D5.1 The Effectiveness of EU capabilities and current situation of pooling and sharing

D5.1 The Effectiveness of EU capabilities and current situation of pooling and sharing

Lead beneficiary: SaferGlobe

Delivery date: 21/06/2017

Revision: 5.0

Download (pdf)

Executive Summary:

This comparative review analyses the case studies of the IECEU-project to consolidate findings from the project. In its core are the six capabilities of crisis management identified in the project. These capabilities are planning capacity, operational capacity, comprehensiveness, competences, interoperability and technology. Together the six capabilities form an overall picture of the capabilities used in crisis management.

The general conclusion of the review is that EU crisis management missions and operations are very varied in their effectiveness and the capabilities that they are able to deploy. The great variation also extends to all missions under study, which showed a mix of capabilities on both high and low levels. Furthermore, the capabilities themselves showed great variation between different operations and missions, which was not attributable to the nature of the mission.

The study highlights two factors for effectiveness in crisis management. First, mandate creation and planning. Although strides towards better planning have been made, the EU still has significant potentials for improvement. Specifically challenging to planning is the combination of linear and relatively slow planning mechanisms with both complex institutional arrangements, coordination with other international actors, and the changing local context. Here, there is anecdotal evidence that crisis management operations and missions with a clear, broad, overall goal are better placed to deal with changes than those with either overly limiting or overly broad mandates.

Second, comprehensiveness and coordination, especially with other international actors is vital for operations and missions. Especially in military operations, EU typically works well with other international actors. As the number of potential international actors grows, the coordination challenges also grow, but nevertheless it is clear that here is one of EU’s strengths in crisis management. Coordination with locals is more varied in practice, but still a clear emphasis in crisis management.
Other identified impediments to effectiveness include short rotation cycles, especially in combination with poor hand-over practices and lack of information sharing. Recruitment of skilled professionals with necessary soft-skills (e.g. communication skills, language skills) remains challenging especially for positions that require the highest level of expertise.

The most underdeveloped capability, especially in the civilian missions (or in civ-mil cooperation), is interoperability and pooling and sharing. Here there is both potential for development and synergies to be found. However, further development of joint EU tools will require additional emphasis on training in general and wider use of train& equip. In terms of effectiveness, the overall the comparison showed that the EU’s venture into operational conflict prevention is neither an unconditional ‘success’ nor ‘failure’. Instead it demonstrates how the Union has had significant achievements as well as difficulties in this regard – sometimes in the same missions/operations.