Funny you should mention talk of bias. You posted a link the other day from the EU Commission’s ‘EuroMyths’ site in reference to what you (rightly or wrongly) perceive as lies from the “right wing press” towards the EU from 1992 to 2017. I haven’t read through them all but there’s a good number of myths accredited to both the BBC and even the left wing Mirror via that link. How inconvenient
.
Now given that you provided the link I feel we may agree that poor reporting exists across a wide spectrum of outlets. Many perpetuate indignation and often anger. They sensationalise, attract attention, appeal to the collective moral compass of the masses and in so doing often promote division. On the other hand once you get passed the headlines good reporting is often accurate, unbiased, to the point and able to raise awareness. As I’m sure you’ll agree the trick is to read between the lines, do some research and find out what’s what.
Having looked up the terms army, defence, EU Army and even veto from the link you provided there’s very little in the way of denial from the EU Commission’s own ‘EuroMyths’ site on their reported plans for an EU Army. If said site is a fair and accurate reflection of the truth then how very unusual. Could that mean there’s been little bias or untruth on such reporting? Could the desires of Junker, Macron, Merkel, Blair and Chirac et.al regarding an EU Army have been accurately reported after all? Or is the link itself largely useless as it concentrates on trivia by sheer volume of nonsense, thus diverting attention from wider agendas encapsulating any number of issues and not just defence?
There is a link on ‘EuroMyths’ quoting the Telegraph’s story on an EU Rapid Reaction Force though, denying plans for an EU security force exist and which goes on to state the following: “The rapid response unit was set up inside the European Commission in May 2000 on the back of proposals from Chris Patten, the Commissioner for External Relations. It aims to ensure that the Commission can react quickly to unfolding crises, such as earthquakes or other humanitarian disasters.
This measure is categorically not linked to the decision by EU Member States to create a joint military capacity. The Commission does not perform any kind of military role”.
https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK...-its-own-army/
As you like links if you have the time feel free to explore the one below at your leisure. It’s from the European Union External Action site and lists a number of its operations to date. Although humanitarian interventions can of course take many guises, a European Union which uses “…… civilian
and military instruments in several countries in three continents (Europe, Africa and Asia) as part of its Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP)” doesn’t sound very humanitarian to me. There are some very interesting uses of common defence and police resources on said link worthy of further reading elsewhere.
https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/...-operations_en
One final point, vetoes are only as useful as the governments entrusted with their use.