News 28/07/2002

GWU report contradicts KMB on security and defence in EU

By Kurt Sansone

While the General Workers’ Union legal adviser Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici on Monday sounded the warning that if Malta joined the EU it would not have a guarantee that it will live in peace, MaltaToday was leafing through an unpublished report commissioned by the GWU that reached a completely opposite conclusion.

The report seen exclusivly by this newspaper was compiled by the General Workers’ Union EU-desk officer Peter Paul Barbara in 2000 and had to study the effects of the EU’s Common Foreign and Security policy on the Maltese worker.

In its conclusion the report states; "As far as the General Workers’ Union, its members and their families are concerned, the European Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy does not leave any impact whatsoever."

The report was one of the many reports commissioned by the union and kept hidden from its own members.

Mr Barbara started his report by outlining the concept of neutrality. The author drew parallels with other European neutral states such as Sweden, Finland, Austria and Switzerland. However, the report strictly emphasises that these neutral countries have consistently spent millions on their defence budget to be able to defend their neutrality.

Malta’s military spending can in no way be compared to the USD3,910 million spent by Sweden and the only form of Maltese military deterrent is the defence agreement signed between Malta and Italy. But even this agreement would have to be revised if Malta opts not to join the EU because within the framework of the CFSP the individual member states would not be able to enter into such bilateral defence/military agreements.

Malta could find itself having its defence guaranteed by the EU, which could potentially conflict with the neutrality clause as drafted in the Constitution.

The report even encourages the political leaders to amend the Constitution’s neutrality and non-alignment clause to make it relevant to world changes.

Mr Barbara warns against a neutrality status that is isolationist. He argues that the Constitution says that Malta must work for peace but over the years this has never been put into practice. The GWU report even chides the previous Labour administration for pulling the country out of NATO’s Partnership for Peace arrangement.

"The opportunity for Malta to contribute to peace in peacekeeping missions through NATO’s Partnership for Peace was wasted by the Malta Labour Party government of 1996-98, through the refusal to participate in the PFP. Even if the Malta Labour Party government reiterated on a number of occasions that it wants Malta to be involved only in UN-led peacekeeping missions, it failed to contribute to such missions when in government."

The report also makes reference to European and Mediterranean relations and argues that Malta must be at the core of the Barcelona Process to see it come to fruition. By being part of the EU Malta could give the process the right impetus. The report explains, "To do this, Malta must be influential where decisions are being taken. There are no limits to what Malta could do for example when chairing the Presidency of the European Union, whereby it could act as the catalyst to the completion of the Barcelona Process and other Euro-Med related initiatives."

In its conclusion the report states that as a member of the EU Malta would still have the option not to take part in any military operation conducted by the EU even though the country would still take part in the decision-making regarding that same conflict. In this sense as a member Malta could act as a mediator and a peace broker between the EU and a third country.

However, the report also highlights what is probably the most important element of the CFSP that notwithstanding Malta’s neutrality the country would still benefit from a strong defence structure in case of hostilities by third parties.