A European army

THE ARGUMENTS FOR

Proposals for a European army have been discussed for more than 50 years. There is already a European Rapid Reaction Force. It's time to build on this.

Britain is determined, and perhaps obliged, to have an active foreign policy, but our forces are already stretched to near their limit. We need assistance from our European partners, and a European army is the best way to achieve this.

There are areas - Eastern Europe, the fringes of the old Soviet Union, and even the Middle East - where our interests are not always the same as America's, but where they may need to be supported by armed force. Only a European army can do this.

A European army will ensure that we don't have a repeat of the situation in Afghanistan where German soldiers are forbidden to shoot except in self-defence.

Given the quality of our military, this is one area where Britain will be the leading power in Europe.

THE ARGUMENTS AGAINST

A European army would represent another stage in the progress towards a United States of Europe - something we don't want.

The difficulty of integrating different military traditions in a multi-lingual force would be considerable, and would impair the efficiency of our own troops.

It is essential that we maintain our right to an independent foreign policy. This would be curtailed if we participated in a European army.

It would drive a wedge between the USA and Europe, damage the Atlantic Alliance and our 'special relationship' with Washington. It is better to rely on Nato as we did over Kosovo.

Whatever is said now, the French would assume leadership of any European army.