CONCLUSIONS

of the Inter-Parliamentary Conference for the Common Foreign and Security Policy

and the Common Security and Defence Policy

Dublin 24 & 25 March 2013

Introduction

1. The second meeting of the Inter-Parliamentary Conference for the CommonForeign and Security Policy and the Common Security and Defence Policy,hereinafter referred to as “the Inter-Parliamentary Conference”, was held inDublin on 24 and 25 March 2013, at the invitation of the Ceann Comhairle andthe Cathaoirleach, the Presidents respectively of Dáil Éireann and SeanadÉireann, the two Houses of the Parliament of Ireland, in the framework of theParliamentary Dimension of Ireland‟s Presidency of the Council of theEuropean Union, in accordance with the Decisions of the Conference ofSpeakers of the EU Parliaments made at its meetings in Brussels on 4 and 5April 2011 and in Warsaw on 20 and 21 April 2012, and in accordance with theRules of Procedure of the Inter-Parliamentary Conference adopted in Paphos,Cyprus, on 9 September 2012.2. The Inter-Parliamentary Conference was attended by delegations of thenational Parliaments of Member States of the EU and the EuropeanParliament. Delegations of national Parliaments of EU candidate countriesand European member countries of NATO which are not EU Member Statesalso attended as observers.

Procedural business

3. The Inter-Parliamentary Conference adopted a proposal by the PresidencyParliament, made pursuant to the Conclusions of the Inter-ParliamentaryConference in Cyprus, to appoint an Ad Hoc Review Committee (AHRC) toconduct a review of arrangements for the Inter-Parliamentary Conference inaccordance with the decisions of the Conference of Speakers and the Inter-Parliamentary Conference. Adoption was subject to the inclusion of Italy as amember of the Working Group of countries that will co-operate closely withthe Presidencies in presiding over the AHRC. The incoming Presidency ofLithuania is asked to preside over the commencement of the work of the AdHoc Review Committee. The proposal as adopted is appended (Appendix1)to these Conclusions.4. The Inter-Parliamentary Conference considered a proposal by the House ofRepresentatives of the Republic of Cyprus, made pursuant to the Conclusions

of the Inter-Parliamentary Conference in Cyprus, on a fact-finding missionregarding the Southern and Eastern Mediterranean Neighbourhood. It wasagreed to report the comments made on the proposal to the CyprusParliament and to ask it to refer it or a revised proposal to the Inter-Parliamentary Conference in Lithuania in September.

Proceedings of the Inter-Parliamentary Conference

High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy5. The High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,Catherine Ashton, addressed the meeting and set out the priorities andstrategies of the EU in the area of the CFSP and CSDP.6. Catherine Ashton, speaking to the topic “The CFSP and CSDP – Working forPeace, Security and Development in Africa”, discussed the benefits of anintegrated approach to ensure that various policies and instruments at theEU‟s disposal are used coherently and effectively in support of commonobjectives. Concrete success of this approach in Horn of Africa isdemonstrated by the curbing, since May 2012 of hijacking of vessels at sea.Also discussed was the use of a similar Comprehensive Approach inSahel/Mali; importance in each situation of creating circumstances and longterm vision to aid transition to democratic rule; the importance of role ofwomen; continued support by the EU and its Member States in supporting thetransition process initiated in several Arab States including importance ofsupporting specificities of each country.7. The High Representative‟s address was followed by a wide-ranging debate.The themes of the discussion included the importance of respect for localpopulations and adapting Comprehensive Approach to specificities of eachcountry/region; need for “strategic patience” with long term vision inassisting countries; importance of supporting development of concreteessential services; deep democracy, linking political reform with economicreform; other areas of concern including Eastern Partnership countries,Central Africa and Congo; continued importance of EU‟s Strategic Partners;concern with aspects of Human Rights in Russia; continued support for MiddleEast Peace Process; enhancing the development of defence capabilities bystrengthening European defence cooperation through Pooling and Sharing andensuring Research and Development is used to best effect.

Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Ireland8. Ireland‟s Tánaiste (Deputy Prime Minister) and Minister for Foreign Affairs andTrade, Mr. Eamon Gilmore T.D., addressed the meeting on the topic of“Conflict Prevention – the EU as Peacemaker” and set out the perspectives ofthe Irish Presidency in the area of the Common Foreign and Security Policygenerally.9. In the course of his address, the Tánaiste noted that the EU itself was a primeexample of conflict resolution having emerged from centuries of enmity anddivision. In Ireland, the Good Friday Agreement was a recent example of aframework which acknowledged separate political identities and traditionswhile at the same time respecting and helping to bridge them. There wasgrowing appreciation for the role of the Union as a force for good in theworld. He urged greater use of mediation as a useful and cost effective tool.He noted that the Union was involved currently in building state capacity inLibya, implementing the Comprehensive Approach in Somalia andstrengthening the capacity of the authorities in Mali.10. The address by the Tánaiste was followed by a wide-ranging debate. Thethemes of the discussion included the need for even greater foreign policyvision; the supply of arms to the rebels in Syria; the promotion of goodgovernance; the increase in settlements in the E1 area as a serious threat tothe two state solution in Israel; the need for countries to implement thedevelopment aid target of 0.7% of GNI (as the UK had recently) and the needto look beyond current conflicts to future areas of conflict such as Pakistanand Morocco. The Tánaiste acknowledged that Europe could do more inrelation to tax justice and Europe not providing tax havens for multi-nationalcompanies to evade and avoid paying taxes in African countries where theyare operating.Minister for Justice, Equality and Defence, Ireland11. Ireland‟s Minister for Justice, Equality and Defence, Mr. Alan Shatter T.D.,addressed the meeting on the topic of “The European Council on Defence2013” and set out the perspectives of the Irish Government in the area of theCommon Security and Defence Policy generally.12. In the course of his address, the Minister highlighted active engagement andcommon themes emerging since December 2012 including the need for;Pooling and Sharing, clearly articulated political commitment to deploymentof Battlegroups; development of functional toolbox of military capabilitiesand improved EU level decision making cycles; emphasised Common Securityand Defence Policy must ensure maintenance of peace and security, so as to

guarantee security of EU‟s citizens and the promotion of its interests; EU hasto be able to rely on itself to facilitate actions and reactions to world events,therefore may need to consider Member States specialising in nichecapabilities; internal delays must not delay launching of CSDP operations andpolitical will needed to make capabilities available when and where needed.Finally need to strengthen Europe‟s Defence industry to ensure it is moreintegrated, sustainable and competitive with well-functioning defencemarket.13. The address by the Minister was followed by a wide-ranging debate. Thethemes of the discussion included the economic situation and impact ondefence capabilities, responses to existing and emerging threats; existingEuropean shortfalls in key enablers; capability requirements into the futureand developing a common understanding of priorities; enhancing operationaleffectiveness; improving capacity of EU to rely on itself to facilitate actionsand reactions to world events; cooperation with other relevant internationalactors.14. Remarks were also made by Mr. Maciej Popowski, Deputy Secretary General,European External Action Service.

Workshops

15. The plenary meeting of the Inter-Parliamentary Conference was suspended topermit delegates to participate in two workshops.The Comprehensive Approach to instability in Africa – the experience of theHorn of Africa16. Delegates met in Workshop format to debate “The Comprehensive Approachto instability in Africa – the experience of the Horn of Africa”. The workshopwas moderated by Mr. Ronan Murphy, former Director of Irish Aid. Ms. JoelleJenny, Director for Conflict Prevention and Security Policy, EEAS, madeopening contextual remarks. The rapporteur was Mr. Arnaud Danjean,Chairman of the Security and Defence sub-Committee, European Parliament.17. A number of key themes and challenges emerged in the course of debateamong delegates. These included the efforts to resolve the conflict inSomalia and the state-building and stabilisation effort in that country, seriousfood instability and vulnerability problems in the region, cross-border tensionsbetween Ethiopia and Eritrea, threats of terrorism and the continuing threatto international shipping from pirates.

18. Delegates discussed the combination of humanitarian and developmentefforts, together with the political engagement of the EU SpecialRepresentative and the work of the three CSDP missions. Particularlyhighlighted was the importance of partnerships especially with the AfricanUnion which ensures legitimacy and local ownership, and of good coordinationbetween Member States' actions with those of the EU institutions.19. The workshop noted that development of a genuine „ComprehensiveApproach‟ to the external relations of the EU should ensure that the variouspolicies and instruments at the EU‟s disposal are used coherently andeffectively in support of common objectives. The comprehensive approachshould apply to all aspects of the “conflict cycle” from prevention tomediation to crisis management to post conflict reconstruction and peace-building.Delegates also recognised the importance of ensuring thathumanitarian assistance should continue to be available to all who need it.The Middle East Peace Process – the role of the European Union20. A second Workshop was held at which delegates debated “The Middle EastPeace Process – the role of the European Union”. The workshop wasmoderated by Mr. Andreas Reinicke, EU Special Representative for the MiddleEast Peace Process. The rapporteur was Mr. Petras Auštrevičius, DeputySpeaker of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania.21. A number of key themes emerged in the course of debate among delegates.These included the urgent need for genuine, substantive and continuousnegotiations on the MEPP; the need for a comprehensive, regional solution toensure long-lasting peace; the importance of a negotiated peace based on thetwo-state solution; and the on-going determination of the EU to workconstructively with all who wish to ensure peace, stability and prosperity inthe region, including the US and the Quartet and regional actors includingTurkey and Egypt. Delegates emphasised that ending the conflict is afundamental interest of the EU and noted the importance of a ceasefireagreement in Gaza. In addition to its diplomatic role, the provision ofhumanitarian and development assistance to different countries in the MiddleEast was discussed. Recent developments, including the formation of a newIsraeli government and the visit of President Obama and his strong politicalcommitment to the peace process, were noted in the hope such landmarkswill add fresh impetus to the peace process in due course. Delegates alsodiscussed current developments regarding Syria and the Arab Spring. Thecomplexity of the situation in Syria and the risk for further instability in theregion was acknowledged. Delegates expressed a desire to see the EU fulfilits political leadership potential in the region including by means of financialassistance.

Conclusions

The Inter-Parliamentary Conference adopted the following conclusions:The Inter-Parliamentary Conference -22. Being committed to fulfil the role envisaged for it by Title II of Protocol I ofthe Treaty of Lisbon and mandated to it by the Conference of Speakers of EUParliaments,23. Aware of the dynamic and expectations for a more effective and coherentCommon EU Foreign and Security Policy and Security and Defence Policy,resulting from the adoption of the Treaty of Lisbon,24. Cognisant of the fact that the CFSP and CSDP involve the contribution of avariety of actors and policies at both national and EU levels,25.Conscious that the multi-layered nature of the CFSP and CSDP necessitatesclose cooperation between national Parliaments and the EuropeanParliament, with full regard to their respective rights, duties andrepresentative mandates,26. Is committed to contributing to the development of the Inter-ParliamentaryConference towards an optimum configuration,27. Resolves to enhance the democratic engagement in the CFSP and CSDP bypromoting a more systematic, regular and timely exchange of information onthe different aspects and implications of the CFSP and CSDP at both nationaland EU levels,28. Recalls the achievement of the EU in being awarded the prestigious NobelPeace Prize as an example of regional reconciliation and peace following thedevastation and destruction of the first half of the twentieth century;Recognises that promoting peaceful resolution of conflict has been a corepart of the Unions CFSP since the 2001 European Council made a commitmentto strengthening capacities for conflict prevention and peace-buildingincluding preventive diplomacy, mediation, dialogue and reconciliation;29. Considers the further strengthening of these capacities to be essential toachieving a Comprehensive Approach; Believes that the Union's uniqueexperiences and resources in this field, including those of its nationalparliaments, should be utilized and shared;

30. Emphasises that the strength of the EU lies in developing a ComprehensiveApproach drawing upon its unique ability to mobilise the full range ofpolitical, economic, development, humanitarian and - as a last resort and inaccordance with the UN Charter - military means to address global challengesand threats; Is convinced that the effectiveness of this approach is onlypossible by solid coordination between the European External Action Serviceand the Commission and crucially via the support and complementarityoffered by the actions of the Member States;31. Welcomes the HRVP's initiative to map out in a report how to achieve such aComprehensive Approach and thereby make full use of the potential of theLisbon Treaty; Is convinced that inter-parliamentary engagement throughdialogue, cooperation and promotion of democracy constitutes a significantlong term component of this Comprehensive Approach;32. Is determined, by means of this enhanced dialogue and exchange ofinformation, to address the decision-making, capacity-building andoperational weaknesses of the CFSP and CSDP, in order to make it moreeffective and efficient in addressing our common challenges and pursuing ourcommon goals,33. Expects the High Representative to bring forward an ambitious report in atimely manner on the review of the organisation and functioning of the EEASas decided by Council on 26 July 2010 and to allow adequate time for debateand comment on this report by parliaments,34. Acknowledges that the complex crisis situation in Mali and the Sahelrepresents a serious and immediate challenge for European foreign andsecurity policy and fully supports the actions initiated by France andreinforced by the EU in Mali involving the deployment of the ComprehensiveApproach, especially, the establishment of the EUTM Mali,35. Welcomes the efforts to establish the rule of law and address the loss of lifein the Horn of Africa and supports all efforts to fully implement the EUstrategy for the Horn of Africa, which implements the ComprehensiveApproach and, in particular, the achievements of the three current operationsEUNAVFOR Atalanta, EUTM Somalia and EUCAP Nestor to reinforce theprospects of sustainable regional stability,36. Encourages the African Union including regional organisations to play agreater role in addressing the conflicts in Africa and specifically in the Hornof Africa,

37. Calls on the various EU institutions to develop further the tools at theirdisposal for conflict prevention and, in particular, mediation which is aneffective and cost-efficient instrument for conflict prevention and to deployall of these tools in a much more coordinated way,38. Notes the commitment made by the HRVP to ensuring the EU plays aprominent role in the difficult but important process of peace in the MiddleEast; supports wholeheartedly the Council conclusions of December 2012 onthe Middle East Peace Process and welcomes any moves aimed at therestarting of genuine negotiations on the MEPP and at the achievement of thetwo-state solution with the State of Israel and an independent, democratic,contiguous and viable State of Palestine living side by side in peace andsecurity; recalls that solving the conflict in the Middle East is a fundamentalinterest of the EU as well as of the parties themselves and the wider region,39. Stresses that the need for progress in the peace process is even more urgentdue to the ongoing changes in the Arab world; Highlights the need fordialogue with the Arab League and the Organisation of the Islamic Conferenceas well as other relevant regional actors on how to help restart negotiations;welcomes the positive commitment to the peace process by the re-elected USadministration and believes that the EU should make dialogue andcoordination with the US on this issue a high priority; Stresses the importanceof continuing support to the Palestinian Authority in order to maintain theirstatehood management capacity,40. Notes that the report of the High Representative aimed at developing furtherproposals and actions to strengthen CSDP and improve the availability of therequired civilian and military capabilities is due by September 2013, with aview to a full discussion at the December 2013 European Council and urgesthe fullest consultation possible with all parliaments in this regard,41. Encourages the Council to give a much-needed political boost to address theserious decline in European defence investment, capabilities and industrialcapacity and to reconsider the financing mechanism of CSDP operations aswell as the EU battle groups; Welcomes also the important contribution beingmade by the European Commission‟s Task Force,42. Trusts that the European Council will reaffirm the importance of the defencepillar in the EU's comprehensive approach and commit to addressing defencecapability shortfalls as well as bridging the gap between the Union's civilianand military capacities; Encourages therefore the European Council to set outa roadmap with specific timelines for achieving progress on defence issues

including the Pooling and Sharing initiatives through the European DefenceAgency as well as other solutions to make sure that the Union's security isassured despite the significant defence cuts in all Member States,43. Asks the Presidency Parliament, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure ofthe Inter-Parliamentary Conference, to forward these Conclusions to alldelegations, to the Presidents of National Parliaments and of the EuropeanParliament, to the Presidents of the European Council and the Commissionand the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,44. Between now and the next meeting of the Conference, its members will focuson identifying the obstacles to the implementation of all the provisions to theLisbon Treaty concerning the CSDP. During the next meeting of theConference, a session should be devoted to a discussion of these questions.The conclusions of these questions could be sent to the European Council inview of the December meeting devoted to the defence questions.

APPENDIX 1 DECISION BY THE INTER-PARLIAMENTARY CONFERENCE TO APPOINT AN AD HOC

REVIEW COMMITTEE

History

The Conference of Speakers of the European Union Parliaments agreed, in theConclusions which it adopted in Warsaw on 21 April 2012, as follows concerning thereview of arrangements for the Inter-Parliamentary Conference:“TheConference of Speakers recommends conducting a review of these arrangementsfor the Inter-Parliamentary Conference after two years from its first meeting, andsubmitting conclusions from such review by the relevant Presidency of the Conferenceof Speakers of the European Union Parliaments.”.The first Inter-Parliamentary Conference in Cyprus on 9-10 September 2012 –“Endorsingthe recommendations of the Conference of Speakers meeting in Warsaw inApril 2012 that the Conference of Speakers should conduct a review of arrangementsfor the Inter-Parliamentary Conference two years after its first meeting,”adopted Rules of Procedure which provided, in Article 9, that –“TheInter-Parliamentary Conference may appoint an ad hoc review committee whichwould, eighteen (18) months from the first meeting of the Inter-ParliamentaryConference, evaluate the workings of the Inter-Parliamentary Conference and makerecommendations thereon to be deliberated upon by the Conference of EU Speakers.”.The Inter-Parliamentary Conference in Cyprus on 9-10 September 2012 agreed thefollowing paragraph in the Introductory Remarks to its Conclusions:“TheInter-Parliamentary Conference adopted its Rules of Procedure. All amendmentssubmitted by national Parliaments and not taken on board will be reviewed by an adhoc committee to be established by the Inter-Parliamentary Conference in order toevaluate these proposals and present recommendations to the Speakers’ Conference ofthe EU, within eighteen (18) months from the first meeting of the Inter-ParliamentaryConference.The incoming Irish Presidency is asked to submit to the Inter-Parliamentary Conference a proposal on the composition of the review committee.”.

Proposal of the Irish Presidency

An Ad Hoc Review Committee (AHRC) is appointed to conduct a review of arrangementsfor the Inter-Parliamentary Conference in accordance with the decisions of theConference of Speakers and the Inter-Parliamentary Conference.

The AHRC is composed of one representative of each of the delegations of the nationalParliaments of the EU Member States and the European Parliament.The AHRC shall be presided over by the Presidency Parliament, in close co-operationwith the Trio national Parliaments (Ireland, Lithuania and Greece), the EuropeanParliament, Cyprus and Italy.A Working Group of the AHRC is established to conduct a preliminary review ofarrangements for the Inter-Parliamentary Conference.The Working Group is composed of one representative of each of the delegations of theTrio national Parliaments, the European Parliament, Cyprus and Italy.The Working Group shall be presided over by the Presidency Parliament.The Working Group may request the observations of the national Parliaments of the EUMember States on any matter within its remit. National Parliaments of the EU MemberStates may, at their own initiative, submit observations to the Working Group.The Working Group shall report its observations and recommendations to the AHRC.The Working Group shall meet at the Inter-Parliamentary Conference in Lithuania butmay meet by agreement at any time before it reports its recommendations to theAHRC.The AHRC may meet by agreement at any time but shall meet in advance of and makeobservations and recommendations to the Inter-Parliamentary Conference presided overby the Greek Presidency.The AHRC ceases to exist on the conclusion of the Inter-Parliamentary Conferencepresided over by the Greek Presidency.

Indicative Roadmap

September 2012CyprusThe Irish Presidency is asked to submitto the IPC a proposal on the composition of theAHRC.A proposal is submitted by the Irish Presidencyto the IPC in Dublin.The Working Group meets at the IPC.Before the Greek IPC, the Working Groupsubmits recommendations to the AHRC.