PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Europaudvalget 2005-06, Det Udenrigspolitiske Nævn 2005-06
EUU Alm.del Bilag 262, UPN Alm.del Bilag 107
Offentligt

For a European civil

protection force: europe aid

Report by Michel Barnier

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Contact:

[email protected]

• Satellite image over Balakot (Pakistan): data © Space Imaging 2005

• Map over Banda Aceh: map created by DLR: data © Space Imaging 2005

May 2006

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

For a European civil

protection force: europe aid

Report by Michel Barnier

former French Minister for Foreign Affairs and

former Member of the European Commission

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Thanks

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

By jointly entrusting me with this mission José Manuel Barroso, President of the European

Commission, and Wolfgang Schüssel, President of the Council of the European Union, have given

me the opportunity to propose a project which clearly has European added value and meets an

urgent need. The European Parliament too has often advocated this new form of solidarity.

This mission has also enabled me to renew contact with many of those with whom I had the pleasure

to work as Commissioner or as Minister. I would like to express my personal gratitude to them and

to all the European civil servants whose advice and ideas were so valuable. My very special thanks

go to Jean-Marc Pisani for his competent and cooperative contribution as rapporteur throughout

this four-month mission, and to Isabelle Richard-Misrachi, for her commitment and efficiency.

The twelve proposals contained in this report are for the time being purely personal. I have set out

to be both realistic and straight-thinking – realistic not only in order to take account of certain

reservations and apprehensions but also in view of the crises and disasters which could well be on

the near horizon.

The implications of these proposals are such that they would have to be seen in the context of the

function of the future Union Minister for Foreign Affairs provided for by the Constitutional Treaty,

a function which, one way or another, will have to become operational in the next few years.

Hence my decision to opt for a four-year time-frame for implementation, which will allow the

necessary gradualism and flexibility for each of the Member States – and I hope the European

citizens as well – to understand the proposals and take them on board.

former French Minister for Foreign Affairs and

former Member of the European Commission

9 May 2006

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Contents

Introduction: The need for Europe

Twelve proposals for improving

the European Union’s crisis response capability

1. A European civil protection force: “europe aid”

2. Support for the force from the seven outermost regions

of the European Union

3. The setting-up of a Civil Security Council and a greater role

for the General Affairs and External Relations Council

4. A one-stop shop for the European Union’s humanitarian response

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

5. An integrated European approach to crisis anticipation

6. Six European Union delegations to specialise in crisis management

7. A clear information system for European Union citizens

travelling outside the Union

8. The pooling of consular resources

9. The creation of consular flying squads

10. The setting-up of “European consulates”

on an experimental basis in four geographical areas

11. The establishment of a European consular code

12. Laboratories specialising in bioterrorism and victim identification

Timetable for implementing the twelve proposals

Technical report: inventory and analysis of future requirements

Introduction

Crisis situations and existing European Union instruments

1. Crisis situations

A. Natural disasters

B. Complex humanitarian crises

C. Conflicts

2. Instruments available to the European Union

A. For anticipating crisis response

B. For responding urgently

C. For preparing long-term action

The future: better needs evaluation

1. Improving the European response to crises

2. Civil protection response: what is needed

3. Humanitarian response: what is needed

4. Response to political crises: what is needed

5. Assistance for European citizens: what is needed

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Annexes

Annex 1 : Mission statement

Annex 2 : European Union instruments

Annex 3 : Rehabilitation and reconstruction aid for countries hit by the tsunami

Annex 4 : List of discussions conducted

Annex 5 : List of documents consulted

Maps and diagrams

Map No 1: MIC interventions inside and outside

the European Union since 2002

Map No 2: ECHO interventions and regional offices 2005

Map No 3: Presence of the European Commission delegations worldwide

and relative presence of the Member States

Map No 4: Civilian crisis-management operations and interventions

using the rapid reaction mechanism (2001-2006)

Diagram 1: Examples of natural and man-made disasters inside

and outside the EU (1999-2006)

Diagram 2 : Crisis cycle

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Introduction

The need for Europe

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

“Europe will not be made all at once, or according to a single plan.

It will be built through concrete achievements which first create a

de facto solidarity.”

Robert Schuman, 9 May 1950

In January 2006 Wolfgang Schüssel and José Manuel Barroso, Presidents of the Council of the

European Union and of the European Commission respectively, asked me to draw up a report

on the EU’s response to major cross-border emergencies for the June European Council.

Since the tsunami of 26 December 2004, the EU and other players, in particular the United

Nations, have been eager to improve their response to emergencies. Since January 2005 the

EU has been working on the basis of an action plan. Successive EU Presidencies have since

shown their resolve to boost the EU’s capacity to show solidarity at home and abroad.

As the tsunami so tragically bears out,

the price of non-Europe in crisis management

is too

high. First and foremost, a series of hastily organised individual responses is no match for an

EU response that has been planned, organised and tested against specific scenarios. Secondly,

multiplying responses results in a lack of coordination that diminishes the EU’s impact and

visibility on the ground. The EU response can only be made more cost-effective by properly

organising the Member States’ civil protection capabilities and consular assistance on the basis

of common scenarios, training programmes and exercises.

When drafting this outlook report, I naturally took account of the progress of the many

projects under way at the Council (especially in the Permanent Representatives Committee) and

the Commission. I had talks with a number of Member States, and I sounded out the Commission

and the Council’s General Secretariat.

When all is said and done, I wanted to place the work under way in a

political context.

I have therefore taken the calculated risk of framing my proposals and the associated

timetable in the medium term, and more specifically with an end date of 2010, by which time,

one way or another, the countries of the EU will have created

the post of Union Minister

for Foreign Affairs, provided for in the Constitution, which they wanted and accepted

unanimously in Rome.

By 2010 the Council, the Commission and the Member States will be

working together more effectively on the EU’s external action. I therefore hope that the reader

will make the same mental leap into the medium term. This is the only way in which we can

get over the present hurdles and shortcomings. I also hope that no more disasters will be

needed in the interim to set our thinking, resources and expertise on the right track.

My mission statement

poses the question of what the EU can do to improve its response,

especially to major emergencies

outside the EU.

1. Annex 1 – Mission

statement from Mr Barroso

and Mr Schüssel

Introduction: the need for Europe

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

External emergencies differ in a number of ways from emergencies inside the EU:

They affect

sovereign states,

which are free to decide how to respond to an emergency and

whether to request assistance from abroad.

The

EU Presidency

coordinates the response politically in close cooperation with the

United

Nations, national and local authorities in the country concerned and non-governmental

organisations.

We need to find ways to increase the speed and effectiveness of their collective

decision-making.

There are

many tools at the EU’s disposal.

Naturally, national or regional civil protection

resources can be drawn on. At any rate, we have a presence on the ground through humanitarian

aid, coordinated at international level by the United Nations and channelled at EU level through

ECHO

. Last but not least, the EU implements reconstruction programmes. We need to work out

how best to pool these resources and maximise synergies.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Such emergencies, often in far-off places, affect more than one country and call for

capability

projection.

This projection of men and resources is currently lacking.

Lastly, such emergencies call for

consular assistance,

since EU citizens are naturally more

vulnerable when they are far from their country of origin. In 2003 there were more than 30 million

trips by Europeans outside Europe. The falling price of air travel will increase this number in the

years ahead. In the Indian Ocean tsunami of 26 December 2004 about 200 000 people died and

thousands disappeared. In Thailand alone, 2500 foreign tourists, many of them EU citizens, died.

At issue is whether the Member States of the EU are willing and able to work together to improve

their assistance to citizens in difficulty.

Obviously, if the Member States and the EU institutions take up the proposals outlined in this

report and decide to improve our civil protection response considerably,

that will apply to emer-

gencies in far-off places as well as to disasters within the territory of the EU.

In 1999 Turkey

and Greece were hit by earthquakes at the same time. In the more distant past, some 100 000

people were killed by an earthquake and tidal wave that destroyed the Sicilian city of Messina in

1908. Exactly twenty years ago the Chernobyl disaster, just across the border from the EU, affected

the whole of Europe. And the bombings in Madrid and London have shown that a European

September 11 is possible.

The need for Europe

2. European Commission

Directorate-General

for Humanitarian Aid

Our countries’ citizens

need new proof of the EU’s value added.

Voters in France and the

Netherlands have told us this quite bluntly.

Whether it is the earthquakes or storms of 1999, the wrecks of the

Erika

and the

Prestige

off our

shores, the floods that hit Central Europe in 2002 and again this year, whether it is the tsunami

or the earthquake in Pakistan,

Europe is expected to show solidarity: the EU is called on to act

and the Member States asked to help.

Obviously, a better EU response to these emergencies reflects a real duty to help as well as responding

to the citizens’ political expectations. It has been at the very heart of the European project for fifty

years now.

Since 1950 Europe’s peoples have shown solidarity towards each other but also

towards the other peoples of the world.

It is not by chance that we find this demand for solidarity in two recent initiatives:

The

European Union Solidarity Fund

set up in 2002 at the behest of the Prodi Commission in

the wake of flooding in Germany, the Czech Republic and Austria can mobilise

€1

billion a year

for devastated regions of the EU.

The

draft European Constitution,

for its part, contains a

solidarity clause

(Article I-43) for EU

Member States. It provides for the EU to mobilise all the instruments at its disposal, including

military resources, to protect democratic institutions and the civilian population in the event of

terrorist attack or natural or man-made disaster.

Introduction: the need for Europe

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

The same needs are being expressed and the same proof asked for beyond our continent: inter-

national instability, new threats and environmental hazards oblige us to respond. The citizen has

consistently asked for this: as recently as December 2005,

77% of EU citizens expressed their

backing for a common foreign and security policy and 68% for a common external policy.

Javier Solana has clearly identified the five main threats facing Europe:

terrorism, proliferation of

weapons of mass destruction, regional conflicts, failed states and organised crime. The govern-

ments of each and every Member State have a duty to protect themselves and to respond to these

new geopolitical threats. It is also in their interest to do this together.

The Treaties and the risks being what they are,

we can and must find the will and the resources

to act together more effectively now.

But one way or another, sooner or later, we will need the solutions offered by the draft Treaty

establishing a Constitution for Europe, and in particular the following innovations:

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Union Minister for Foreign Affairs

with authority over all services involved in external action

(external relations, development assistance and humanitarian aid); a

European External Action

Service

will help the Minister fulfil his or her mandate (Article III-296);

the

solidarity clause

(Article I-43) referred to above and its implementing procedures

(Article III-329);

European policy on the prevention of natural disasters and on civil protection

(Article III-284);

EU action on humanitarian aid

in the context of the principles and objectives of the EU’s

external action (Article III-321);

public health

policy covering, in particular, the fight against the major health scourges

(Article III-278);

enhanced cooperation

(Articles I-44 and III-416 to III-423) making it easier for those Member

States that wish to take things further and faster to do so.

What the EU is already doing

Since the early 1990s the EU has been able

to respond to emergencies.

The Humanitarian Aid

Office (ECHO) was set up in 1992. The Commission – like a number of Member States – is already

a very active member of the Good Humanitarian Donorship Initiative and of the donor support

groups set up by the International Committee of the Red Cross and the UN Office for the Coordi-

nation of Humanitarian Affairs.

In 2001 Margot Wallström, who was Environment Commissioner at the time, proposed a Commu-

nity Civil Protection Mechanism, which triggers a movement of solidarity in the event of emer-

gencies both inside and outside the EU. Depending on the circumstances, this solidarity currently

involves pooling certain resources available in the Member States (transport, equipment, medical

teams, etc.). It is designed to respond to the consequences of natural and man-made disasters

(industrial and maritime accidents, terrorist attack, etc.).

Lastly, the EU has worked

to consolidate its emergency response and provide back-up over

time.

Preparing reconstruction and stabilising fragile political situations are two key areas of EU

action. Just as humanitarian aid and the rapid reaction mechanism

have their role to play, so do

large-scale reconstruction programmes.

Moreover, since 2003, at the prompting of Javier Solana and the Council of the European Union,

civilian crisis-management operations in the context of the European Security and Defence Policy

(ESDP) have been added to this arsenal, helping respond effectively to emergencies with

a common foreign and security policy dimension. Twelve such missions are currently under way in,

for instance, Bosnia in the Balkans, Rafah in Palestine and Aceh in Indonesia.

3. Eurobarometer 64 –

December 2005

4. European Security

Strategy, proposed by

Secretary-General/High

Representative Javier

Solana and adopted by

the Heads of State and

Government at the

Brussels European Council

on 12 December 2003

5. See pages 37 to 40

of the technical report

for further details

6. Council Decision

of 23 October 2001

establishing a Community

civil protection mechanism

7. See pages 40 to 42

of the technical report

8. Council Regulation

(EC) No 381/2001

of 26 February 2001

creating a rapid-reaction

mechanism

Introduction: the need for Europe

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Building on and learning from this, I have worked out 12 practical, operational solutions.

They address

three concerns:

making humanitarian aid and civil protection more effective,

providing EU citizens with greater protection and assistance,

strengthening overall consistency.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Diagram 1:

Examples of natural and man-made disasters inside and outside the EU (1999-2006)

1999

Aug

Oct

Dec

2000

Feb

Apr

Jun

Aug

Oct

Dec

2001

Feb

Apr

Jun

Aug

Oct

Dec

2002

Feb

Apr

Jun

Aug

Oct

Dec

2003

Feb

Apr

Jun

Aug

Oct

Dec

2004

Feb

Apr

Jun

Aug

Oct

Dec

2005

Feb

Apr

Jun

Aug

Oct

Dec

2006

Feb

Apr

Jun

Earthquake in Turkey and Greece

Humanitarian crisis in Somalia

Erika Oil Tanker

UK, Foot and Mouth Crisis

"9.11"

WHO issues a global alert on SARS

Floodings in Central and Eastern Europe

Spain: oil tanker Prestige sinks

Darfur crisis

Earthquake in Algeria

Forest fires in France

Forest fires in Portugal

Floodings in France (Arles)

Earthquake in Iran (Bam)

Avian Flu

Earthquake in Northern Morocco

Madrid bombings

Tsunami in SE Asia

Severe snow storms in Sweden

Severe snow storms in Albania

Marburg virus infection outbreak

Floodings in Romania

Floodings in Bulgaria

Floodings in Georgia

Floodings in Kyrgyzstan

Bombings in Egypt (Charm el-Cheick)

London bombings

Food crisis in the Sahel (mainly Niger)

Niger food crisis

Floodings in Bulgaria and Romania

Fires in Portugal

Hurricane Katrina - Floodings in Louisiana

Earthquake in Pakistan (Kashmir)

Food crisis in Kenya

Two tankers collide in front of Cherbourg (ECE)

Mudslide in the Philippines

Floodings in Romania

Bombings in Egypt (Dahab)

Aug

Oct

Dec

Feb

Apr

Jun

Aug

Oct

Dec

Feb

Apr

Jun

Aug

Oct

Dec

Feb

Apr

Jun

Aug

Oct

Dec

Feb

Apr

Jun

Aug

Oct

Dec

Feb

Apr

Jun

Aug

Oct

Dec

Feb

Apr

Jun

Aug

Oct

Dec

Feb

Apr

Jun

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Introduction: the need for Europe

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Twelve proposals for

improving the European Union’s

crisis response capability

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Our

twelve proposals

for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability rest on the ideas

developed in the second part of the report and on progress in the projects and discussions currently

under way in the Council, the Commission, the European Parliament and the Member States.

In general they call for

voluntary participation by the Member States

and they are spread over

a four-year time-frame.

We propose:

A European civil protection force: “europe aid”

Support for the force from the seven outermost regions

of the European Union

The setting-up of a Civil Security Council and a greater role for

the General Affairs and External Relations Council

A one-stop shop for the European Union’s humanitarian response

An integrated European approach to crisis anticipation

Six European Union delegations to specialise in crisis management

A clear information system for European Union citizens travelling

outside the Union

The pooling of consular resources

The creation of consular flying squads

10.

The setting-up of “European consulates” on an experimental basis

in four geographical areas

11.

The establishment of a European consular code

12.

Laboratories specialising in bioterrorism and victim identification

Twelve proposals for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

1. We propose setting up a European

civil protection force: “europe aid”

The Community Civil Protection Mechanism was undoubtedly a step forward: in the event of a

crisis inside or outside the Union, the Member States’ civil protection forces are now better coor-

dinated.

But the mechanism still relies too heavily on the help that is forthcoming spontaneously

in response to events.

More than a year after the tsunami tragedy, there are no

systematic scenarios or protocols

European level for responding to any of seven major risks:

earthquakes and tsunamis; forest

fires and other fires; floods and landslides; industrial and nuclear accidents; terrorist

attacks; disasters at sea;

and

pandemics.

This applies both to internal crises and to external

crises, where such scenarios need to incorporate considerations of humanitarian aid.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Furthermore, the EU has not pooled the

existing national resources.

The paradox is that national

and regional resources do exist; the Member States have a capacity to organise relief and prepare

for disasters, and among other things have set up national crisis centres; the EU also has satellite

observation capacity such as the GMES system.

In the absence of

overall organisation of the European response,

with scenarios, protocols and

identified resources, the cost of non-Europe is being felt in the effectiveness of the response and

in economic terms.

Only preventive organisation and a pooling of existing resources can

bring about the emergence of a European civil protection force.

Such a European force would be governed by five principles:

Dual subsidiarity, in relation to the Member States and in relation to the United Nations:

European crisis capacity must respect the national, regional and local organisation of each

Member State. Units of this European civil protection force would be made available in line with

national and regional powers:

the European force’s resources of people and equipment would

be managed and maintained by the Member States at national or regional level. There would be

no centralisation of resources in Brussels.

The European civil protection force would also respect the coordinating role of the United

Nations. Such a force would be

a positive response to the expectations of the UN,

which sees

clear added value in a European pole with the capacity to act, as compared with a multitude of

national operations working alongside one another.

Voluntary membership and a “bottom-up” approach:

the initiative would come from the

Member State wishing to take part in the force.

Following a methodology outlined in the second part of this report,

we have

identified precise

needs

which are listed in a

“menu”

corresponding to different standard civil protection scenarios.

The items on this menu, taken together, represent an average of what Europe needs in terms of

equipment and national teams in order to respond and to operate the European force. A

precise

and gradual timetable

would see the force move from

potential provision

effective

pooling

of operational capacities or units.

An interested Member State would voluntarily choose one or more items on the menu; it would

finance these items and maintain them in its own country. In this

delegated management

approach,

participation would be “bottom-up”, at the voluntary request of the Member State.

The way in which the Member State decided to participate would of course take account of the

need for specialisation and for the coherence of the whole.

European solidarity:

In the event of a crisis inside or outside Europe, the resources making up

the force would be devoted as a matter of priority to a European response. If the crisis was in a

Member State, and the resources were not needed by Europe, they would be used by the Member

State that maintained them.

9. See map No 1,

page 16, showing MIC

operations inside and

outside the EU since 2002

10. See the technical

report, in the chapter

The future: better needs

evaluation the section

Civil protection response:

what is needed,

pp. 43-45

11. Pp. 26-29

Twelve proposals for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Specialisation:

Member States would specialise in the handling of one or more threats,

corresponding to the various civil protection scenarios (fires, floods, earthquakes etc.) that had

been precisely identified and mapped to the resources needed to tackle them. Member States

could join together to establish a group of countries specialised in the management of a particular

threat, setting up units big enough to be operational. A recent example of specialisation of this

kind is provided by five countries in the south of the EU which have joined together to fight the

danger of fires. In the future the coastal countries of the EU might also pool their resources to set

up a European coastguard.

Openness:

The European force would be open to the non-EU countries that already participate

in the European Civil Protection Mechanism – Bulgaria, Romania, Liechtenstein, Norway and

Iceland – and to the Union’s other neighbours, such as Switzerland, Russia or Turkey.

Recent European history has seen recurrent oil spills (the

Erika,

the

Prestige).

But Europe still lacks

ships able to pump oil on the high seas in stormy weather. Nor are there enough heavy-duty

pumps for use in fighting floods. When crises arise outside Europe, we still hire large aircraft on

each occasion, rather than making the initial investment needed to buy a few. Helicopters may or

may not be available to carry aid to the scene of the disaster. The same applies to fire-fighting

helicopters and aeroplanes. And lastly, rapid action must be taken to develop the interoperability

of communications equipment between civil protection forces.

The European Union must itself

acquire

equipment of this kind under a multiannual programme

– in particular field hospitals, heavy-duty pumps, transport planes and medical material – and

these would be

entrusted to the interested Member States on a delegated management

basis.

The question of

transport planes

is crucial for long-distance transport to disaster areas outside

the EU. The systems already in place (UN, NATO) have to be considered, and so, too, does the

European profile that the EU’s external action ought to have in the eyes of the EU’s own citizens

and of the rest of the world.

In particular, the scenarios and protocols drawn up need to make a systematic analysis of the

complementary role of military resources,

in order to achieve maximum integration and to limit

the cost of emergency deployments. In an emergency, it has first to be considered whether Euro-

pean resources will be enough, or whether there are other needs that justify NATO involvement,

especially if our US and Canadian partners are making a major contribution to the aid effort.

The European resources must in any event be upgraded: to support humanitarian aid, four or five

Airbus A 400Ms (replacing the Hercules C-130s) and some Casa aircraft should be bought. These

would be deployed at one or more multimodal bases. There would have to be close collaboration

between the Member States, the General Secretariat of the Council, the future Operations Centre

and the European Defence Agency.

The European force would be set up by the following

procedure:

The European Council would approve the principle that such a European civil protection force

should be set up. The European Commission would propose the setting up of a European civil

protection force under Article 308 of the EC Treaty, which in the absence of a Constitution is the

only legal basis. The proposal would include the establishment of an

Operations Centre,

upgraded MIC, to

take over from the MIC,

and of a

Joint Training Institute.

If unanimity could

not be achieved within a year of the proposal, enhanced cooperation would allow eight countries

to go ahead with the plan.

Twelve proposals for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

The European force would call on the

existing resources of the Member States.

It should

also be able to acquire additional resources, which would be

entrusted to volunteering

Member States to manage on a delegated basis.

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

To ensure that the national resources made available fitted together coherently, and were

appropriate to requirements, Member States’ proposals for participation would require the tech-

nical approval of the new

Operations Centre.

Member States would continue to be responsible

for the conduct of operations carried out using their own resources.

Setting up the Operations Centre would not require a transfer of powers. The Centre would be

made up of the present MIC teams, with the addition of seconded national experts, who could

give it the benefit of their own specialised knowledge.

The focal points of the European force would be an

Operations Centre

and a

Training

Institute for Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid:

The

Operations Centre

would draw up the scenarios and protocols in close cooperation with

the crisis centres in the Member States, and with the Civil-Military Cell, in order to take account

of the strategic transport facilities that might be available to provide logistical support for the civil

protection force and for humanitarian aid. One department of the Operations Centre would be

responsible for the monitoring and use of satellite capacity in three areas: navigation, communi-

cation and observation.

In line with the

“bottom-up” approach,

the Operations Centre would delegate or subcontract

all or part of the drafting of scenarios to specialised bodies: the European Centre for Disease

Prevention and Control in Stockholm could draw up the scenario for handling pandemics, in

collaboration with the Member States and the Commission’s Directorate-General for Health and

Consumer Protection; some Member States, such as Italy, which has acquired special expertise –

as shown by the operation of the crisis rooms at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and its civil

protection arrangements – could also share their experience and draw up scenarios for particular

threats. In the same way, the Operations Centre would examine the studies and proposals for

preparedness and prevention drawn up by the Council, and more especially by the European

Counter-terrorism Coordinator. It would organise joint exercises and practices in close collaboration

with the Member States.

Training Institute for Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid

would be set up. Its location

would be chosen by the Council. It would provide training for staff and for the national and

regional teams making up the European force and for the evaluation experts working for the EU.

It would train the single reconnaissance teams (proposal 5). The Institute would also be open to

NGOs, and on certain conditions to volunteers from among the public who possessed expertise

that would be useful in assistance and rescue operations.

12. Report of the

European Parliament’s

Committee on Regional

Development, rapporteur

Mr Rolf Berend, on

the European Union

Solidarity Fund

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

The European force would be financed as follows:

annual transfer of 10% from the EU Solidarity Fund,

which currently has a budget of

€1

billion a year, in the spirit of the Berend Report.

The

resources and equipment

of the Operations

Centre and the Training Centre could then be bought under a multi-annual programme.

In order to

supplement the efforts of the Member States, and with a view to cohesion

between the 25 Member States of the Union,

some of the equipment of the force, over and

above the capacities bought directly by the Member States, could also be financed out of this

transfer of 10% of the Solidarity Fund.

This equipment would be entrusted to the Member

States on a delegated management basis.

If financing from the Solidarity Fund was not sufficient to cover the external aspect of civil

protection, the drawing together of civil protection and humanitarian aid (proposal 4) would

allow it to be financed out of ECHO’s budget.

If a crisis arose inside the EU, unless the Council specifically decided otherwise, the Member

States requesting European assistance would bear the costs occasioned by the provision of

resources by the other Member States.

Twelve proposals for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

A proper

legal basis for the European force inside the Union

would be provided by a

Council regulation on covering the risks associated with civil protection operations in

the European Union.

Unlike operations outside the Union, these are not covered by an

agreement of the kind that applies to missions outside the Union.

Last, the profile of the force would be raised by choosing a logo that would be clear

to the EU public.

It seems to me that if the European response is to become more visible, outside communication

regarding emergency action taken by the Union has to be simplified.

The logo “EuropeAid” is already being used by the EU, but the

implications of the visibility of

EU emergency response are such

that the existing terminology needs to be extended to allow

the logo to be used for emergency action both inside and outside the Union.

This logo would be easily recognised by European citizens, especially if it was worn by the staff of

the European civil protection force and displayed on its aircraft carrying humanitarian aid.

We propose a common uniform for

all staff of the European civil protection force

It is essential that the staff carrying out operations on the ground should be visible.

It will be remembered that one of the controversies that arose during the tsunami

crisis concerned the allegation that the European profile was too low, and did not

do justice to the very big overall effort made by the Europeans.

A single uniform for all staff acting as part of the European force would help the

intervention teams to feel that they were part of the European effort. The design of

the uniform could draw on the best already existing in the Member States.

It would include the European flag followed by the logo “europe aid” and the flag

of the country of the wearer:

13. See Annex 3,

on rehabilitation and

reconstruction aid

for countries hit by

the tsunami.

EUROPE AID

National

flag

Twelve proposals for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Map No 1: MIC interventions inside and outside the European Union since 2002

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

2. We propose that the force be supported from

the seven outermost regions of the European Union

Geography is an important asset for the EU when it comes to crisis response.

Thanks to its seven outermost regions, the EU has a territorial and human presence off the African

coast (Canaries and Madeira), in the Indian Ocean (Reunion Island), at the heart of Latin America

(French Guiana), close to Central and North America (Guadeloupe and Martinique) and in the

middle of the Atlantic (Azores), not to mention the overseas territories in the Pacific.

These outermost European regions, though not exclusively, can provide support bases to allow the

pre-positioning of basic products and logistical backup. This would facilitate the deployment of

European human resources and equipment in cases of emergency humanitarian assistance outside

the EU.

Close cooperation between the Member States and the operations centre should enable us to

identify the best possible positions for the backup sites. The French Red Cross has set up emer-

gency humanitarian response teams on this pattern. They are specialised (primary health care,

emergency hospital, water and sanitation, telecommunications, logistics and distribution), ready-

formed and can be mobilised on demand. The Red Cross can thus deploy rapidly via a regional

rapid intervention platform for the Indian Ocean (Plateforme

Régionale d’Intervention Rapide

pour l’Océan Indien

or PIROI), which has basic equipment (cholera kits and water, tents, medicines,

etc.) and can send out emergency teams in the area within 24 hours. A similar structure exists in

the Caribbean and another is planned for the Pacific.

The EU should organise its support structure along the same lines.

Twelve proposals for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

3. We propose setting up a Civil Security Council and

giving the General Affairs and External

Relations Council a greater role

These proposals relate to

the most serious internal and external cross-border crises

that could

affect the European Union (tsunami, terrorist attacks, pandemics). They take account of ongoing

work in the Council and the Commission.

The Civil Security Council will be set up on the basis of existing coordination arrangements and

the Crisis Steering Group by the Heads of State and Government at the European Council. It will

be composed of the President of the Council, the President of the Commission, the Secretary-

General/High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, the Member State(s)

affected and the Chief of Staff of the European Union, who may appoint representatives. The President

of the Commission may be represented by the future Commissioner responsible for civil protection

and emergency humanitarian assistance.

The Civil Security Council will meet immediately at the request of the Presidency-in-office of the

Council of the European Union. It will report to the General Affairs and External Relations Council

or to the Permanent Representatives Committee if delegated for this purpose by the Council.

The Civil Security Council will meet only when a crisis arises in order to ensure that operational

procedures are properly applied and to keep the Member States informed.

The Civil Security Council will have a dual role:

It will establish that a crisis exists and launch the procedures drawn up by the operations centre

for each scenario. Each institution will then manage operational implementation in accordance

with its responsibilities. To avoid any delay in deploying the assistance, a

clause on the immediate

departure

of national teams is envisaged in case the Civil Security Council does not meet rapidly.

It will keep the Member States regularly informed through the Permanent Representatives

Committee.

At a political level, the

General Affairs and External Relations Council

will alone be responsible

for the political handling of the crisis. It will meet in the event of a cross-sectoral crisis inside or

outside the EU. It will inform the

Permanent Representatives Committee

of its meeting and will

delegate to it the authority to take rapid action with respect to any decision coming under its

responsibility for the duration of the crisis.

Once a year the General Affairs and External Relations Council will hear a report from the Civil

Security Council and will discuss EU action in the fields of humanitarian assistance and civil protection

and assess the action taken. The same presentation and debate will take place at the European

Parliament.

Twelve proposals for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

4. We propose a one-stop-shop for

the European Union’s humanitarian response

In order to perform its various funding, political and operational roles successfully, the Commission

must ensure a consistent humanitarian response. The tsunami, followed a few months later by the

earthquake in Pakistan, highlighted a number of limitations of humanitarian action as it is

currently organised. One of the lessons to be drawn from these disasters is that we need to boost

our capacity to assess needs and provide a rapid response. We also need to improve our ability to

deliver humanitarian assistance. These two key aspects require cooperation between civil protection

and humanitarian assistance departments.

The fact that there are two contact points within the Commission, one purely humanitarian and

one covering the civil protection field but also elements of humanitarian assistance, complicates

preparatory work. It also adds to a real risk of confusion among our external partners, primarily

the United Nations. The coordination mechanism for civil protection should therefore gradually be

attached to DG ECHO in order to create a

one stop shop for the EU's humanitarian response.

This would perform two functions:

Make the EU's emergency response more consistent and efficient,

and in particular ensure

better preparation, organise single assessments and carry out coordinated deployments. On the

latter point, when an external crisis arises, it is vital that the civil protection and humanitarian

assistance responses be closely coordinated. The one-stop-shop would also provide a single

contact point with the United Nations.

We must give immediate attention to improving our emergency response to external crises:

several members of the MIC staff should be seconded to ECHO to prepare joint scenarios and

assessments for an external response. As things stand at present, until other arrangements are

made, the RELEX

crisis platform

set up by the President of the Commission immediately after the

tsunami must be the interface between ECHO, the MIC and the General Secretariat of the Council

on the political aspects of the EU's emergency response.

It is hoped that before the next Commission takes up office the Heads of State and Government

find some means of creating the post of Union Minister for Foreign Affairs as proposed in the

draft Constitutional Treaty.

The President of the European Commission could then give sole

responsibility for humanitarian assistance and civil protection to a single Commissioner

working with the Minister for Foreign Affairs/Vice-President of the Commission.

Improve external communication on our emergency response.

A single spokesperson

working with the future European Commissioner responsible for humanitarian assistance and civil

protection will handle communication on our emergency response. The same person could also

act as spokesperson for the future Civil Security Council. In this case, the Commission and Council

would need a single set-up for external communication on behalf of the European Union.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Twelve proposals for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

5. We propose an integrated European

approach to crisis anticipation

We need to devise a more consistent integrated European approach to crisis response at all stages

of the crisis cycle,

in particular as regards

assessing situations, training and pooling experts.

diagram 2:

the crisis cycle

There is

no prevention without observation.

We should therefore systematically use the

GMES system

, which supports the development of European policy on the environment and secu-

rity and helps to monitor its implementation at local, regional, Community and world level. The

GMES programme will largely meet the EU's civil protection needs. Given the strategic importance

of earth observation in the environmental and security fields, we should keep to the deadlines set

by the Göteborg Council of June 2001 and develop

an independent and operational European

global monitoring capacity by 2008 at the latest.

We need to ensure, as of now, that there is a

single, “integrated” assessment of situations

by setting up single, multi-disciplinary teams,

both for the emergency humanitarian response

and for long-term follow-up

and

to prepare for the transition to the reconstruction phase.

A single needs assessment

for

the emergency humanitarian response

should be provided as

swiftly as possible, though without, of course, encroaching on the coordination role assigned to the

United Nations. At present several evaluations are made in parallel. Coordinating different teams

with differing chains of command on the ground proves costly in terms of human resources, coor-

dination, and effectiveness. Depending on the situation and without prejudice to the neutrality and

impartiality of humanitarian operations, these teams could also include military personnel to analyse

the advantage of additional logistical back-up.

A single assessment of situations

for the “consolidation” phase should be carried out by the

Council and the Commission. Following a systematic joint assessment of the political and reconstruction

requirements, the instruments available to the EU to respond to the crisis would be identified. Each

institution would then set in motion its own operational procedures. The Council and Commission

would coordinate their responses on the spot. And the Commission would have to take account of

the link between the emergency response and longer-term Community programmes.

These single assessments should result in the pooling of the available expertise

using

two

databases,

one covering the humanitarian aid and civil protection requirements and the other the

requirements for the consolidation phase. For that phase the Council’s Secretariat General and the

Commission would work in tandem. The Member States would also support this approach by

making available experts from their national cooperation agencies.

14. See Diagram 2

on the “crisis cycle”

15. Announced in the

European Commission’s

Communication to the

Council and Parliament,

10.11.2005 –

COM (2005) 565 final

Twelve proposals for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

A single training régime

should be set up for the European personnel deployed

in the event

of humanitarian emergencies (including the health aspects) and for the consolidation phase,

centred around a “common core” and specialisation modules for each of the phases.

The

European Institute for Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid

could run this training.

This would help generate a common sense of identity and common working methods. The teams

trained would take part in exercises such as those held in 2005 in Sicily, which involved Sweden,

the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Greece and Spain plus more than 30 observer countries, or in

2004 with the “top” five countries in fire protection.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

6. We propose that six European Union

regional delegations specialise

in crisis management

We should take advantage of the geographical coverage of these delegations to turn them into

an effective crisis response instrument.

We need

to set up six regional delegations specialising in crisis management

by drawing

on ECHO’s

experience. ECHO has 90 field experts and 150 local experts in six regional offices –

Amman, Bangkok, Dakar, Managua, Nairobi and New Delhi.

The

regional delegations are identified in Africa, Asia and Latin America

by the Directorate-

General for External Relations in cooperation with ECHO and in consultation with the General

Secretariat of the Council. These six regional delegations must be provided with means of

communication enabling them to transmit the necessary information to Brussels.

Each

regional delegation

be provided with a civil protection officer, a specialist in political crisis

management, a reconstruction expert, a logistics expert, a governance specialist and a pro-

gramme manager. The civil protection officer will liaise with the Operational Centre and the local

civil protection, early warning and coordination services. He will be given training for that purpose

funded from the Operational Centre’s budget and report directly to the Head of Delegation. The

civil protection officer will be responsible for the safety of the premises and for implementing the

staff evacuation plan. Together with the ECHO office head, he will be the contact for the teams

deployed in the event of a major crisis and will coordinate institutional support actions and

training. The training provided to civil protection officers at the relevant regional delegations will

be open to staff posted to the embassies of the Member States in the area.

During the first year, these

new organisational arrangements

will be gradually tested in

three

pilot delegations

in Africa, Asia and Latin America to enable the system to be fine-tuned. After

one year an evaluation will be carried out and the system will be extended to all pre-identified

areas on the basis of its recommendations.

Lastly,

the head of delegation will have additional coordination powers.

The ECHO offices

and their staff will be placed under the authority of the head of delegation. The ECHO office head

will advise the head of delegation on how to manage humanitarian crisis situations. The head of

delegation and the delegation’s head of operations will be given specific training for crisis situations.

In crisis areas which have been identified as a top priority, a secure communication system will be

set up as a matter of urgency. It will be linked to the ARGUS system and will be operational even

in a major crisis within a protected enclosure on the delegation’s premises.

16. See map No 2 –

ECHO interventions and

regional offices in 2005

Twelve proposals for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Map No 2: ECHO interventions and regional offices 2005

7. We propose establishing a clear information

system for European Union citizens

travelling outside the Union

As a preventive measure,

we propose establishing a clear information system

for European

Union citizens travelling outside the Union.

1. First, the following will be

reproduced on all EU passports:

Article 20 of the Treaty establishing the European Community:

“Every citizen of the Union

shall, in the territory of a third country in which the Member State of which he is a national is not

represented, be entitled to protection by the diplomatic or consular authorities of any Member

State, on the same conditions as the nationals of that State. Member States shall establish

the necessary rules among themselves and start the international negotiations required to secure

this protection.”

Useful telephone numbers for persons requiring assistance,

and in particular the number

of the crisis centre in each Member State.

Second, a

targeted information campaign

will be organised, particularly at airports.

Twelve proposals for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

8. We propose pooling consular resources

When the Asian tsunami occurred it became apparent that consular networks needed to develop

an adequate crisis response. With more and more people travelling abroad, we need to take struc-

tural action now to evaluate and pool capacity, with due allowance for the resources of European

Commission and, in future, European Union delegations abroad. The proposed responses respect

the subsidiarity principle.

We propose evaluating existing capacity:

the existing consular resources of the Member States

should be evaluated in order to anti-

cipate requirements in the event of a crisis. A country-by-country inventory of representative

offices (consulates, embassies, honorary consulates) is a first step to identifying resources and

needs in terms of diplomatic and consular representations worldwide.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

a map showing Commission delegations

abroad and the relative presence of the Member

States

suggests that the delegations should be included in a more general discussion of capacity

evaluation, especially in countries where few of the Member States are represented.

Map No 3: Presence of the European Commission delegations worldwide

and relative presence of the Member States

17. See map No 3 –

Presence of the European

Commission delegations

worldwide and relative

presence of the Member

States

18. See the technical

report, in the chapter

“The future: better needs

evaluation” the section

assistance for European

citizens, p. 49

this evaluation should also comprise an exchange of best practice

between national consu-

lates abroad in the fields of assistance and evacuation.

The Council General Secretariat could make an early start on coordinating this exercise, in close

cooperation with the Commission.

We propose stepping up cooperation between the Member States’ representations,

Commission delegations and the Presidency of the Council of the European Union.

Under the existing Treaties, delegations must be in a position to

help pool available resources

order to facilitate cooperation on the ground, in response to a growing demand on the part of

the Member States. This responsibility of the delegations, quite apart from the practical and

logistic aspects referred to in the second part of the report,

should be reflected:

Twelve proposals for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

in an

appropriate administrative framework

which gives the head of delegation the neces-

sary flexibility to mobilise his staff in the event of a crisis. Some staff members can be mobilised

because their technical skills are useful (civil engineers, water purification specialists, health

specialists, energy project managers, etc.). If necessary, acting under the leadership of the head of

delegation, assisted by the civil protection consultant and the head of the ECHO office, they can

reinforce

the teams responsible for making an initial assessment of the situation in the event

of a major disaster.

in the setting-up of an

emergency financial reserve

enabling heads of delegation to take any

necessary support measures without delay. These measures should essentially cover logistical and

material assistance. The reserve could be used within the framework of the budget of the future

stability instrument, on condition that its legal basis allows the funding of emergency measures

for EU nationals.

We propose joint funding of the most costly evacuation operations

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Evacuation operations for EU citizens will involve nationals of several Member States. The Member

States will work together on evacuation plans abroad. When evacuations take place, they often

entail significant costs. It should therefore be possible to refund

the cost of these evacuation

operations

over a given threshold using the CFSP budget; this could function along similar lines

to the

solidarity fund internally.

The Commission and Council should look into this option in the

near future.

9. We propose the creation of

consular flying squads

The tsunami tragedy showed the need for rapid reaction and mutual support, given that some

States with citizens in the area had no representation and bearing in mind the scale of the disaster

for the States that did have a representation.

Consular “flying squads” are a response to this need.

Made up of diplomats from various Member States, they would be ready to fly out in the event

of a disaster.

They would receive joint training in emergency management. This would enable them to form a

sense of common identity and formulate common procedures for action on behalf of European

citizens abroad in the event of a crisis.

Deployed immediately to assist European nationals, they would help people deal with the formalities

if there were no consulate on the spot. The Commission delegations, where well placed to provide

added value, could accommodate these squads and provide them with the necessary logistical

support (contacts, communication).

The Member States would undertake to train their diplomats for such special consular cooperation.

Joint exercises and training would be organised by geographical region or at European level under

the authority of the future Union Minister for Foreign Affairs. The idea of creating a

Joint

Consular Academy,

as proposed by the European Parliament in 2000, ought to be considered.

In the medium and long term, the best response in order to help European citizens would be to

set up “European consulates”, especially for the countries that are part of the Schengen area.

Member States could start pooling of their consular resources at once on a voluntary basis

applying a “bottom-up” approach. The Commission could be asked to contribute to the financing

of joint training.

Twelve proposals for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

10. We propose setting up “European consulates”

on an experimental basis in four regions

The creation of joint consular services was explicitly proposed by the Hague Programme, point

1.7.3:

“Common visa offices should be established in the long term, taking into account discussions

on the establishment of a European External Action Service.”

Besides issuing visas, these services

would be transformed into a genuine common consular corps that could act to assist any EU citizen

in distress.

We propose

four experimental regions – the Caribbean, the Balkans, the Indian Ocean and

West Africa

– to develop these first “European consulates”. These regions have been identified on

the basis of the following three criteria: the presence of Commission delegations, the number of

European tourists, and the relative representativeness of the Member States.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

A European consulate would be created in each of these regions around the existing Commission

delegations. With the creation of a Union Minister for Foreign Affairs and a European External

Action Service in prospect, this scheme could become the general rule after proper evaluation and

could then be embodied in a European consular code (see next proposal).

To implement this pilot proposal,

the Commission will have to make a swift assessment of the

feasibility of submitting a proposal along these lines on the basis of Articles 20 and 22 of the

Treaty establishing the European Community.

Under Article 22 the Commission can present a proposal to extend the existing rights of citizen-

ship to the Council, which has to adopt it unanimously after consulting the European Parliament.

The Constitutional Treaty also provides for a similar mechanism: a European law of the Council to

establish the measures necessary to facilitate such protection. The Council would act after consulting

the European Parliament (Article III-12).

Failing this, this common consular service would be formed around enhanced cooperation

between Member States that volunteer under the “bottom-up” approach.

11. We propose the establishment

of a European consular code

European consular code

should be established to underpin cooperation between Member

States’ diplomatic missions and the delegations of the European Union, without altering the fact

that consular protection is for the citizen.

y¤Any

proposal would have to concern itself with the

human dimension

of the situation facing

citizens in distress and

the help to be provided

(administrative assistance, repatriation, identifi-

cation of a family member’s body, loss of travel documents, etc.).

y¤

The Code would also allow

an automatic stand-in system to be established between

consulates,

depending on the effective capacity of each over a given geographical area. There are

some regions of the world where several Member States have no embassy or consulate.

It is therefore important to draw up a Code clearly defining the stand-in arrangements in each

country (for example Member State X would represent Member States Y and Z in India) in order

to enhance consular synergies. A “stand-in” system of this kind would be an application of the

principle of subsidiarity. In the absence of unanimity, automatic stand-in arrangements could

already be established through enhanced cooperation between the Member States that wish to

go ahead.

Twelve proposals for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

y¤Besides

stand-in arrangements, the Code would also have to define

the operating rules for a

future common consular corps

that could intervene to help any citizen of the European Union.

The

European consular code

proposed by the Commission on the basis of Articles 20 and 22

would have to

spell out the assistance to be given to citizens,

the

stand-in system

and the

operating rules.

12. We propose the creation or specialisation

of laboratories to deal with bioterrorism

and victim identification

The tsunami tragedy highlighted the need to specialise, designate and reinforce existing national

resources, given the great difficulty of identifying victims after a disaster. And future crises will

doubtless bring other shortcoming to light.

We therefore need to devise reference scenarios, so as to anticipate the requirements in terms

of scientific analysis, and to set up a network of national specialist skills that could serve all

Europeans if necessary.

Designating a few European reference laboratories

will facilitate the work of the Member

States after a disaster. Designation will entitle laboratories to European research budget funding

to boost their capacities.

Taking account of the skills identified in the Member States and the expertise gained in Bosnia,

one or two laboratories to serve Europeans in identifying victims

would be set up, designated

or would specialise after a feasibility study.

Besides identifying victims, this approach of designating laboratories or having them specialise

could be taken further, for example to build up scientific capacity

on bioterrorism.

This pooling of resources in support of the European civil protection force would follow the

principles of specialisation and constitution of effective units under a voluntary “bottom-up”

approach. The Operations Centre – in cooperation with the bodies concerned in the Member

States, the Commission and the Council – would make proposals to the Member States on the

means that it considers should be made available to the European civil protection force.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Twelve proposals for improving the European Union’s crisis response capability

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Proposed timetable

1 July 2006

30 June 2007

(Finnish and German Presidencies)

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Humanitarian aid/Civil protection

Establishment within a year of the following seven scenarios

– MIC in close cooperation

with the Member States and the stakeholders (other Commission Directorates-General, the Council

General Secretariat’s Civil/Military Cell):

earthquakes and tsunamis

forest fires and other fires

flooding

industrial and nuclear accidents

terrorist attacks

disasters at sea

pandemics.

Establishment of “menu” of needs for each scenario.

Those Member States that wish to do so start taking account of the “menu” in their

organisation.

Alignment of MIC and ECHO emergency structures for external relations.

Reinforcement of MIC

with Member State experts to form the basis of the operations centre.

European Council decision to establish a EuropeAid civil protection force.

External relations

Study into possibility of “common” financing from the CFSP budget for

operations to evacuate

EU citizens abroad.

Empowerment of heads of delegation

to act in emergencies in liaison with Member States’

diplomatic and consular services and establishment of contingency fund for heads of delegation.

Identification of six regional delegations

and preparation of organisational set-up for three

of them.

Establishment of structure for the two “emergency” and “consolidation” databases.

Proposed timetable

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Assistance to EU citizens in the event of a crisis/Consular matters

Assessment of the Member States’ consular capacities,

in order to anticipate needs in the

event of a crisis, and identification of best assistance and evacuation practices at national consulates

abroad.

Preparation of Commission proposal on the

four pilot areas

for establishing EU consulates.

Start of work on EU consular code.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Proposed timetable

1 July 2007

30 June 2008

(Portuguese and Slovenian Presidencies)

Humanitarian aid/Civil protection

In follow-up to the Berend Report, the Council, Commission and Parliament hold a tripartite

meeting to adapt the EU Solidarity Fund Regulation to finance civil protection training and the

purchase of certain types of equipment.

Preparation of operations protocols by the “enhanced MIC” (future operations centre) assisted

by the Member States and the Council General Secretariat.

Feasibility study on legal cover necessary for civil protection missions within the EU.

Stepping-up of joint training and implementation of an annual exercise open to all Member

States and organised by the future operations centre.

Commission proposal for setting up a European civil protection force (EuropeAid). Adjustment

of visibility factors for external aid.

Setting-up of “Civil Security” Council by Heads of State and Government.

Launch of feasibility study for foundation or specialisation of a European victim-identification

laboratory and one or more laboratories specialising in bioterrorism.

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

External relations

Entry into service of the three regional delegations specialising in crisis management after

finalisation of organisational set-up.

Introduction of new administrative and financial framework for heads of delegation.

Creation of the two “emergency” and “consolidation” databases.

Training of first joint assessment teams for “emergency” and “consolidation”.

Application of institutional provisions on external action and civil protection.

Assistance to EU citizens in the event of a crisis/Consular matters

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Identification and training of consular flying squads of volunteer diplomats.

Presentation and adoption of the Commission proposal on the four experimental regions for

setting up EU consulates. Failing that, enhanced cooperation for those wishing to press ahead.

Presentation of Commission proposal for

an EU consular code.

1 July 2008

30 June 2009

(French and Czech Presidencies)

Humanitarian aid/Civil protection

Discussion in Council of act creating the EuropeAid European civil protection force.

At end of period, adoption of act creating the EuropeAid European civil protection force or,

failing that, start of enhanced cooperation between those countries wishing to press ahead under

Article 43 (Title VII of Treaty on European Union).

Setting-up of the force’s operations centre and training college. Choice of college’s location by

Council.

Proposal for EU regulation on the legal cover necessary for civil protection operations within

the EU.

Initial application of scenarios and their testing during the annual exercise.

External relations

Evaluation of first three regional delegations specialising in crisis response.

Proposed timetable

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Assistance to EU citizens in the event of a crisis/Consular matters

Introduction of consular flying squads and first joint training courses.

Evaluation of working of four experimental regions and extension to other areas.

1 July 2009

30 June 2010

(Swedish and Spanish Presidencies)

Humanitarian aid/Civil protection

Launch of initial approval procedures for units of the “EuropeAid” force. The Member

States choose items from the proposed “menu” that they undertake to make available to the

force.

Grouping of humanitarian action and civil protection under the authority of a single

European Commissioner.

First integrated operation involving humanitarian aid and the resources of the European

civil protection force.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Proposed timetable

External relations

Extension of organisational set-up of first three regional delegations to another three.

Assistance to EU citizens in the event of a crisis/consular matters

Drafting of an EU consular code.

Foundation or specialisation of a European victim-identification laboratory and laboratories

specialising in bioterrorism.

Adoption of EU consular code. Failing that, enhanced cooperation between those countries

wishing to press ahead.

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Technical report

Inventory and analysis

of future requirements

Introduction

In the past few years the European Union has responded to all kinds of natural disasters through-

out the world – most recently when hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans and after the earthquake

in Pakistan – and within Europe too – for example by sending civil protection teams to deal with

the floods in Arles, France in 2003 or to fight the forest fires in Portugal in 2005.

Within the European Union, the Member States show solidarity by offering their national

resources for use in emergency situations when the Union is affected by natural disasters, indus-

trial accidents or pollution at sea. Individually the Member States do not always have adequate

capacity to cope with major crises. Another element is the Solidarity Fund set up in 2002, which

in certain circumstances will reimburse the authorities of the stricken Member State within ten

weeks of the disaster happening.

The situation outside the Union is different: the national civil protection resources made available

by the Community civil protection mechanism can indeed always enhance the European Union

disaster response capability, under the political coordination of the Presidency in office of the

European Union. But the essential role is played by the combination of the European humanita-

rian aid policy (ECHO) and the external relations policy in the broad sense (emergency response

instruments and reconstruction aid instruments).

European humanitarian aid action comes under the overall coordination organised by the United

Nations and offers an immediate response and a long-term response. There is value added in three

respects: first, geographical cover (ongoing operations in some sixty countries) is much more

extensive than that of individual Member States. This extensive coverage means that in many cases

the Commission is already on the spot when a disaster occurs. Second, the Commission is far more

involved than others as a humanitarian aid donor. While it is true that the Directorate-General for

Humanitarian Aid (ECHO) funds projects carried out by partners rather than taking direct action,

funding is granted in response to an analysis of needs conducted on the ground by the Commis-

sion itself and not just by its partners. ECHO keeps a close eye on projects and is in constant

dialogue with the partners, the donors, the Member States, the national authorities, etc., to

ensure that the aid provided is the most suitable and goes to those most in need. This involve-

ment is made possible by the network of ECHO experts on the spot and the collaboration with the

Union delegations worldwide. and third, the impartiality of Community humanitarian aid makes

it more acceptable in certain difficult contexts where aid from a specific EU Member State would

be looked on less favourably.

The European Union’s other advantage lies in the reconstruction programmes. These enable

Europe to work on a long-term basis with a

set of instruments

made up of European

programmes linked to external relations over all geographical areas. Even if they are not discussed

in detail in this report, which is devoted essentially to emergency response methods, it must be

stressed that only the major Community geographical programmes (ALA, MED, TACIS, CARDS,

etc.) give European Union action a long-term dimension. They are therefore an important factor

of visibility. The analysis below will focus on three European Union rapid political response instru-

ments: the Rapid Reaction Mechanism, the Peace for Africa facility, and civilian crisis management.

The European delegations abroad are also a very important tool that this report will be looking at to

consider their possible role in responding to crises and providing assistance to citizens.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

19. Annex 2 is taken

from the 2003 Commission

document on civilian

crisis management

instruments, it gives

an idea of the many

kinds of programme

than can be called on

Technical report

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Finally, the European Union’s added value is its ability to

cover the entire crisis cycle

(preparation,

emergency response and ending with the consolidation response) with substantial and coordinated

resources. The impact of the response on the ground is greater and the overall cost lower than

the aggregate cost of all the individual responses.

The purpose of this technical report is to:

present the action of the European Union through its various instruments and illustrate

the contribution to crisis response (Part One),

consider real needs (Part Two)

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Technical report

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Crisis situations and the instruments

currently available to the EU

1. Crisis situations

A. Natural disasters

According to the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Humanitarian Aid (“ECHO”),

over 300 million people worldwide are affected every year by natural disasters, mainly in the deve-

loping countries.

The European Union responds to natural disasters in two ways:

Humanitarian aid:

a specialised Commission office (ECHO) was set up in 1992, and since then

humanitarian aid has been given to some 85 countries around the world. The proportion of ECHO’s

budget spent on natural disasters averages 17%. The most common disasters are hurricanes (espe-

cially in Central America), floods, drought, earthquakes and epidemics. ECHO steps in when

national and local authorities are not able to meet humanitarian needs.

The Community Civil Protection Mechanism:

The Community mechanism has been brought

into play in the earthquakes in Algeria (2003), Iran (2003), and Morocco (2004), the floods in

Georgia and Kyrgyzstan (2005), the Asian tsunami (2004), where several teams were sent to four

affected countries (Thailand, Sri Lanka, the Maldives and Indonesia), and more recently in the

United States, following hurricane Katrina (2005), and in Pakistan, following the earthquake there

(2005). In most case the victims also received humanitarian aid.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

20. See map No 1,

page 16, MIC interventions

inside and outside

the European Union

since 2002

21. See map No 3,

page 22, ECHO

interventions and

regional offices 2005

22. See map No 4,

page 34, Civilian crisis-

management operations

and interventions using

the rapid reaction

mechanism (2001-2006)

23. European security

strategy, proposed by

Javier Solana, Secretary-

General and High

Representative, and

approved by the Heads

of State and Government

at the European Council

meeting in Brussels on

12 December 2003

24. Heidelberg Institute

for International Conflict

Research, Conflict

Barometer 2005

25. A “crisis” is defined

as “a tense situation in

which at least one of the

parties uses violent force

in sporadic incidents”

B. Complex humanitarian crises

ECHO is one of the world’s major humanitarian organisations, with an annual budget of

€500

million. Since 1992 it has provided a response to natural disasters and to complex human-

itarian crises, both as a matter of urgency and on a long-term basis; in particular, it attempts to

tackle crises that have been “forgotten” by the media and by the international community. These

are often long-standing crises to which no political solution is yet forthcoming.

Natural disasters sometimes aggravate the effects of conflicts or post-conflict situations from

which populations have not yet recovered. This was the case, for example, with the drought that

affected Afghanistan for several years.

Every year ECHO helps about 18 million people, in more than 60 countries, through its 200 partners:

European NGOs, the Red Cross organisations, and the United Nations agencies, especially the High

Commissioner for Refugees.

C. Conflicts

Alongside natural disasters and humanitarian crises, EU intervention may be occasioned by

conflict. Two of the five key threats facing Europe referred to by the European security strategy

are regional conflicts and state failure.

According to

Conflict Barometer

2005

, there were 249 conflicts in the world in 2005. Their

intensity was variable, but measurable: 74 of them were classified as “crises”

, which in some

cases were taking place in the heart of Europe. Between 2004 and 2005 the number of conflicts

of this kind increased from 50 to 74. In 2005 there were 24 situations with a higher intensity,

including two wars; these were concentrated in Africa, the Middle East and Asia, regions of the

world with which the EU has close political and economic ties.

Technical report

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Map No 4: Civilian crisis-management operations and interventions using

the rapid reaction mechanism (2001-2006)

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

2. Instruments available to the EU

The added value represented by the EU is manifest in the tools available to it, which allow

the entire cycle of a crisis to be covered.

26. Discussed in

the Commission

Communication to the

Council and Parliament,

COM(2005) 565 final,

10 November 2005

A. For anticipating responses

From preparedness for natural disasters to conflict prevention,

measures can be

planned to respond to crises

of any kind, using a range of across-the-board and

specific tools.

Monitoring the environment and security

The Union has a

general tool,

the

GMES

system

, which is intended to

remedy the fragmentation

of national observation systems

that use different national capacities and standards.

The European Space Agency is implementing the space component, and the Commission is handling

the identification and development of the services that the system is to provide to public authorities.

The Commission here seeks to help the authorities in their decision-making in respect of the

environ-

ment and security.

Technical report

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

This initiative, which is being steered by the EU, will allow

three fast-track services to be intro-

duced by 2008: land monitoring, marine services and emergency response.

It will also put

additional capacity at the disposal of European defence and security policy. Civil and military

synergies will be sought in order to arrive at a better use of resources, in full complementarity with

the EU Satellite Centre.

To support the GMES programme an office for global monitoring for environment and security

will be set up in the Commission’s Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry from 1 June 2006.

Preventing natural disasters

Preventive measures

have already been financed by the Commission, in close cooperation with

the UN, with a view to improving the EU’s capacity to respond. The Global Disaster Alert and

Coordination System (“GDACS”) allows the impact of natural disasters to be assessed.

The loss of human life in the Asian tsunami might have been smaller, at least in the regions

furthest removed from the epicentre, if early warning systems had been in place (disaster prepared-

ness). Likewise, the physical and human damage cause by the Bam earthquake would have been

less serious if buildings had complied with strict earthquake standards (disaster reduction). Land-

slides can be avoided by proper land-use planning (disaster prevention). In the

research field,

the

Commission has organised a substantial number of meetings of specialists. A workshop on the

danger of tidal waves in Europe has taken stock of progress and requirements in research into

early warning systems. Another seminar on research into the impact of tidal waves and natural

disasters has discussed the socio-economic implications of tsunamis. Calls for proposals under the

research programmes are regularly linked to these aspects. Lastly, the Commission is coordinating

the production of a study of early warning systems for tidal waves.

ECHO’s disaster preparedness programme, known as

“DIPECHO”,

financed more than 319 projects

worldwide between 1996 and 2004, for a total budget of

€78

million. It aims at training, capacity-

building, awareness-raising, and the provision of early warning and planning and forecasting

measures to civil society groups and to national and local authorities. As part of the response

to the tsunami, for example, the Commission is helping to finance the early warning system in

the region. It is also supporting the mainstreaming of disaster preparedness into development

cooperation.

The Community Civil Protection Mechanism

allows potential responses to disasters to be

prepared. The mechanism is equipped with a database recording information on the available

capacities of national civil protection authorities. Using this database the Member States can esta-

blish what kind of assistance is available through the mechanism before any emergency arises.

This enables them to gain precious time in the event of an emergency, and to call on that assis-

tance if they need it. In addition, knowing what help is available allows them to classify resources

in order of priority at national level and to promote synergies and complementarity at Commu-

nity level, thus raising the general level of protection throughout the EU. The mechanism also

provides access to the content of the military database compiled by the EU Military Staff, which

gives an overall view of the resources available to handle the consequences of disasters.

In recent months the Commission has been working on scenarios with a view to taking stock of

the resources that each Member State is in a position to provide in the event of a serious terrorist

attack in another Member State. All of these resources are included in the database. The exercise

will enable Member States to determine what are the gaps and weaknesses in the European

system of civil protection, and are an essential step on the road to greater interoperability of the

available resources. This project should be extended to the other disasters, whether natural or not,

which most strongly justify the mobilisation of civil protection resources.

The experts and project heads included in the database have been asked to take part in training

programmes which include courses, exercises and exchanges of specialists. The Community has to

ensure that once they are deployed the teams and resources can operate effectively together in line

with the accepted standards and methodologies. More than 300 team heads and experts have so far

attended courses organised as part of the Community mechanism. The Commission has also financed

a number of simulations involving civil protection teams from different Member States with a view to

ensuring that there is total interoperability between teams on the ground. The investments made in

recent years in training, exercises and preparedness have made it possible effectively to mobilise civil

protection resources in order to go to the assistance of disaster-hit countries inside and outside the EU.

27. See www.gdacs.org

Technical report

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

A Common Emergency Communication and Information System (CECIS) is also being operated

in order to ensure effective sharing of information between the MIC and the national points

of contact. Lastly, the Commission’s civil protection unit is responsible for two civil protection

programmes: the Civil Protection Action Programme and the marine pollution programme,

which are intended to support and supplement the efforts deployed by the Member States

for the protection of people, property, and hence the environment in the event of natural or

technological disasters. They also seek to facilitate cooperation, the exchange of know-how

and mutual assistance between the Member States in these areas.

Preparedness for public health crises

The

Health Emergency Operations Facility

(HEOF) is intended to provide information and

data to give the Commission an overall view of pandemics and epidemics. It also seeks to

facilitate communication between crisis managers in the 25 Member States, the associated

countries, international health organisations and medical emergency professionals. Experience

in its first two years suggests that it is important to expand the Community’s capacity to react

and preparedness for health emergencies, and to enable the Commission to play a role in the

coordination of health emergencies and cross-border bio-terrorist attacks.

The Centre currently has two alert systems in operation, and a third under development:

y¤The

Early Warning and Response System (EWRS) is used where there is a danger of a

communicable disease (emergencies reported by the Member States via the crisis room

and the communications centre).

y¤RAS-BICHAT

is used for CBRN threats; it links the Health Security Committee to the

Member States’ contact points.

y¤RAS-CHEM

is intended to link the EU’s poison centres.

In 2006 the HEOF, which now has a specific budget allocation, will acquire new equipment and

software so that it can:

y¤provide

Member States with services helping them to better handle health problems,

epidemics and bioterrorist attacks;

y¤provide

the Commission with an overview of the health situation,

y¤build

and share knowledge on handling health emergencies throughout Europe;

y¤assess

the situation in emergencies and provide a basis for deciding whether to alert

the “health community”;

y¤align

the activities of the EU health community with those of international bodies;

y¤enhance

communication and the pooling of know-how between experts in different

disciplines, Member States’ organisations, the World Health Organisation and the other

international organisations;

y¤coordinate

the Member States’ command and control activities during emergency

operations at Community level.

Preventing conflict

Measures to prevent the use of

natural resources

to finance conflict are developing all the

time. The European Community is a key contributor to the Kimberley Process, a multilateral

initiative against conflict diamonds. It is now time to consolidate the achievements made so

far by the Kimberley Process and to apply at least some aspects of the Kimberley Process to

other high-risk resources, such as gold, coltan and timber.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

28. In order to tackle

trade in tropical timber

linked to the financing

of armed conflict,

the EC has started

implementing the ‘Forest

Law Enforcement,

Governance and Trade’

programme, which

includes a bilateral

system for certifying

exports of tropical timber

from certain partner

countries to the EU

Technical report

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

The Kimberley Process: harnessing trade policy

to preventing conflict

The Kimberley Process was launched in 2000 by a coalition of governments,

NGOs and the diamond industry to tackle “conflict diamonds” – diamonds

produced in conflict zones and used by rebel movements to finance their

activities, as was the case during the civil wars in Angola, Sierra Leone and the

DRC in the late 1990s. Since January 2003 the Kimberley Process has been

operational as the Kimberley Process Certification System (KPCS). This multilateral

trade instrument binds all participating countries (and the European Community,

whose participation covers all EU Member States) to comply with common

standards in the production and trading of rough diamonds, and in particular

to make sure that every international shipment of diamonds is covered by a

'Kimberley certificate' attesting to its lawful provenance. The system is backed

up by tight international controls and the possibility of disciplinary action in the

event of serious breaches. The KPCS now covers almost all rough diamonds

traded on the world market. Its benefits for countries like the DRC and Sierra

Leone in terms of preventing conflict and building peace (through tighter

control of the diamond industry) are uncontested, though considerable efforts

are still needed to strengthen internal controls in many participating countries.

B. Responding to emergencies

An emergency response capacity is necessary to relieve human suffering.

It primarily takes the form of

humanitarian aid

and may involve

civil protection

resources (in the event of, say, a natural disaster).

Emergency relief is aimed at providing food aid, access to water, field hospitals, tents

for refugees, doctors, etc. Emergencies are not confined to natural disasters. They

can include

natural disasters against the background of a long-running crisis,

in the case of the flooding in southern Algeria that hit Sahrawi refugees, where ECHO

has repeatedly intervened and where the Community Civil Protection Mechanism’s

Monitoring and Information Centre handled the delivery by air of additional aid

during the emergency phase.

The emergency response is not therefore confined to the days and weeks immedia-

tely following a disaster. Its duration is determined by the conditions on the ground.

After an earthquake, the need for field hospitals or water purification equipment can

last for months if infrastructure has been destroyed.

ECHO

ECHO’s machinery for responding to disasters has proved its worth on many occasions. This

has been recognised by a good many evaluations and the reports of the Court of Auditors.

The round-the-clock monitoring system set up by ECHO and the flexible procedures for taking

decisions in emergencies permit a very rapid response, even during holidays (e.g. the

response to the Bam earthquake and the Tsunami). Since 2001 the Commission has had

a fast-track decision-making procedure that enables it, pending the approval of financing

decisions for larger amounts, to grant up to EUR 3 million to UN organisations, the Red Cross

Technical report

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

and NGOs within 72 hours of a disaster. When the Tsunami struck, the initial EUR 3 million

was made available the same day. In addition to its financial response, ECHO sends experts

to the scene to coordinate matters and assess needs. 100 international experts are currently

employed in 60 or so offices across the world, six of them regional offices with a rapid-

reaction capability.

The emergency response to the earthquakes

in Algeria, Iran, Morocco and Pakistan

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

ALGERIA:

On 21 May 2004 an earthquake shook northern Algeria. To meet the basic humani-

tarian needs, the Commission, through ECHO, granted EUR 1 million to provide medical care,

sanitation and temporary shelters. A further EUR 1 million was granted a few months later to

help those still without shelter. The presence in Algiers of a full-time relief expert made the

operation easier to coordinate. The Community Civil Protection Mechanism was activated the

same day, resulting in the mobilisation of 19 civil protection teams, including search-and-

rescue teams and field hospitals, and a team of EU coordinators.

IRAN:

On 26 December 2003 the Bam earthquake claimed 30 to 40 000 victims. Despite the

considerable resources fielded by the Iranian government and the country’s Red Crescent

Society, the scale of the earthquake was such that Iran appealed for international assistance.

On 27 December the Commission granted EUR 2.3 million to the International Federation of

Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, UNICEF and NGOs to help provide emergency food aid,

tents, a field hospital (which operated for 8 months), drinking water and sanitation, and

logistical back-up (establishment of a telecommunications centre) for organisations working

on the ground. Two experts were sent to coordinate activities with other donors, including

the OCHA team. This emergency aid was followed six weeks later by a further grant of

EUR 6.2 million. At the same time the Community Civil Protection Mechanism helped mobilise

and coordinate 13 EU civil protection teams, including search-and-rescue and medical teams.

MOROCCO:

On 24 February 2004 Morocco was hit by a major earthquake. The MIC, in coor-

dination with the Presidency, rapidly established contact with the EU delegation in Morocco

and the Moroccan mission to the EU. That evening the Moroccan authorities requested EU

assistance via the MIC. The request for emergency assistance sent by the MIC to all countries

involved in the Mechanism resulted in the dispatch of a number of search-and-rescue teams,

medical aid and generators. At the same time, in close consultation with the Presidency, an EU

coordination team was set up to coordinate the civil protection teams. ECHO also sent a relief

expert to assess the situation. On 26 February Morocco was granted EUR 975 000 for medical

aid, sanitation (provision of drinking water) and temporary shelters.

PAKISTAN:

The EU showed solidarity by providing rapid and substantial aid. The amount and

nature of the assistance granted reflects the scale of the need and the difficult terrain.

Between 8 October, when the earthquake struck, and mid-December, EUR 48 million was

mobilised in a number of tranches to cover emergency and subsequent needs. The emergency

aid covered health, water and sanitation, the provision of tents, food, basic necessities and

logistics (transport and telecommunications) and coordination. On the spot, the ECHO team

already working in Pakistan was given more staff to assess needs, monitor the operations

financed and help with coordination. The Community Civil Protection Mechanism supported

and facilitated the mobilisation and coordination of twenty or so civil protection teams in the

days following the disaster. To address the most pressing needs, the Mechanism also provided

tents, plastic sheeting, blankets and mattresses. In consultation with the Presidency, an

EU coordination team was set up.

Technical report

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

The Community Civil Protection Mechanism

The Mechanism is recent (set up in 2001

) and

simple in its working,

since it enables the resources

and equipment available in the Member States to be pooled in the event of major disasters.

The

Mechanism is not a financial instrument; it is geared to mobilising the existing resources (usually

search-and-rescue equipment, medical services, temporary accommodation, sanitation equipment,

etc.) needed to save lives and relieve suffering in the days immediately after a disaster. Civil protec-

tion operations also help protect the environment and property, including the cultural heritage, so

helping reduce loss of life, the numbers of injured and material, economic and environmental

damage.

The core of the Mechanism is the Monitoring and Information Centre (MIC), which receives

warnings and handles requests for assistance round the clock. The Mechanism operates both

inside and outside the EU. It covers all Member States, the candidate countries and the countries

of the European Economic Area. It therefore numbers 30 members: the 25 EU Member States,

Bulgaria, Romania, Liechtenstein, Norway and Iceland. It comprises an intervention/operations

phase and a prevention/preparedness phase.

In the event of an emergency outside the EU, the Presidency-in-office handles diplomatic and

political coordination. The Mechanism works in the same way as it would in an internal disaster.

The country concerned must send a request for assistance to the MIC, which forwards that request

to the Mechanism’s member countries. The MIC then coordinates the means made available by

the Member States on a case-by-case basis. Moreover, if the country affected by the disaster

requests it, the MIC can mobilise and deploy small teams of experts within a few hours of the

disaster. These teams can also assess specific needs on the spot, coordinate assistance operations

and liaise with the competent authorities and international organisations involved (especially the

UN). The MIC can also offer technical support, such as providing satellite pictures.

The pooling of means of transport ensures that all available assistance can be provided rapidly and

cost-effectively. Cooperation at European level enables the Member States to avoid needless

duplication of resources and increase the impact of Europe’s collective response, so providing a

practical expression of Europe’s solidarity with Member States hit by disaster.

29. Council Decision

2001/792/EC.

30. Including search-and-

rescue equipment,

medical services,

temporary shelters, etc.

Technical report

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Examples of recent civil protection operations

Five years after its creation, the Community Civil Protection Mechanism has proved that it can

work well even in difficult circumstances.

On 29 August 2005 Hurricane Katrina struck Louisiana, hitting shore at Grand-Isle, 90 km

south of New Orleans, at a speed of up to 200 km/h. Sweeping through New Orleans, it left a

trail of wreckage and thousands of people homeless. In the space of 24 hours, almost 80% of

the city was under water. The situation was made even worse by the general sanitary conditions

and the lack of law and order. Fires also broke out in several parts of the city.

Informal contacts were immediately established with the United States, the Commission

Delegation in Washington, the MIC and the UK Presidency. At 6.32 on Sunday 4 September,

the United States made an official request for assistance to the MIC and the UK Presidency.

The US government submitted its request via the Commission delegation in Washington.

The European response was channelled through the Civil Protection Mechanism.

24 hours after the request for European assistance, the first planeload of emergency equipment

sent by the Mechanism landed in the US. By the next day all EU Member States had offered

specific, practical help: medical teams, high-volume pumps, ready meals, boats to provide

shelter, etc.

The US request for assistance rounded off a year in which numerous demands were made on

the Mechanism both inside and outside the EU. In South-East Asia, field hospitals were

supplied, and rescue teams and medical experts dispatched. Slovakia and Germany sent pumps

and generators, and Austria and Belgium sandbags, to flood-hit regions of Romania and

Bulgaria. Water bombers from France and Italy, and helicopters from Germany and the

Netherlands, were involved in fighting forest fires in Portugal. Following the earthquake in

Pakistan, 25 of the countries involved in the Mechanism offered assistance in the form of food

aid, blankets, medical teams, search-and-rescue teams, equipment or money. A number of

search-and-rescue teams were deployed in the first stage of the operation.

Throughout all these emergencies, the Mechanism and its Monitoring and Information Centre

played a crucial role in the dissemination of information from all agencies involved. This

enabled the civil protection equipment available to be used to maximum effect in the places

where aid was needed.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

31. Annex 3 –

Rehabilitation and

reconstruction aid

for countries affected

by the tsunami

C. Preparing long-term action

This “consolidation” response builds on the previous stage economically

and politically to pave the way for reconstruction.

The aim is to identify upst-

ream measures providing longer-term support for the emergency response.

The EU is providing a substantial contribution in regions in conflict (Afghanistan in 2002, Iraq in

2003) in terms both of relief and reconstruction. Its network of delegations (over 130 across the

world) provides useful back-up for this effort. Reconstruction programmes also play a key role in

supporting the crisis response, as was demonstrated by the Commission's recent contribution to

tackling avian flu in Asia (EUR 80 million), and indeed by the response to the tsunami

and the

earthquake in Pakistan.

Humanitarian aid

is extended and thereby serves to link relief, rehabilitation and development by

tailoring its emergency programmes to supporting longer-term action.

Technical report

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Sectoral rules for emergencies

have been developed, chief among them being the Rapid

Reaction Mechanism (RRM) set up in 2001. It has enabled the EU to respond rapidly to the needs

of a country gripped by political instability or suffering the effects of a disaster, in whatever part

of the world, within six months of the start of an emergency. Today the RRM (and the stability

instrument provided for in the future financial perspective) involves civilian operations (excluding

humanitarian aid) to maintain or restore stability in emergencies or emerging crises. Such opera-

tions are also vital to the implementation of Community aid via assistance and cooperation

programmes and policies. The Rapid Reaction Mechanism comprises both economic and political

measures (including aid for rebuilding a state or for instituting democracy).

The Peace Facility for Africa,

set up in May 2004, is one of the most innovative instrument of the

EU’s external action. It was created at the behest of Africa’s leaders, who, at the July 2003 African

Union summit in Maputo, asked the EU to establish an instrument in support of African leadership

in the continent’s peace and security. It enshrines the principles of ownership by Africa, solidarity

and partnership between Africa and Europe. Based on the Cotonou Agreement,

the Peace

Facility has used EUR 250 million from the European Development Fund to promote security and

development. Its strategy has been to support peacekeeping operations by African organisations.

It has supported two operations in the Central African Republic (FOMUC) and three successive

operations in Darfur and elsewhere in Sudan (AMIS).

Darfur

The Darfur crisis broke out in February 2003 and rapidly developed into a complex

military conflict and a major humanitarian disaster. In three years it has been the

cause of about two million displaced persons and over 100 000 refugees in Chad

and has claimed – estimates vary - from 200 000 to 400 000 lives.

The EU has been actively involved in the political and financial response to this crisis.

It has combined a crisis-management approach with a broader approach, taking

account of the changing structure of power, resources and influence in Sudan and

the regional and international dimension.

The political solution to the Darfur crisis is a crucial factor in the success of the

comprehensive peace agreement signed in January 2005, so ending over 20 years

of North-South conflict. The EU’s political response was based on a fundamental

partnership with the African Union, supporting its leadership on the ground and at

the Abuja negotiations. Since January 2004 the EU and its Member States have

provided the African Union with substantial support to stabilise the situation in

Darfur. This support was a key factor in the Abuja talks, the ceasefire commission

and the planning support, equipment and funding provided for the AMIS missions.

It is also visible in the appointment of Mr Pekka Haavisto as EU Special Representa-

tive for Sudan in July 2005.

To permit an emergency relief operation, the parties to the conflict signed a cease-

fire on 8 April after talks sponsored in N’Djamena by the government of Chad. An

African Union mission (AMIS) began by deploying 120 ceasefire monitors and has

now reached a strength of 7600 soldiers.

Since 2003 the EU has distributed humanitarian aid (through ECHO) and food aid,

primarily for refugees fleeing Darfur for neighbouring Chad. Darfur has accounted

for almost 70% of all humanitarian and food aid to Sudan, which in 2005 amounted

to about EUR 118.5 million.

32. Article 11 on

“Peace-building policies,

conflict prevention

and resolution”

Lastly, when the response to a crisis has

a foreign policy dimension,

the EU responds in the frame-

work of the civilian ESDP and via the

Rapid Reaction Mechanism.

Civilian crisis management is a

recent addition to the EU’s external action but it has quickly established itself as a fixture alongside

more traditional aspects of external relations such as development, trade and the environment.

Since the first civilian crisis-management operation (EU police mission in Bosnia) on 1 January

2003, the number of missions has grown steadily (one in 2003, six in 2004 and 12 in 2005). These

missions are currently focused on Africa, the Middle East and the Balkans. A mission has also been

launched with a view to supporting the peace process in Indonesia.

Technical report

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Aceh

EU action in Aceh

is an example of the continuity and coherence of the EU’s action through the

successive phases of a crisis: emergency, crisis management and reconstruction. It also illustrates

the

great potential of the instruments available to the EU

when managing crises and settling

conflicts. Thus, on 26 December 2004, the EU’s response to the tsunami combined elements of

emer-

gency humanitarian aid and civil protection.

And this EU commitment continued throughout

2005, combining

medium- and long-term reconstruction programmes

with a

political

response,

in full recognition of the need and advisability of supporting a peace process between

the GAM rebels in Aceh province and the Indonesian government. The EU’s action in Aceh is exem-

plified not just by the reconstruction works scheduled over a period of years but by political support

to stabilise the province, such stabilisation being a precondition for any lasting reconstruction.

The political response

provided in this instance is an example of a “cross-pillar” response to a

post-conflict/post-disaster situation that has been well coordinated by the EU institutions:

a) Starting in April 2005, the Commission, through the

Rapid Reaction Mechanism,

supported Presi-

dent Ahtisaari’s efforts to mediate during the talks between the Indonesian government and the Free

Aceh Movement (GAM). These negotiations led the parties to sign a memorandum on 15 August 2005.

b) In July 2005, the Indonesian authorities asked the EU to help the country implement the final

agreement between the parties. A similar request was made to five ASEAN countries. A

civilian crisis-

management operation (the Aceh Monitoring Mission or AMM)

was launched by the Council.

The six-month operation started on 15 September and involved 230 monitors from the EU and the

ASEAN countries concerned. Its mandate covers supervising the withdrawal and destruction of

weapons, the demobilisation of combatants, the withdrawal of government troops and aspects

connected with the conversion of GAM into a political party. This mandate was recently extended

to 15 June 2006, to cover the period up to the local elections.

Community instruments

are also helping secure peace in Aceh in the long term, not just

through post-tsunami reconstruction programmes (about EUR 350 million over five years) but by

programmes focusing more directly on governance and institutional reforms. The Commission has

introduced the following measures aimed at supporting the peace process in the medium and

long term (about EUR 25 million over three years):

y¤assistance

for the reintegration of former prisoners and combatants and for local communities

affected by the conflict (Rapid Reaction Mechanism and aid for displaced persons)

y¤support

for the preparation of local elections (assistance programme for Asia and Latin America –

ALA)

y¤support

for local governance (ALA)

y¤support

for the rule of law and human rights (ALA).

There are also plans for an

EU election observer mission

to monitor the first local elections.

NDONESIA

ANDA

CEH

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

33. See Annex 3 –

Rehabilitation and

reconstruction aid

for countries affected

by the tsunami

IKONOS – January 10, 2003

PRE-DISASTER IMAGE

IKONOS – December 29, 2004

POST-DISASTER IMAGE

Technical report

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

The future: a better assessment of needs

1. Improving the EU's crisis response

This first requires work to be done within the European Union. As regards our response to

external crises, the Commission Communication of 20 April 2005

gave

an overall analysis of

the method

to be followed based on three simple ideas:

improving the coordination

of crisis

response,

improving the mission launch phase

and

creating a specific financial instru-

ment for crisis response outside the EU

(with the exception of humanitarian aid, which has

its own instrument). Since then, specific action has been taken, although some measures are

still being implemented.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

In addition to this methodological analysis, we also need a complete needs assessment.

A needs assessment would enable the

United Nations,

which coordinates the international

humanitarian response, to

have precise information on European capability

in the event of

an emergency humanitarian response. It would enable

the UN's existing capability to be

supplemented

(in particular for industrial/environmental risks). Lastly, it would allow progress

to be made in terms of

more rapid deployment.

2. Civil protection response: what is needed?

Emergency responses to this type of crisis are first and foremost a problem of capacity. At

present, pooling of resources takes place only on an ad hoc basis. Each Member State decides

on a case-by-case and voluntary basis whether it is able to provide the civil protection

resources requested or not. This system means that the speed with which European assistance

can be deployed depends on the national decision-making processes in the 25 Member States.

To move from a case-by-case response to a pooling of resources for civil protection, units avail-

able for Community operations would have to be identified or set up. Member States could be

invited to choose from a list of proposed needs and to indicate which resources could be made

available in an emergency. They could agree to keep a small number of main units permanently

in reserve for European civil protection operations. This would ensure that a few main units

were available and ready to intervene at any moment, and would significantly reduce the time

needed to mobilise civil protection resources. Such units would need to be able to deploy

rapidly and be totally autonomous. The interoperability of these units, which would be at the

heart of any European civil protection operation and would form the effective core of a Euro-

pean civil protection force, should be developed through joint exercises and training.

Should the resources declared in this way by the Member States be judged insufficient, the

gaps should be filled by way of solutions allowing access to additional resources (such as large

multi-purpose aircraft, mobile field hospitals, high-capacity pumps, etc.) to boost the EU's

ability to act. This approach is a necessary precondition for the Community to be able to

respond at any time to a request for assistance from one of its Member States or from a third

country, even if the national resources of the other Member States are insufficient or unavai-

lable. It would provide additional protection and security such as cannot be guaranteed by the

Member States acting individually.

It would also allow the Member States to account for the possibility of EU-wide assistance in their

national planning, to prioritise resources and to ensure that the EU response is more cost-effective.

It would enable them:

to benefit from economies of scale and avoid excessive costs;

to ensure that a minimum level of assistance can be available at any time and deployed rapidly;

34. Reinforcing EU

Disaster and Crisis

Response in Third

Countries

Technical report

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

to give practical effect to the Council's undertaking to provide mutual assistance in a spirit of

solidarity and its desire to create a Community rapid reaction capability;

within the EU, to provide a safety net so that each Member State can count, if needed, on

voluntary civil protection assistance from the other Member States to boost its national reaction

capability.

Based on past experience of the Community civil protection mechanism, we can identify

five

scenarios

for which requests for assistance are highly likely and for which the added value of

closer cooperation at European level is undeniable:

Floods:

this category covers various flood scenarios, including coastal and inland floods across

a wide territory and several countries. They destroy infrastructure and homes and require the

evacuation of thousands of people and the supply of first aid to thousands of others. Outside the

EU, the following bodies are likely to deploy in emergencies: the United Nations, the Red Cross,

NGOs and possibly NATO. Through ECHO, the European Commission would also take part in the

response.

Forest fires:

this scenario includes all types of forest fire, especially active forest fires across a

wide territory supporting mass tourism. They affect hundreds of thousands of hectares, causing

severe damage to the environment and to property. And they also isolate holiday camps and

villages.

Earthquakes: this

scenario comprises earthquakes (and possibly tsunamis) with the following

features: earthquakes with a force of at least 6 on the Richter scale in a densely populated area;

almost total destruction of the major towns; massive loss of human life and large numbers

injured; major requirements in terms of food, water, blankets and tents; and destruction of the

local health system.

Industrial accidents/CBRN attacks:

involving the dispersion of dangerous chemical

substances, radioactive substances or viral or bacteriological organisms.

Marine pollution accidents:

this scenario involves a major oil slick from an oil tanker carrying

over 10 000 tonnes of oil in very poor weather conditions and which is likely to have a significant

environmental and socio-economic impact along the coasts of several Member States.

The table opposite

shows the key elements which should form the basis of the EU's response

to requests for civil protection assistance. Whenever the EU responds to a disaster, it should

be able to count on the availability of these key elements. This is an average hypothesis, based

on past experience of the Community civil protection mechanism. These resources would not

suffice in the event of an exceptionally serious disaster or very specific types of emergency.

Instead, they correspond to a reasonable working basis for an appropriate Community

response to the five scenarios identified above.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Technical report

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

NEED

Relevant in

the following

scenarios

Type of equip-

ment/personnel

required to

address the need

Operational

readiness

(in hours)

Average/

estimated

team size

Minimum quantity

required to ensure

a credible

European response

1. Pumping and

drainage

Flood

• Medium / high

capacity pumps

(equipment and

personnel)

• Water sanitation

unit (equipment

and personnel)

• Emergency medical

assistance teams

• Field hospitals

(as defined by WHO

)

• Medevac aircraft

(staffed)

• Water bomber

aircraft (staffed)

• USAR team

2. Water sanitation

and purification

of drinking water

3. Emergency

medical care

Flood/CBRN

All

15-25

25-35

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

4. Aeromedical

evacuation

5. Aerial fire

fighting

6. Search and

rescue

7. Public mass

decontami-

nation

8. Oil recovery

All

Forest fires

3-5

Earthquakes

25-35

CBRN

• CBRN decontami-

nation teams

Oil spills

• Oil recovery vessels

10-20

4 (EMSA)

9. Aerial

transport

All

• Strategic air lift

capacity (long

distance) to

transport assistance

from EU to affected

country

• Mass evacuation of

European citizens

• Cargo and medium

lift helicopters for

local transport

(access to remote

areas, etc.)

• DVI teams

(incl. forensic

pathologists,

forensic dentists and

fingerprint-experts)

3-5

10. Disaster

victim

identification

All

4-10

35. This is the time

from notification until

readiness for departure

36. The WHO defines

field hospitals as

“mobile self-contained

and self-sufficient

facilities (tents, inflatable

or containerized modules)

with 10 or more beds,

one or more operating

rooms and basic

laboratory and

diagnostic facilities

including mobile X-ray”

37. The minimum

guaranteed treatment

capacity would there-

fore be in the range of

100 patients at any

time

38. Aeromedical

evacuation is defined

as the movement of

patients under medical

supervision to and

between medical

treatment facilities

by air transportation

39. This should ensure

an estimated minimum

medevac capacity of

250 patients at any

time

40. Estimated capacity

of 30 persons per hour

per team; each unit can

operate for maximum

6 hours

Technical report

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

3. Humanitarian response: what is needed?

The humanitarian aid managed by the Commission has established itself as part of the Union’s

overall response to the crises, conflicts and development problems encountered in third countries.

The link with development policy was first made downstream, by linking relief, rehabilitation and

development (LRRD). Upstream, preparedness for disasters has mainly been financed by the

humanitarian budget but also by raising awareness in other Commission departments so that this

dimension is taken into account.

On the basis of the experience gained, the EU response can still be improved by:

boosting ECHO’s capacity to send a sufficient number of experts with the proper training

to a new theatre of operations.

A special effort has been made in this area by increasing the

number of experts and having them attend United Nations and Red Cross rapid response training

(UNDAC and FACT). This effort needs to be continued, even though it has already borne fruit (for

example in Pakistan in October 2005).

following a needs-based approach:

events such as the Asian tsunami prompt a large wave of

generosity from private and public donors. Unfortunately, disasters and other crises do not as a rule

receive the same media coverage and response. The Commission’s role is to ensure that humanitarian

aid arrives wherever it is needed and to alert the Member States and other donors to forgotten crises.

improving coordination:

this is an imperative at all stages in a crisis. However, it is during the

emergency phase that coordination is most necessary and most difficult. This is due not only to

realities on the ground, but also to the speed at which action has to be set in motion, the large

number of actors involved, the absence of a strong coordinating body, and the temptation of the

different actors involved to boost their political and media profile. These shortcomings can be

mitigated in two ways: first by ensuring that the coordinating body (the UN Office for the Coordi-

nation of Humanitarian Affairs) is capable of performing the task and that its authority is

recognised by the various actors. Second by preparing actors (humanitarian organisations,

donors, United Nations bodies, civil protection teams, the military, national authorities) in advance

through awareness and training programmes and by establishing practical modes of operation.

improving the response by humanitarian operators:

the Commission does not intervene

directly but finances action by UN agencies, the Red Cross and NGOs. However, as an active donor,

the Commission supports these organisations by giving them the means to act, for example by

financing logistical support (transport, telecommunications) and the pre-positioning of emer-

gency supplies. The possibility of increasing such support should be examined.

The table opposite

gives an

indication of the types of disasters we face.

The initial response

always comes from the local authorities and local people and organisations. In an earthquake, it

is often the local teams, rather than the international ones, that save the most lives. To improve

the humanitarian response,

one fundamental aspect, then, is to strengthen the capacity of

local bodies to deal with disasters themselves.

Logistics is probably the most important aspect in a crisis

and the aspect that is most dependent

on the specific circumstances of any given disaster. Here, too, the

international humanitarian

response would be easier if the products needed were nearby: local or regional stocks.

As regards transport,

the key is not only the speed with which resources are mobilised

but

above all how close they are to the scene.

Thus, in a scenario where access is difficult or where

it proves necessary to use military resources, how close these resources are is a crucial factor

(example: in the Pakistan earthquake, where the military resources were in Afghanistan).

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Technical report

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

YPE

OF INTERNATIONAL

RESPONSE TO

VERAGE

DURATION OF

EMERGENCY

INTERVENTION

LEMENTS

THAT

COULD FACILITATE

A RESPONSE

TO NEEDS

XISTING

CAPACITIES

DISASTER

EMERGENCY NEEDS

Earthquake,

tsunami

A. Medical aid, shelter,

domestic products,

water and sanitation

B. Food aid

6 months

Prepositioning of

nonfood products such

as tents and blankets

in the vicinity

Floods and

landslides

A. Shelter, domestic

products, water

and sanitation

B. Medical aid, food aid

6 months

Prepositioning of

nonfood products such

as tents and blankets

in the vicinity

Red Cross family and

water and sanitation

modules

Tropical

storms

A. Shelter, domestic

products, medical aid,

water and sanitation

B. Food aid

6 months

Prepositioning of

nonfood products such

as tents and blankets

in the vicinity

Red Cross family and

water and sanitation

modules

Epidemics

A. Medical aid

(vaccination)

3 months

Prior agreements with

vaccine producers

Volcanic

eruptions

A. Medical aid,

water and sanitation

B. Shelter, food aid,

domestic products

A. Food aid, nutritional

aid, medical aid,

water and sanitation

B. Shelter, domestic

products

3 months

Red Cross family and

water and sanitation

modules

Drought

(famine)

6 to 12 months

Prepositioning of

special supplies such as

HPB (highprotein

biscuits)

Conflicts:

local

population

A. Food aid, nutritional

aid, medical aid,

water and sanitation,

domestic products

B. Shelter, mine clearance

6 months after

stabilisation of

the situation

Prepositioning of

nonfood products in

the vicinity

Red Cross family

mobile hospitals and

water and sanitation

modules. Emergency

medical stocks with

several organisations

Conflicts:

refugees

and internally

displaced

persons

A. Food aid, nutritional

aid, medical aid, water

and sanitation, domestic

products, shelter

B. Mine clearance

6 months after

stabilisation of

the situation

Prepositioning of

nonfood products in

the vicinity

Red Cross family

mobile hospitals and

water and sanitation

modules. Emergency

medical stocks with

several organisations

Technical report

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Red Cross family

mobile hospitals and

water and sanitation

modules. Emergency

medical stocks with

several organisations

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

4. Response to political crises: what is needed?

In the light of the experience gained in the five years of the Rapid Reaction Mechanism’s existence

and the twelve civilian crisis management operations currently under way, improving the response

to some of the threats cited in the European Security Strategy calls for

optimum coordination

between the civilian ESDP and the Community instruments.

The civilian ESDP has added

a significant

political dimension

to the European Union’s external relations in recent years.

This action should be supported using the Community instruments.

There needs to be an assessment of the choice of instruments

used by the European Union to

respond to crises of this type, centred around a combination of the following elements:

the semi-governmental nature or the executive aspect of the mission,

as in the case of semi-

governmental missions or missions with an executive aspect – for instance the mission to reform

the security sector in the DRC (EUSEC DRC) or the police mission for the Palestinian Territories

(EUPOL COPPS).

the launch capacity in real time:

ESDP missions are EU missions launched in real time (with the

Political and Security Committee – PSC – providing week-to-week political leadership): a) the staff

for civilian crisis management operations come from public authorities (magistrates, police officers,

etc.): b) staff are available and can be deployed at short notice under the authority of an EU head

of mission; c) joint actions ordering the deployment of an operation are taken in record time;

d) these missions are managed directly by an EU head of mission; e) the results of these missions

can be evaluated within a year and sometimes after six months, as the operations are short.

managing the political risk:

the Political and Security Committee corresponds to the degree of

political risk associated with the operations. It is composed of ambassadors from the Member

States answering directly to their national governments and thus represents the most appropriate

risk-management instrument possible in view of the political environment in which operations are

carried out.

Operations in countries with special political and security conditions

can be run only in

cooperation

with the Member States.

The crisis platform

recently set up in the European Commission’s Directorate-General for External

Relations is working closely with the Member States and the Council’s General Secretariat to draw

up consistent approaches in civilian crisis management.

Set up on 1 February 2006, it is working on:

creating effective EU instruments to respond to political crises.

It is thus seeking to speed

up the start-up phase of ESDP missions (in financial and logistical terms) to allow faster on-the-

spot deployment of EU missions. It is also working with the Council's General Secretariat, which

is seeking to create joint EU situation evaluation teams. These efforts are to be backed up by joint

training, so as to boost the EU’s effectiveness even further.

devising and implementing crisis responses.

The Rapid Reaction Mechanism (and the future

stability instrument) is one of the instruments that could be mobilised to

respond to crises.

one of the major issues in the coming years

will also be to mobilise the European Commission’s

delegations abroad so as to gear them better to respond to crises.

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Technical report

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

5. Assistance for European citizens: what is needed?

Before a crisis,

information must be provided for citizens on the procedures to be followed in

the event of a crisis in a country outside the EU. An information campaign for a targeted audience

should be organised in airports and other targeted sites (travel agencies, tour operators, press,

etc.).

Training schemes and information updates for members of consular teams,

for example

on the legal bases and international conventions applicable, on procedures for operations, on

identification of persons, on-the-spot inquiries and cooperation with local authorities, international

transport contracts (for the repatriation of survivors).

There should be an

exchange of information

between consular teams on procedures for the

transport of victims in compliance with the applicable conventions; on the rules for the issue of

visas; on travel documents and laissez-passer, the protection of long-term residents; and on public

health rules (international conventions) in the event of pandemics and return via the external EU

frontier.

Lastly the

Commission delegations

could provide practical and logistical support, for example

by accompanying EU representatives to meetings with the government and local authorities;

by helping to establish contacts between teams and the police, hospitals, etc.; by playing a part

in updating evacuation plans to ensure that teams are covered; by liaising with the Monitoring

and Information Centre of the Community Civil Protection Mechanism. The Centre can provide

operational assistance through its network linking the Member States round the clock, especially

by exchanging information on the Member States’ needs in terms of victim-identification,

repatriation and medical-evacuation teams.

Technical report

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Annex 1-

Mission statement

Annexes

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Annex 2 -

European Union instruments

EIDHR

ECHO

Food Security

Uprooted People

Rehabilitation

NGO Co-financing

All developping

Mine Action

Civil Protection

MEDA

TACIS

CARDS

ALA

EDF

RRM

Regulation

Action

All

Asia, Latin America

All except SE Europe

All

Mediterranean

SE Europe

Africa, Pacific Caribbean

All

Europe Central Asia

Asia, Latin America

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Eligible regions

Humanitarian Aid

Food Aid

Food security

Securing the

livelihoods and

safety of refugees/

refugee return

Civilian emergency

assistance

Mine action

Rehabilitation

Reconstruction

Infrastructure

development

Economic

development

Budgetary

support

Consolidation

of democracy

Rule of law

Inst, legal

and regulatory

framework

Human rights

Elections

Conflict

Prevention

Customs/Border

management

✓

❨✓❩

✓

❨✓❩

✓

❨✓❩

✓

❨✓❩

✓

❨✓❩

✓

❨✓❩

✓

Annexes

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Annex 3 -

Rehabilitation and reconstruction

aid for countries affected by the tsunami

EU GRANT

ASSISTANCE

Commission

Austria

Belgium

Cyprus

Czech Republic

Denmark

Finland

France

Germany

Greece

Hungary

Ireland

Italy

Luxembourg

Malta

Netherlands

Poland

Portugal

Slovakia

Slovenia

Spain

Sweden

United Kingdom

PLEDGED

(GRANTS)

350.000.000

44.000.000

15.000.000

309.289

8.000.000

29.600.000

30.000.000

23.000.000

457.444.300

11.500.430

16.172.000

10.935.000

115.000.000

3.700.000

1.060.000

237.609.411

400.000

8.000.000

256.000

284.000

11.626.000

32.000.000

64.908.000

1.470.804.430

COMMITTED

IN 2005

169.215.000

16.662.309

7.600.000

309.289

6.300.000

30.834.000

14.320.000

25.000.000

222.000.000

11.500.000

1.133.796

10.950.465

75.000.000

3.700.000

1.060.000

184.805.809

247.000

5.058.112

256.000

284.000

10.958.000

43.313.000

61.700.000

902.206.780

OMMITMENTS

. P

LEDGES

48%

38%

51%

100%

79%

104%

48%

109%

49%

100%

65%

100%

78%

62%

63%

102%

100%

94%

135%

95%

61%

DISBURSED

AS TO

ISBURSEMENTS

. C

OMMITMENTS

45%

43%

159%

89%

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

2005

75.675.516

7.167.187

12.050.000

274.009

19.572.900

3.700.000

24.000.000

76.250.000

700.000

1.150.000

9.690.965

31.700.000

1.003.000

470.000

64.022.264

247.000

3.000.000

196.000

284.000

1.365.000

11.935.000

22.430.000

366.882.841

63%

26%

96%

34%

101%

88%

42%

27%

44%

35%

100%

59%

77%

100%

12%

28%

36%

41%

TOTAL

Annexes

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Annex 4 -

List of interviews

I - European institutions

Council of the European Union

Mr Javier SOLANA,

Secretary-General of the Council of the European Union/High Representative

for the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)

Mr Pierre de BOISSIEU,

General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union – Deputy

Secretary-General

Mr Gijs de VRIES,

General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union - Coordinator for

the fight against terrorism

Mr Robert COOPER,

General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union – Director-General

for External Economic Relations, Politico-Military Affairs

General PERRUCHE,

General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union - Director-General

of the European Union Military Staff

Mr William SHAPCOTT,

General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union - Director of

the Joint Situation Centre of the European Union

Mr Patrice BERGAMINI,

Member of the office of Secretary-General /High Representative for the

Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)

Ms Cesira D’ANIELLO,

General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union – Head of the

Coordination Unit, Assistant to the Director-General

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

European Parliament

Mr Elmar BROK,

Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the European Parliament

European Commission

Mr Jacques BARROT,

Vice-President of the Commission, Commissioner with responsibility

for transport

Mr Franco FRATTINI,

Vice-President of the Commission, Commissioner with responsibility

for justice, freedom and security

Ms Benita FERRERO-WALDNER,

Commissioner with responsibility for external relations and

European neighbourhood policy

Mr Louis MICHEL,

Commissioner with responsibility for development and humanitarian aid

Mr Stavros DIMAS,

Commissioner with responsibility for the environment

Mr José CUTILEIRO,

Special Adviser to the President of the Commission

Mr Joao VALE DE ALMEIDA,

Chef de cabinet to Mr Barroso, President of the European Commission

Mr Fernando ANDRESEN GUIMARAES,

Member of the office of Mr Barroso, President of the

European Commission

Mr Patrick CHILD,

Chef de cabinet to Ms Ferrero-Waldner, Commissioner with responsibility

for external relations and European neighbourhood policy

Mr Benoît LE BRET,

Chef de Cabinet to Mr Barrot, Vice-President of the Commission, Commissioner

with responsibility for transport

Mr Eneko LANDABURU,

Director-General, Directorate-General for External Relations

Mr Antonio CAVACO,

Director-General, Humanitarian Aid, European Commission

Mr Jonathan FAULL,

Director-General, Directorate-General for Justice, Freedom and Security

Mr Peter CARL,

Director-General, Directorate-General for the Environment

Mr Stefano SANNINO,

Director, Crisis Platform and Policy Coordination in CFSP,

Directorate-General for External Relations

Mr Thierry DE SAINT MAURICE,

Director, External Service, Directorate-General for External Relations

Mr Paul WEISSENBERG,

Director, Aerospace, Security, Defence and Equipment,

Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry

Mr Ulrich KNUEPPEL,

Adviser, Directorate-General for External Relations

Mr Philippe WILLAERT,

Adviser, Directorate-General for External Relations

Annexes

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

European Commission Delegations/Representations

Mr Fernando VALENZUELA,

Head of the European Commission Delegation to the United

Nations in New York

Mr Reijo KEMPPINEN,

Head of the European Commission Representation in the United Kingdom

Mr Gerhard SABATHIL,

Head of the European Commission Representation in Germany

Ms May Ann RAMSAY,

Deputy Head of the European Commission Representation in Sweden

Mr Charles-Michel GEURTS,

European Commission Delegation to the United Nations in New York

II - Member States of the European Union

Germany

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Annexes

Mr Wolfgang SCHAÜBLE,

Federal Minister for the Interior

Mr Reinhard SILBERBERG,

State Secretary for Foreign Affairs

Mr Peter ALTMAIER,

Member of the German Parliament, Parliamentary State Secretary

in the Federal Ministry for the Interior

Federal Ministry for the Interior

Mr Joachim STEIG,

Director, Internal Security Department

Mr Lothar FREISCHLADER,

Diplomatic Adviser to the Federal Minister for the Interior

Ministry for Foreign Affairs

Mr Peter TEMPEL,

Director, European Affairs Department

Mr Dr. Heinz-Peter BEHR,

Director, Crisis Centre

Austria

Ms Ursula PLASSNIK,

Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs

Ms Liese PROKOP,

Federal Minister for the Interior

Ministry for the Interior

Ms Barbara FISCHER,

Member of the Minister’s Office

Mr Peter WIDERMANN,

Deputy Director-General, Civil Protection, President SCIFA

Ms Doris ITA,

Head of Unit, Civil Protection

Ms Petra UNTERWEGER,

Civil Protection

Ms Karin ZETTELMANN,

Civil Protection

Ms Susanne KLEIN,

International Affairs

Ministry for Foreign Affairs

Mr Thomas OBERREITER,

Member of the Minister’s Office

Mr Johannes KYRLE,

Ambassador, Secretary-General for Foreign Affairs

Ms Elisabeth TICHY-FISSLBERGER,

Ambassador, Deputy Director-General for Economic

and European Affairs, Head of the Directorate for Institutional Questions

Mr Wolfgang PAUL,

Ambassador, Head of the Directorate for Consular Affairs

Mr Peter LAUNSKY-TIEFFENTHAL,

Minister Plenipotentiary, Federal Ministry for Foreign Affairs

Mr Karl PRUMMER,

Department for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, Head of Unit,

European Security Policy

Ms Kathrin BLANCK-PUTZ,

Department for the Common Foreign and Security Policy

Mr Franz HÖRLBERGER

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Permanent Representation of Austria to the European Union

Mr Gregor WOSCHNAGG,

Ambassador, Permanent Representative of Austria to the European

Union, President of the Permanent Representatives Committee

Ms Jutta EDTHOFER,

Second Secretary, Permanent Representation of Austria to the European

Union

Denmark

Permanent Representation of Denmark to the European Union

Mr Jorgen A. GAMMELGAARD,

Deputy Representative on the Political and Security Committee

Finland

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Permanent Representation of Finland to the European Union

Mr Teemu TANNER,

Ambassador, Representative of Finland on the Political and Security Committee

Ms Miia ARO-SANCHEZ,

Second Secretary, Coordinator Political and Security Committee (Nicolaidis)

Ms Henriika LEPPO,

Permanent Representation of Finland to the European Union, Legal Affairs

Ms Tuula TURUNEN,

Permanent Representation of Finland to the European Union, Counsellor

France

Mr Nicolas SARKOZY,

Minister for the Interior and Regional Planning

Ms Catherine COLONNA,

Minister with responsibility for European Affairs

Ministry for the Interior and Regional Planning

Mr David MARTINON,

Adviser on foreign affairs, Member of the Office of Mr Nicolas Sarkozy,

Minister for the Interior and Regional Planning

Mr Gérard COURTOIS,

Adviser on civil security, Member of the Office of Mr Nicolas Sarkozy,

Minister for the Interior and Regional Planning

Mr Christian GALLIARD DE LAVERNEE,

Director, Defence and Civil Security (DDSC)

Mr Didier LOPINOT,

Head of mission, International and European Affairs

Mr Philippe OTT,

Chargé de mission, International and European Affairs

Ministry for Foreign Affairs

Mr Jean-Louis FALCONI,

Head of service, Common Foreign and Security Policy,

Ministry for Foreign Affairs

Mr Gilles BRIATTA,

Director, European Cooperation

Mr Philippe SETTON,

Deputy Director, General Affairs and Future of the Union

Permanent Representation of France to the European Union

Mr Pierre SELLAL,

Ambassador, Permanent Representative of France to the European Union

Ms Christine ROGER,

Ambassador, Representative of France on the Political and Security Committee

Mr Jérôme MONTANT,

Counsellor, Permanent Representation of France on the Political and Security

Committee of the European Union

Mr Erkki MAILLARD,

Permanent Representation of France on the Political and Security Committee

of the European Union

Mr François-Xavier BOURGES,

Counsellor, Justice and Home Affairs

Annexes

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Italy

Mr Gianfranco FINI,

Minister for Foreign Affairs

Mr Gianni LETTA,

State Secretary, Prime Minister's Office

Prime Minister's Office – Department of Civil Protection

Dott. Guido BERTOLASO,

Head of Department

Dott. Agostino MIOZZO,

Director, Bureau of International Relations

Dott. Alessandro BARISICH,

Senior Adviser for International Affairs

Dott.ssa Elvira CASTELLANO,

Responsible for European questions

Ministry for Foreign Affairs

Ambassador Paolo PUCCI di BENISICHI,

Secretary-General

Ambassador Ferdinando NELLI FEROCI,

Director-General for European Integration

Mr Luca GIANSANTI, European Correspondant,

Coordinator for the CFSP and the ESDP

Ms Elisabetta BELLONI,

Responsible for the Crisis Unit

Luxembourg

M. Jean-Louis SCHILTZ,

Ministre de la Coopération et de la Défense

Ministry for Foreign Affairs

Mr Marc BICHLER,

Director for Development Cooperation

United Kingdom

Mr Douglas ALEXANDER,

Minister of State for Europe

Cabinet Office

Mr Kim DARROCH,

Prime Minister's European Policy Adviser and Head of Secretariat

Ms Catherine DAY,

Desk-officer, EU external relations in the Secretariat

Mr Pete ROSE,

Secretariat for Defence

Foreign Office

Mr Paul SIZELAND,

Director, Consular Directorate. Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Mr David FITTON,

Head, Consular Crisis Group

Mr Bruce MANN,

Head, Civil Contingencies Secretariat

Mr Peter TALANTIRE,

Director, Evaluation, Commitments and Legislation

Ms Charlotte VAN BAAK,

Diplomat

Department for International Development (DFID)

Mr Jim DRUMMOND, Director,

United Nations, Conflict and Humanitarian Division

Mr Jack JONES,

United Nations, Conflict and Humanitarian Division

Permanent Representation of the United Kingdom to the European Union

Mr Vincent DEVINE,

Adviser CFSP & ESDP, Deputy Representative on the Political and Security

Committee

Sweden

Ms Leni BJÖRKLUND,

Minister for Defence

Mr Hans DAHLGREN,

State Secretary for Foreign Affairs

Annexes

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Ministry for Defence

Mr Johan RAEDER,

Director, Head of Department for International Affairs and Security Policy

Mr Olle JONSSON,

Director, International Relations, Department for Civil Affairs

Ms Susanna LIF,

Political adviser

Mr Lennart JOHANSSON,

Senior expert

Ministry for Foreign Affairs

Mr Fredrik JÖRGENSEN,

Deputy Director-General, Head of the Department for Consular Affairs

and Civil Law

Ms Charlotte WRANGBERG,

Director, Department for Consular Affairs and Civil Law

Mr Tommy ANDERSSON,

European Coordinator, Department for Consular Affairs and Civil Law

Mr Carl-Magnus HYLTENIUS,

Director-General for Consular Affairs

Mr Fredrik JÖRGENSEN,

Deputy Director-General, Head of the Department for Consular Affairs

and Civil Law

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Embassy of Sweden to France

Mr Frank BELFRAGE,

Sweden’s Ambassador in Paris

Ms Anna HAMMARGREN,

Minister Plenipotentiary

Permanent Representation of Sweden to the European Union

Ms Pia ÖVELIUS,

Counsellor, Defence

Mr Björn LYRVALL,

Ambassador, Representative of Sweden on the Political and Security

Committee

III - Third countries

Canada

Mr Shawn BARBER,

Director, Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding Group

Ms Elissa GOLBERG,

Director, Humanitarian Affairs and Disaster Response Group

Ms Wendy GILMOUR,

Director, Peacekeeping and Peace Operations Group

Mr Kevin O’SHEA,

Minister-Counsellor, Deputy Head of the Mission of Canada to the European

Union

Ms Catherine BOUCHER,

First Secretary, Political Affairs, Mission of Canada to the European Union.

IV - United Nations Organisation

Ms Margareta WAHLSTROM,

Assistant Under-Secretary-General, Humanitarian Affairs,

Deputy Emergency Relief Coordinator, Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

Mr Wolfgang WEISBROD-WEBER,

Director, Europe and Latin America, Department of

Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO)

Ms Louise FRECHETTE,

Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations

V - Red Cross

Professor Jean-François MATTEI,

President of the French Red Cross

Mr Antoine PEIGNEY,

Director, International Relations and Operations

Mr Luc HENSKENS,

Director, Red Cross/EU Office

Annexes

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

VI - Institute for Security Studies

Ms Nicole GNESOTTO,

Director, Institute for Security Studies

VII - European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control

Ms Zsuzsanna JAKAB,

Director of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control

Prof. Johan GIESECKE,

Head, Unit for Scientific Advice

Dr. Denis COULOMBIER,

Head, Unit for Preparedness and Response

Dr. Andrea AMMON,

Head, Unit for Surveillance and Communication

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

Annexes

VIII - European Space Agency

Mr Jean-Jacques DORDAIN,

Director-General

Ms Claudie HAIGNERE,

Former Minister responsible for research and the new technologies and

former Minister responsible for European Affairs

I would also like to thank the members of the informal group I set up within the European

Commission and who provided me with their advice and expert knowledge:

Mr Antonio CAVACO,

Director-General, Humanitarian Aid, European Commission;

Mr Johannes LUCHNER,

Head of

Unit, Humanitarian Aid DG, European Commission;

Ms Henrike TRAUTMANN,

Assistant to the

Director-General, Humanitarian Aid, European Commission;

Mr Hervé DELPHIN,

member of the

office of Louis Michel, Commissioner with responsibility for development and humanitarian aid;

Mr Hubert GAMBS,

member of the office of Ms Ferrero-Waldner, Commissioner with responsibility

for external relations and European neighbourhood policy;

Mr Vincent GUEREND,

member of the

office of Ms Ferrero-Waldner, Commissioner with responsibility for external relations and Euro-

pean neighbourhood policy;

Ms Pia BUCELLA,

Director, Governance, Communication and Civil

Protection, Directorate-General for the Environment;

Mr Nicolas THERY,

Adviser, Directorate-

General for the Environment;

Mr Ranieri SABATUCCI,

Assistant to the Deputy Director-General,

Development;

Mr Olivier LUYCKX,

Assistant to the Director-General, Development;

Ms Marleen

HARFORD,

Director, Secretariat-General;

Ms Isabelle BENOLIEL,

Principal Adviser, Directorate-

General for Health and Consumer Protection;

Mr Francisco FONSECA MORILLO,

Director,

Directorate-General for Justice, Freedom and Security;

Ms Myriam SOCHACKI,

Adviser, Directorate-

General Bureau of European Policy Advisers

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files

Annex 5 -

List of documents consulted

The work of the Permanent Representatives Committee (COREPER II) between January 2005 and

May 2006 and the work of the Council working parties connected with Civil Protection and Consular

Affairs were taken into account in the report.

More specifically the following documents were consulted:

21/03/2006:

Report by Mr Rolf Berend on the European Union Solidarity Fund adopted by

the European Parliament’s Committee on Regional Development

For a European civil protection force:

europe aid

03/03/2006:

Information report on behalf of the delegation for the European Union on Community

action on civil protection, by Mr Paul Girod, Senator – France

13/02/2006 – 15/02-2006:

Report on Wilton Park Conference

Improving the emergency

response in Europe

26/01/2006:

COM (2006) 29 final – Proposal for a Council Decision establishing a Community

civil protection mechanism (recast) – SEC (2006)113

20/12/2005:

The EU’s contribution to the international response to the 2004 Asian Tsunami –

Achievements, next steps and lessons learnt – Discussion Paper – High-level Meeting, Brussels –

Department for International Development, United Kingdom

29/11/2005:

(document 15106/05 of the Presidency and the counter-terrorism coordinator to

Coreper, Limited) – EU emergency and crisis co-ordination arrangements

18/11/2005:

Progress report on the Commission’s response to the Indian Ocean tsunami of

26 December 2004 and the reinforcing of the EU crisis and disaster response in third countries

09/2005:

Disasters, Diseases, Disruptions: a new D-drive for the EU, Institute for Security Studies

10/11/2005:

Commission communication to the Council and the European Parliament

Global

Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES): from concept to reality

29/07/2005:

Report to the Prime Minister by the interministerial delegate,

Mr Jean-Claude Mallet, for France’s aid to the countries affected by the tsunami

20/04/2005:

Commission communication to the Council, the European Parliament the Economic

and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions

Reinforcing EU disaster and crisis

response in third countries

20/04/2005:

Commission communication to the Council, the European Parliament the Economic

and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions

Improving the Community Civil Protection

Mechanism

6/04/2005:

COM (2005) 113 final – Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a Rapid

Response and Preparedness Instrument for major emergencies

28/01/2005:

Presidency document – Follow-up to extraordinary CAGRE of 7 January 2005

on the earthquake and tsunamis in the Indian Ocean – European Union Action Plan

13/12/2004:

General Secretariat – The Hague Programme: strengthening freedom, security

and justice in the European Union

Annexes

PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files