Romanian Military Thinking

148
Romanian Military Thinking ~ 4/2007
activity being related, in a complex way, to the traditions of a world that privileges
bilateral exchanges, from service to service, and does not trust multilateral
structures, which jeopardises uncontrolled goals. The issue of intelligence services
and the one related to information circulation have always been sensitive,
being considered parts of state sovereignty, as they refer to the secret means
of information and political action of the states and the people who lead them.
As, in this context, the issue of the degree of autonomy of each state towards
its partners arises, the above-mentioned case generates a debate regarding
the real status nation-states give the European Union when fundamental elements
of their sovereignty are at stake.
In the same context, the question whether Europe can really derive benefit from
a full cooperation of the European Intelligence Service or from the establishment
of a European “CIA” is perfectly justified. The solution of establishing an information
cell with regard to the terrorist threat, within which states can exchange specific
information was eventually preferred to the idea of establishing a European “CIA”.
The statements of some politicians speak for themselves in this context: “the effectiveness
of the fight against terrorism itself requires some well-thought and coordinate actions”
and “it is impossible to throw everything on the table anyway, as this fact presupposes
certain dexterity” (Jacques Chirac) or that “information is the most difficult thing to share
as to obtain it one should protect the sources, which is difficult even within the same country”
(Nicholas Sarkozy). Mention should be made that the Five in the European Union (France,
Germany, Spain, Italy and Great Britain) prefer to cooperate this way within G5, an instance
that reunites the ministers of homeland affairs belonging to these countries.
The enhancement of the European organisation and cooperation requires a strategy
to make this territory a sanctuary that should be the result of the strategic reflection
in the above-mentioned priority domains and to allow for the initiation of some proper
measures, at the European level, based on the subsidiarity principle, complementary
with the own national actions. The appointment of a coordinator for “homeland defence”
could enhance, in the French experts view, the coherence of the attempts that have
been initiated at the level of the three pillars by the national ministries. At the same
time, the cross-border troubles that may be caused in the event of an aggression requires
the enhancement of the operational training of the civil-military forces to counter a terrorist,
chemical, radiological or bacteriological attack in a coordinate manner. In the same
view, it is proposed to organise some large-scale interstate exercises on regular bases,
as well as the establishment of a group of military units specialised in civil protection,
designated by member states to carry out common training programmes.
In experts view, to achieve an effective European homeland defence, the EU should
consider the three challenges to its internal security, as follows:
Fundamental rights protection, in the context in which, under the pretext to protect
the population against the aggressions that put the constitutional principles in danger,
authorities tend to limit some of the citizens individual rights. As a result, even if it is