A “Friendly” Competition:Galileo and Trans-Atlantic relations

FRS 144

Brian J. Greeley

• Why was Galileo developed?

• What it shows about current relations between Europe and the U.S.

•What will be the consequences for the future?

Main Topics to Address

Post-World War II EuropeThe Marshall Plan - 1947

•Aid was given to Western European countries; trade barriers were eased which spurred economic integration

Treaty of Paris - 1951

•Created the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), whose aim was to develop a program of post-war industrial production and consumption of coal and steel.

•Set a common market without duties or subsidies and is seen as the precursor to the E.U.

Post-World War II Europe

The Treaty of Rome - 1957

•Established the European Economic Community (EEC), with the same countries who signed the Treaty of Paris.

•Worked for the free movement of goods, service, labour and capital, easing many internal tariffs while removing some altogether.

•Developed joint economic policies between member states on labor, welfare, agriculture and foreign trade.

•Established common price levels for Agricultural products.

Post-World War II EuropeSolemn Declaration on European Union – 1983

"The Heads of State or Government of the Member States of the European Communities meeting within the European Council resolved to continue the work begun on the basis of the Treaties of Paris and Rome and to create a united Europe, which is more than ever necessary in order to meet the dangers of the world situation, capable of assuming the responsibilities incumbent on it by virtue of its political role, its economic potential and its manifold links with other peoples, ..."

"The Heads of State or Government, on the basis of an awareness of a common destiny and the wish to affirm the European identity, confirm their commitment to progress towards an ever closer union among the peoples and Member States of the European Community.”

"Solemn Declaration on European Union (Stuttgart, 19 June 1983)", in Bulletin of the European Communities. June 1983, No 6, pp. 24-29.

Post-World War II EuropeSingle European Act - 1986

•Worked to further remove intra-Europe tariffs and set a true common market.

Maastricht Treaty - 1992

•Led to creation of the European Union and the Euro, which went into circulation on January 1, 2002.

•Established the “Three Pillar” policy of the E.U. With one pillar dealing with economic policy, one dealing with foreign relations and military policy, and the last dealing with judicial matters.

Convention on the Future of Europe - 2001

•Former French Prime Minister Valéry Giscard d'Estaing proposed to change the name of the European Union to United Europe. Proposal was unadopted.

Post-World War II EuropeTreaty establishing a Constitution for Europe – 2004

• Purpose would be to codify principles throughout the EU, Simplifying justice proceedings, enhancing cooperation and integration throughout member states.

•Seen as a shift towards the future creation of a single European state.

•Rejected by France on May 29, 2005 and the Netherlands on June 1, 2005

E.U. Member States

E.U. Flag

Galileo Positioning System

•Galileo was conceived at the height of the current European integration effort.

•In 1999, a joint team of engineers from France, Italy, the UK, and Germany was commissioned to develop a positioning system that was mainly for civilian use.

•This was in part due to the fact that GPS is run by the U.S. military, and that the U.S. reserves the right to jam, degrade, or shut down public GPS access completely

•Thus, Galileo would “free” Europe and other countries from having to rely on the U.S. system, which could be disrupted or discontinued in times of war.

Galileo Positioning System

•After the September 11th terrorist attacks in 2001, however, the Galileo project was almost scrapped due to pressure from the U.S. and to harsh economic conditions in Europe.

•A letter from then-Deputy Secretary of State Paul Wolfowitz in late 2001, elicited the response that "Galileo is almost dead," from a spokesman for the European commission in charge of the Galileo project

Galileo Positioning System•As a response to this pressure from the U.S., however, European Union leaders decided to go ahead with the program. In the Spring of 2003, the Galileo project was officially agreed upon by E.U. members and funding of 1.1 billion Euros was provided for the first stages of the project.

•In September 2003, the People’s Republic of China joined the project.

•In July 2004, Israel became a partner in the Project.

•As of January of 2006, South Korea, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, and India had also joined the project.

Galileo: Current and Future Affairs

•French President Jacques Chirac was quoted as saying that failing to move ahead on Galileo "would lead inevitably to a vassal status, first scientific and technical and then industrial and economic.“

•Economic benefits with the European entrance into a lucrative market. The E.U. anticipates up to $90 billion of revenue in the first 15 years due to Galileo.

•However, political implications of the Galileo system seem to be much greater.

•Seen as a way to ‘level’ the playing field between the U.S. and Europe.

Implications

Galileo: Current and Future Affairs

•With Europe’s aspirations to be a truly major player in global affairs, Galileo gives the E.U. the opportunity to apply significant leverage on the U.S. and even interfere in its foreign policy.

"Galileo will underpin the common European defense policy that the Member States have decided to establish. There is no question here of coming into conflict with the United States which is and will remain our ally, but simply a question of putting an end to a situation of dependence… Although designed primarily for civilian applications, Galileo will also give the EU a military capability.“

European Commission Directorate-General Energy and Transport. "The European project on radio navigation by satellite“ http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/energy_transport/en/gal_en.html

Galileo: Current and Future Affairs

The Jamming Question

•Under the draft plan put forth by the E.U., one of the signals for Galileo’s PRS would either directly overlay or straddle the new U.S. military GPS M Code centered at 1227.6 MHz.

•Thus, the jamming of Galileo would render American GPS ineffective. (On purpose?)

•However, in late 2003 an agreement was reached for the E.U. to switch frequencies, in return for U.S. assistance and a promise that the third generation of GPS would conform to Galileo standards. (This would, in effect, allow the E.U. to hypothetically jam the American GPS)

Galileo: Current and Future Affairs

The Chinese Connection

•China became a major partner in the Galileo system in September of 2003, funding roughly a fifth of the initial cost of 1.1 billion Euros.

•While the E.U. and China insist that Galileo will be employed for civilian purposes, the military applications of Galileo are immense. China is bound to employ Galileo in its weapons systems.

•China could effectively develop a way to regionally neutralize American GPS signals while enjoying the use of the Galileo system. This is a concern due to the ever-present Taiwan situation

•As a major partner in the project, it seems hard to see the E.U. denying China (or any partner country) access on the account of a U.S. request.

Galileo: Current and Future Affairs

American Policy

•Peter Teets, under-secretary of the US Air Force, sums up the dilemma when he asks: "What will we do 10 years from now when American lives are put at risk because an adversary chooses to leverage the global positioning system of perhaps the Galileo constellation to attack American forces with precision?"

•Without E.U. assistance, the US has stated that it would first try unilaterally to jam Galileo's signals, but then would attack Galileo’s satellites to destroy one or all of its units if jamming failed.

Galileo: Consequences

•Such a disagreement and potential attack by the U.S. on E.U. assets that threaten American security (Galileo) could bring about the unfortunate end of the Trans-Atlantic alliance between Europe and the U.S.

•Technological decisions required by Galileo would mean that countries have to commit themselves to either the pro-American (GPS) or anti-American (Galileo) groups that have arisen from the advent of the Iraq War.

•But with the absence of a clear policy regarding Galileo’s military usage (The E.U. has chosen to ignore this reality and instead focus on civilian applications) it will be hard to know for sure what actions will be taken in the future by the parties involved. What is certain, however, is that the U.S. and its military, for better or for worse, will have to cope with the loss of its monopoly on precision satellite positioning.