Effective Multilateralism
16. The Strategy asserts the commitment of the
EU to "uphold and develop International Law"[16]
and that the United Nations Charter is the "fundamental framework
for international relations".[17]
"Early, rapid and when necessary, robust intervention"[18]
(which may include the use of force) to threats would be welcome,
within the UN Charter. Clarification is nevertheless required
on whether this would include pre-emptive action.
17. Strengthening the UN and other international
organisations are seen as priorities as are supporting the development
of existing institutions (such as the World Trade Organisation)
and supporting new institutions for example the International
Criminal Court. The Security Strategy here places an emphasis
on the role of trade and development policies as 'powerful tools
for promoting reform'.[19]
The European Council is well placed to coordinate these policies
alongside foreign and security policy.
18. This multilateral attitude was reflected
by Mr Solana's opinions on the EU's role in North Korea and Iran.
Mr Solana asked us "What is our role in the North Korea six
party talks? It is not to destroy. We would be stupid if we say
that we want to be the seventh [party].. It is much better if
we say that we support the six and we have said publicly….we
applaud the success of this but we do not want to be part of the
problem or part of the solution. Some Member States say 'Why are
you not at the same table?' But it is because we do not need to
be. We are well represented at the table.. Iran is a much more
difficult topic but we are determined to prevent Iran from being
a terrorist state".[20]
19. This is also reflected in the EU's attitude
towards the African Union (AU): Mr Solana told us "There
is no doubt that they [the AU] know how to handle their own problems
better than coming from outside. This is what they want. They
want to assume their own responsibilities, they need a bit of
help and I think that we should give them this help because otherwise
we have to assume that responsibility at a more expensive level
and, politically in a less attractive atmosphere."[21]
We also note that Mr Solana said that "for the moment, no
forces have been deployed but, in other places, there will be
an eventual need for the Sudan to deploy forces or not and we
would like to see the African Union leading."[22]
20. We were pleased to hear Mr Solana's acknowledgment
of the importance of NATO despite few references to the Organisation
within the Strategy: "I think that cooperation between the
European Union and NATO is fundamental. The arrangement that the
European Union has with NATO is very important. Remember that
we are in crisis management and NATO is not in crisis management
but fundamental on collective defence."[23]
This confirmed what we were told by Mr Sawers from FCO "it
remains the position of the European Union as a whole, that whenever
the Americans want to be involved in a security operation of this
sort then NATO will be the organisation of choice for pursuing
defence operations. Where the Americans decide, for whatever reason,
not to be involved, or that the level of the task is less that
what is required, then NATO will not be an option, but the NATO
resources are available. The whole EU defence capability has a
relationship of close linkage into NATO and…will be dependent
upon the NATO structures."[24]
21. The EU's Security Strategy will be more
effective if it is anchored firmly in cooperation between Europe
and North America. To avoid any doubt, the importance of NATO
(despite the desirability of enhanced EU capability) should be
emphasised and the Council of Ministers (and the US too) needs
to work hard to restore the transatlantic partnership.[25]
11 
