Brexiteers uneasy as UK inches toward EU defense projects

LONDON — Closer integration with the European Union has been a taboo for a generation of British Conservatives — but in the realm of defense at least, Rishi Sunak’s government seems to be taking another look.

This week, Armed Forces Minister James Heappey told the House of Commons that Brussels and London had achieved a consensus on the “majority” of an agreement for the U.K. to join a military project under the EU’s defense coordination group, known as the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO.)

It is a dramatic reversal given only three years have passed since the British government, led then by Boris Johnson, emphatically rejected a post-Brexit deal on foreign policy and defense put forward by the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator.

And the reversal is making some Euro-sceptics in the ruling Conservative party rather uncomfortable.

But as the U.K. seeks a new place in the world outside the bloc, and with Russia waging war in Ukraine and stepping up its aggression against the West, Britain seems to be warming to the idea of reviving defense cooperation with the EU.

During the Brexit negotiations, Brussels tried to strike a foreign affairs and defense treaty with Britain, which would have enabled the U.K. to take part in one or more initiatives under PESCO, a military cooperation pact which now includes 68 projects, spanning from maritime and air systems to cyber and space.

The U.K., a strong opponent of EU defense integration, argued at the time there were ways of cooperating in these areas that did not require treaty obligations.

But as Heappey told the Commons Wednesday, recent events have increased Britain’s appetite for cooperation and London is close to agreeing to a deal to join one PESCO project with others in the pipeline. This first initiative, led by the Netherlands, aims at easing the transport of NATO troops and weapons across Europe by cutting red-tape such as customs rules on the transport of military equipment.

Negotiations began in earnest in November, when the EU accepted the U.K.’s application to join the project — a moment marking one of the biggest steps forward in cross-Channel cooperation since Britain left the union.

Asked if the U.K. could join more PESCO projects, Heappey said the government would “consider them on a case-by-case basis.”

“Where there is merit and where it is in the U.K. interests to work with the European Union to the advantage of NATO and our own national interest, we will, of course, do so. However, we will not do so blindly out of habit, only when it is in our interest,” he added.

Peter Ricketts, a former senior diplomat and ex national security adviser to David Cameron, said “the mood has become a lot more pragmatic in the last year”: Primarily because of the war in Ukraine; The improvement in EU-U.K. relations after they ended their long-running dispute over post-Brexit trade rules in Northern Ireland; And more productive cooperation between NATO and the EU. The alliance is less concerned about being undermined by EU defense initiatives.

The war in Ukraine, Ricketts added, “has forced the U.K. and the EU and other European countries to think about closer cooperation on a whole range of defense and security issues” and has recalibrated the mood “towards cooperation where it is in everyone’s interests.”

Lack of transparency

But the change of heart in government makes hardline Brexiteers feel jittery, even though other non-EU countries including Canada, Norway and the U.S. are also participating in the PESCO military mobility project.

David Jones, deputy chairman of the European Research Group of Tory Brexiteers, said he’s concerned about the terms the U.K. is signing up to the lack of transparency around PESCO.

The Ministry of Defense confirmed it does not plan to publish the agreement to join the military mobility project, arguing it is not the department’s policy to publish memoranda of understanding because they often deal with classified military or technical matters.

“From a parliamentary point of view, it’s quite unsatisfactory because parliament should be in a position to scrutinize arrangements that the government enters into,” Jones said.

The Tory MP added he feared PESCO could come into conflict with NATO’s needs: “NATO is the principal guarantor of peace in Europe and I think there’s a concern about the extent to which PESCO may not align with the objectives of NATO.”

According to Gwythian Prins, a pro-Brexit academic who served on the Chief of Defence Staff’s Strategy Advisory Panel, participation in the military mobility project is a “bait and hook operation” by the EU which “opens the way for subordination to other parts of the European political command structure.”

His words echo those of Richard Dearlove, former head of MI6 and a fellow Brexiteer, who told the Commons foreign affairs committee in February: “If you look at the texts and mechanism for subordination to EU defense rules and laws, for example, I am quite alarmed that we are suddenly agreeing … to join part of PESCO, because there isn’t a ‘part’ of PESCO.”

Heappey brushed aside these concerns in the Commons, however, arguing “conspiracy is not as rife” as Brexiteers fear. The military mobility project, the armed forces minister added, “seems to be a pretty good thing which the U.K. should seek to cooperate with the EU on.”

The Ministry of Defence added that PESCO projects do not lock third countries into the EU’s regulatory or legal ecosystem, nor come with the obligation of joining other EU defence structures or additional PESCO projects.

Joining the military mobility initiative “will not in any way affect the UK’s sovereign control over defence,” a spokesperson for the ministry said.

‘Bait and hook operation’

The U.K.’s interest in PESCO should be seen as “a part of a broader focus on defense industrial collaboration,” said Sophia Gaston of the London-based think tank Policy Exchange, including engagement with other close partners in defense projects such as the AUKUS technology security alliance with the U.S. and Australia and a consortium with Japan and Italy to build a sixth-generation fighter jet.

She suggested PESCO was designed to incentivize EU countries working together, but does not facilitate third countries’ participation.

In the wake of the Ukraine war, the bloc “will have to yield around some of the terms to enable it to become a more attractive capability development prospect for British companies,” she added.

“The EU’s new defense infrastructure has been designed with a degree of inflexibility towards the participation of non-EU states,” Gaston said. “The war in Ukraine has undermined the feasibility of this model, as both the United States and the United Kingdom have demonstrated their indispensability to European security. As ever, both sides will need to compromise, show mutual respect and meet in the middle.”