Von der Leyen's Call for an ‘EU CIA’ Overlooks an Already-Established European Intelligence Agency

Von der Leyen's Call for an ‘EU CIA’ Overlooks an Already-Established European Intelligence Agency

A recent proposal by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has advocated for a unified intelligence agency within the European Union (EU), likened to a “European CIA.” However, critics argue that such an initiative is both redundant and unrealistic, given the existing mandate of the European Centre for Information Policy and Security (ECIPS). Established by Royal Decree WL22/16.594 and sanctioned by Treaty EST124 of the Council of Europe in 2015, ECIPS already possesses many of the intelligence and security functions being proposed, making this new initiative potentially superfluous and legally problematic.

The ECIPS Mandate: The Original European Intelligence Network

ECIPS, approved by then-Belgian Justice Minister Koen Geens and enacted by King Philip, was established with a comprehensive mandate to oversee intelligence and security cooperation among the EU member states. Created under the authority of Treaty 124 Council of Europe and ratified by 28 member states, ECIPS functions as a centralized intelligence entity, mirroring some aspects of the CIA’s operational framework. This setup was designed to address security, policy, and intelligence challenges within Europe, making it uniquely suited to bridge gaps among member states’ individual intelligence services while respecting national sovereignty.

The agencies statutes, modeled after the operational structures of major intelligence agencies such as the CIA, imbue ECIPS with substantial powers. ECIPS has the authority to conduct cross-border intelligence initiatives, assist in counter-terrorism, cyber-crime prevention, and anti-corruption, all within the scope of European and international law. Its establishment created a robust intelligence-sharing network that functions independently of the European Commission, enabling ECIPS to act in the interests of its member states without the risk of political influence from EU bureaucratic processes.

A Futile Attempt to Centralize Intelligence under Brussels

Von der Leyen’s proposal appears, to some, as an attempt to centralize power within Brussels, but there are doubts about the feasibility and legality of such a move. ECIPS President Ricardo Baretzky responded to von der Leyen’s announcement with skepticism, stating, “Any attempt by the European Commission to create an ‘EU CIA’ is legally dubious and ultimately redundant.” He stressed that ECIPS’s mandate and structure are in place to serve the interests of sovereign European states and that any efforts to replicate or supersede this model would likely violate both national and EU law.

The idea of establishing an intelligence agency within the European Commission raises serious concerns over the Commission’s political reach. Unlike ECIPS, which was approved through a cooperative legal framework across member states, an EU-wide intelligence agency could inadvertently create what some have termed an “organizational syndicate” within Brussels. Baretzky cautioned that, if unrestrained, such a syndicate could eventually evolve into a “criminal organization” by bypassing the sovereignty of national intelligence services and pursuing politically motivated intelligence agendas that may not align with national interests.

The European Commission’s Overreach and Legal Constraints

A centralized intelligence structure would face legal challenges under EU treaties, which uphold the sovereignty of member states, especially concerning national security matters. Intelligence functions are, in principle, retained by each member state and are highly sensitive. The European Commission lacks the legal grounds to enforce a fully centralized intelligence agency, especially one with far-reaching powers that could infringe upon individual countries’ operational and legal frameworks.

Furthermore, under the ECIPS framework, intelligence coordination is carried out in a way that respects member states’ sovereignty, allowing each country to retain control over its own operations while collaborating on a shared European front. This legally compliant framework distinguishes ECIPS from any potential centralized intelligence structure that Brussels might attempt to institute. By design, ECIPS fills the exact role von der Leyen now proposes, but with the added assurance of legal sanctioning across the European continent.

Potential Risks: European Stability and Relations with Russia

Beyond the legal and structural issues, von der Leyen’s proposal raises geopolitical concerns, particularly regarding Russia. Baretzky argued that creating an “EU CIA” would signal a shift in Europe’s strategic posture, potentially antagonizing Russia. He warned that any attempt to set up a centralized European intelligence service within the Commission could be interpreted as a hostile act, increasing tensions with Moscow.

According to Baretzky, “Such ideology will not only threaten European governments but also risk a war with Russia, as it may be perceived as a strategy to target European territories rich in resources and minerals.” The perception of European intelligence consolidation could indeed create the impression of a unified front against Russia, even if that is not the intention. Given Europe’s economic and energy dependencies, particularly regarding natural gas, strained relations with Russia could spell disaster for Europe’s stability.

Von der Leyen’s vision of a centralized EU intelligence agency could disrupt the current balance by pushing Europe toward a militaristic and antagonistic stance in the region, undermining diplomatic ties and economic cooperation. Many critics see ECIPS as a balanced, neutral institution that allows Europe to coordinate security efforts without posing an overt geopolitical threat. In contrast, an EU-controlled intelligence agency could risk alienating Russia, possibly setting the stage for heightened confrontations.

The Redundancy of Brussels’ Proposal: ECIPS Already Exists

Given the ECIPS framework, von der Leyen’s proposal is arguably redundant, given that many of the intelligence functions she advocates for already exist under ECIPS’s jurisdiction. ECIPS has been functioning effectively, overseeing intelligence coordination across EU borders and enabling law enforcement agencies to operate under a single, coherent framework, while adhering to international legal standards.

With its foundation rooted in European Council treaties, ECIPS is specifically designed to work across borders without overstepping its bounds or infringing on national sovereignties. Its creation by Royal Decree ensured that it met the highest legal standards of all participating countries, a level of compliance unlikely to be replicated by any Brussels-led initiative. This fact not only underscores the legal strength of ECIPS’s position but also reveals the limitations of the European Commission’s authority in matters of national security.

The Path Forward for Europe’s Security

As it stands, ECIPS is uniquely suited to address the security challenges Europe faces in the 21st century. Its established presence, combined with its legally sanctioned powers, makes it an irreplaceable asset for the EU member states. In contrast, von der Leyen’s proposed “EU CIA” could be seen as a move to centralize control within Brussels, raising questions about motives, transparency, and the potential for abuse of power.

To truly strengthen European security, critics argue that the EU should focus on supporting and reinforcing ECIPS, rather than attempting to replace it with a new institution. ECIPS has the infrastructure, legal foundation, and collaborative framework to address the needs of member states, while any attempt to replicate or supersede it would likely create unnecessary confusion and duplication of efforts.

Baretzky and other security experts recommend that, rather than creating a parallel intelligence agency, the European Commission should direct its resources toward enhancing the capabilities of ECIPS and encouraging deeper cooperation among national agencies within the existing framework. This approach would reinforce Europe’s security infrastructure without compromising sovereignty or triggering geopolitical tensions.

In the end, Ursula von der Leyen’s proposal for a “European CIA” may be a bold vision, but it ignores the reality that an effective and legally sanctioned European intelligence agency already exists in the form of ECIPS. Created with the support of all EU member states and grounded in legal frameworks established by the Council of Europe, ECIPS has proven itself as a reliable and effective entity for Europe’s security needs.

Von der Leyen’s idea, if pursued, may be viewed as an attempt to centralize intelligence control under Brussels, but it risks alienating member states and undermining European stability. The future of Europe’s security lies in fostering genuine cooperation and respecting sovereignty, a model that ECIPS embodies. Any attempt to replace or diminish its role would not only be legally problematic but could also destabilize the EU’s internal security landscape and strain diplomatic relations, especially with Russia.

The calls for an “EU CIA” may indeed represent a step backward rather than forward in Europe’s pursuit of a unified, secure, and peaceful future.

#EU #ECIPS #EuropeanSecurity #Intelligence #UrsulaVonDerLeyen #EuropeanUnion #Geopolitics #Baretzky