An element of the European defence and security strategy

In December 2003 the European Council adopted the European Security Strategy, entitled ‘A Secure Europe in a Better World’. The same year saw the decision to create the European Defence Agency (EDA, established in 2004), and the launching of a Preparatory Action in the field of Security Research (PASR) for a period of three years by the EC.⁽¹⁾ On the basis of this work, the latter is preparing to launch a research task⁽²⁾ in the context of the Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP7) in early 2007; this task is on the theme of security, the European Security Research Programme (ESRP).

While FP6 already included security research (more than twenty identified projects),⁽³⁾ what is new is that the EU has decided substantially to amplify its efforts in this domain by designating this as a one of its headline programmes. Through the ESRP, the EU extends its federalising dynamic in the security and defence fields, notably by:

• the creation of several specialised agencies (security of the skies, security of the seas, security of networks, etc.); and
• actions undertaken in the fields of the fight against terrorism, protection of infrastructures and crisis management.

With the establishment of ESRP the Commission is setting in place a new approach to respond to security needs. Users are invited to think in terms of preparing for the future and investing in technology. Up to now action has been very largely fragmented, isolated and functioning in the reactive mode in the short term; the opportunity is now there to change tack and develop a common strategy which covers the analysis of requirements, technologies and the industrial base necessary to sustain them.

By virtue of the strategic problems which it treats in a structured way, ESRP constitutes a major political challenge. It defines the need for a real European overall security strategy, the emergence of a policy of European sovereignty in the field of technology and the value in this regard of major dual-use (civil and military) projects. In this context it should be noted that the thrust of such projects is to open a new field of action for the Commission to exercise a certain influence on the defence industrial base.

ESRP is an essential part of the European response to the events of 11 September 2001. It is an echo of the major efforts and initiatives in the United States, and more generally of the constant increase in both risks and threats. ESRP is thus a major element of a future (and necessary) development of the European Security Strategy. This initiative has been very favourably received by most EU member states, especially in France, which has made the theme of security one of its priorities for FP7. This support is formalised in the ‘Government White Paper on Internal Security against Terrorism’, which invites technology to privilege the European dimension and to ‘… apply, sustain and develop the European programme of research and security’.

A programme which concentrates on competitiveness and capabilities

This Commission initiative is largely the result of the recommendations of the Group of Personalities (GoP) which it convoked in 2003.⁽⁴⁾ It also responds to the expectations expressed by France in April 2005 in a memorandum addressed to the Commission on the subject of FP7.⁽⁵⁾ ESRP has twin objectives:

• to improve the competitiveness of the European security industry; and
• to reduce the capability gap for its key missions.

In order to do this the programme will implicate the end users (public and private), and will get closer to the end product by proceeding as far as the system demonstrator stage.

ESRP will have four principal missions:

• protection of citizens against terrorism and organised crime;
• infrastructure protection;
• frontier surveillance and protection; and
• crisis management and the re-establishment of security.

It will also deal with horizontal issues such as integration and interoperability, security and civic action, structure and coordination. It should generate major projects, guided not only by a global capability analysis, but also by a significant number of ‘bottom-up’ projects which have been identified by monitoring of technology.

The programme should have an average annual budget of about €200 million. This sum is much less than the €1 billion suggested by the GoP on the basis of comparisons with the United States; it should, however, be borne in mind that that the security domain is dealt with in other themes of FP7 (information technology, transport, health, space), and that in this context ESRP is looking mainly to integrate technology developed elsewhere into global capability systems. Looked at in this way, the budget will allow for the financing of ambitious projects in order to obtain the desired traction and leverage, and constitute a base for the coordination of the entire security R&T field.

ESRP concentrates on research for which the European dimension brings a clear advantage: critical mass, transnational aspects, subjects of common interest, prospect of a European standard, etc. Since it concerns a sensitive subject closely linked to the defence sector by the duality of the technologies concerned, discussions on the limits of intervention are not easy; some states are very keen strictly to separate what is civil from what is military (even though most of the technologies in question are shared); others are reluctant to see ESRP welcoming initiatives which they themselves have refused in the context of the EDA.

Research will therefore retain a civil orientation, including private needs (in particular the issue of business continuity in times of crisis); close coordination will be ensured with the activities of the Agency in order to guarantee the complementarity of the two processes. This policy does not exclude the possibility of future common projects between the Commission and EDA (software-defined radios, maritime surveillance, biological and chemical detection, UAVs, etc). Discussion continues on questions such as the degree of involvement in intelligence-related technologies, and the coordination of subjects shared with other themes of FP7.

Rapid progress in preparation

The Commission conducted PASR by organising three calls for projects in 2004, 2005 and 2006, each financed with €15 million. This was very successful⁽⁶⁾ and has since resulted in continuous exchanges within the research community throughout Europe. PASR has also proved very useful to the Commission’s Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry, which is due to drive ESRP from 2007 onwards. There has been:

• mobilisation and interaction between the actors;
• definition of research orientations; and
• demonstration of the maturity of the security theme, and of the viability of a programme which will have a significant budget.

The first results of the ‘support’ studies (definition of technological direction and production of a ‘road map’) will allow the ESRP programme of work to be elaborated before the end of 2006.

In mid-2005 the Commission established the European Research Advisory Board (ESRAB), with the aim of defining the content and the methodology of the programme. This Board has some 50 members drawn from national administrations, industry and the academic world; it is reinforced by more than 200 specialists working through nine separate groups (technologies, innovation, coordination, specific rules), and dialoguing with the end-users. ESRAB has already achieved much, and France has been very active–particularly the Ministry of Defence through the DGA. The latter has used its technical expertise and its knowledge of the international scene by leading the group defining the start-up rules, and by its membership of the technology, innovation and coordinating groups.

In order to increase the visibility of security research, ESRAB is looking to put some flagship programmes in place which will have both horizontal links, and be federators. These could be, for example:

• relative to the security of the entire logistic chain; or
• the security of mass transit systems; or
• CBRN security, etc.

There is also the possibility of establishing a high-level European Security Board, which would be in a position to define a strategic agenda for security in Europe.

A catalysing effect at the national level

The prospect of ESRP has had a dynamic effect within European industry; there has been a strong mobilisation to make the project reality, and also towards preparation through PASR. This effect has also been felt at national level, in particular in France, where it has resulted in an interministerial steering committee and the launch of a national security research programme.

As a result of concomitant proposals made at the end of 2004 by the DGA and GIFAS (Groupement des industries aéronautiques et spatiales), an interministerial steering committee was established in January 2005 to define French positions and to dialogue with national industry. It is driven by the Secretariat-General for National Defence (SGDN); the Ministry of the Interior and the DGA respectively are responsible for defining requirements, and for technological and industrial aspects. The Ministries of Research, Industry, Transport, Health and Foreign Affairs are also members.

Constituting as it does a first step in interministerial coordination of security-related preparation for the future, this committee can already point to some solid achievements. It has carried out a first survey of requirements, listed key technologies and identified priority programmes (see box) in liaison with the industrial community. Through it France is now deeply involved in questions of confidentiality,⁽⁷⁾ State control of research, and in measures to be taken on sensitive matters such as ethics and non-proliferation. Within this committee the DGA has set up an information network, organised a series of technical workshops, and mobilised industry.⁽⁸⁾ The success of these workshops shows how useful it is to assemble the actors (civil servants, researchers, operators) to develop a common vision of the needs and efforts made, and to debate research orientations.

National mobilisation was marked by the conference ‘What research for security?’ on 18 October 2005.⁽⁹⁾ It was the occasion for the Minister for Defence to underline the necessarily global, interministerial and European character of the responses to the challenge of global security, together with the need for a new approach and a technological strategy which would be ambitious, structured, forward-looking, collective, mutualised and dual.

The national security research programme, together with the preliminary studies financed by the Ministry of Defence in the domain of security, will be one of the main points of this forward-looking policy. This multidisciplinary programme is managed by the National Agency for Research (ANR), and was prepared jointly by the Ministries of Research, Interior and Defence in 2005. The first invitation for projects on the theme ‘Concepts, systems and tools for global security’ was published in April 2006. It is oriented towards vulnerability analysis, alert management, modelling tools, simulation and decision-making aids, information processing, and security and society.

A real opportunity for Europe

ESRP is at one and the same time a point of rupture and a real opportunity which the EC prepared with the firm intention of stimulating the interest and the initiatives of its member states. The first test is to allow for the eventual accession of the entire community to a first, common level of security. National efforts resulting from the realisation of the need to improve security in the short or medium term could prove less than fully successful if EU members end up with too many differences of level between them.

What is more, the programme offers a strong federating potential; it could well promote the establishing of practices and concepts which will be essential constituents of European security, by contributing to the definition of a global capability approach. In this context it will be important to monitor the coherence between ESRP and national programmes.

The success of this programme is based on its pertinence of principle; no one can oppose the improved security of citizens. It will still need to have a scope and a budget which are significant, and to overcome the reluctance of certain of our partners to set aside a major budget appropriation for ESRP. It will also be necessary to develop an entire environment round the programme so as to optimise its effects, notably by:

• making permanent the networks of experts and users set up for its preparation;
• connecting all security research within FP7; and
• establishing technology evaluation test centres.

Finally, it will be necessary to ensure that these technologies are properly used on the ground in operational systems to improve the security of as many people as possible.⁽¹⁰⁾

Level 1 ESRP research priorities as defined by the interministerial steering committee.

Projects

Security systems for complex open spaces (e.g. busy roads, public spaces, stadiums, airport passenger halls).

Systems for the detection of arms and explosives (passengers in public transport systems).

European identity system using interoperable biometrics, and which allow for data cross-reference respecting personal private lives (acceptability).

Systems for crowd surveillance, flow of persons and individuals; early warning, detection and exploitation.

Global surveillance, traceability and integrity of merchandise through the entire logistic chain.

Communication systems which are interoperable at the national and European level (crisis management), using for example software-defined radio techniques.

Unified maritime approach surveillance system; information, intervention.

Explosive detection systems for urban transport (metro platforms, etc.), and public places (shopping centres, airport concourses, etc.)

(1) Following its communication ‘European defence–market and industrial aspects’ of 11 March 2003, the Commission launched a preparatory action called ‘Enhancement of the European industrial potential in the field of security research 2004-2006’ to prepare the bases of an ambitious programme starting in 2007.
(2) The term ‘security’ should be taken here as corresponding to the broad Anglo-Saxon notion of security, which covers both the (traditionally separated) areas of civil and military security, and not the sense of ‘safety’.
(3) For example the following programmes:
a. SAFEE (aeronautical protection);
b. EURITRACK (detection of explosives in containers); and
c. BIOSECURE (Biometric identification), etc.
(4) This report had underlined the need for an ambitious programme with a major budget, coherence, and the mutualisation of fragmented research in the security domain. It also called for closer links between security and defence, the financing of demonstrators, and for links with the end-users.
(5)  ‘It is no longer acceptable to juxtapose solutions which are sectorial, ring-fenced by academic disciplines, or uniquely national . . . [what is needed] is the setting in place of a structure adapted to a global approach to security . . . [ESRP must] allow us to overcome the barrier between the civil and the military by reliance on dual-use technologies.’
(6) The overall cost of the proposals amounted to 20 times the budget available in 2004, as in 2005.
(7) With ESRP in view, France has both pushed and aided the Commission to equip itself to deal with classified contractual information.
(8) In this regard, the proportion of the PASR budget won by France rose from 20% in 2004 to 27% in 2005.
(9) Organised by the Ministries of Research, Defence and the Interior, in liaison with SGDN.
(10) A view which is shared by France and the Commission’s Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry.