Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1516411
6 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 27 MARCH 2022 OPINION 2 maltatoday EXECUTIVE EDITOR KURT SANSONE ksansone@mediatoday.com.mt Letters to the Editor, MaltaToday, Vjal ir-Rihan, San Gwann SGN 9016 E-mail: dailynews@mediatoday.com.mt Letters must be concise, no pen names accepted, include full name and address maltatoday | SUNDAY • 25 FEBRUARY 2024 Being naïve is not an option: Europe's security is in Malta's interest Editorial THE Labour Party is trying to make political gain from Roberta Metsola's recent statements on the need for the European Union to boost defence and security spending. The PL is trying to label Metsola a warmonger and an enemy of peace. The descriptions fit snuggly with the Prime Minister's rhetoric that depicts Malta as a peace-loving nation and Metsola – and as a con- sequence, the Nationalist Party – as the country's enfant terrible. The problem with the PL's rhetoric is that it ig- nores the geopolitical developments in Europe over the past two years characterised by Russia's invasion of Ukraine. It is a rhetoric that ignores Vladimir Putin's expansionist ambitions. It is a rhetoric that pays lip service – a minute's silence in parliament and short message on X – to the death of Alexei Na- valny at the hands of the Russian authorities, while ignoring Putin's ever-tightening grip on power by eliminating internal critics. At best, the PL's reasoning is a naïve interpretation of the dangers Europe is facing today and at worst, deceitful rhetoric intended to score brownie points in Malta while doing something different at EU level. While Robert Abela in Malta is telling us that he wants peace – a noble value indeed – and shoots at Metsola for speaking on the need of a militarily stronger EU, his minister was telling MaltaToday that Malta was considering taking part in the EU's Red Sea naval mission, Operation Aspides. It is in the EU's and Malta's interest to ensure that international shipping lanes are not compromised and thus it makes absolute sense for Malta, within its limitations, to participate in such a mission. Details of Malta's participation have so far been limited to a reply sent to this newspaper a couple of weeks ago that suggested an Armed Forces of Malta officer will be stationed at operational headquarters in Greece. An operation like Aspides, which is intended to defend, accompany and provide situational aware- ness to merchant ships passing through the Red Sea, is precisely why the EU needs to bolster its security and defence structures. On a far more serious level is the threat posed by Putin's Russia. EU member states would be extreme- ly naïve to ignore what Putin has done in Ukraine in the belief that he will never pose a threat to them. Being prepared is not a declaration of war; being prepared is ensuring you have the means and the structures to defend yourself if attacked. Being pre- pared also serves as a deterrent to ward off potential threats. The EU needs to develop strategic autonomy in several economic sectors over the coming years. But this notion must also extend to its defence capabili- ties, especially if Donald Trump is elected president in the US next November. This is why the EU needs to step up its defence spending. This does not necessarily mean creating an EU army with central command – this will prob- ably never work. But structured EU defence cooperation will be necessary to develop military interoperability; joint procurement of arms and ammunition; joint military research and development; sharing of intelligence; and the ability to deploy a significant joint military force in the shortest time possible in the case of adversity. This enhanced security and defence capability will give form and function to the mutual defence clause introduced in the Lisbon Treaty. Through the mutual defence clause all member states are obliged to provide help to a member state under attack but unless there are structures in place to make this hap- pen, the clause is as good as a fish out of water. Malta should not shun this strategy on the mis- guided premise that neutrality protects us from adversity. Even if a physical threat to the country is a remote possibility, we can never underestimate the risks associated with cyberwarfare. The government has argued that Malta's neutral- ity does not stop it from taking a political position. Indeed, Malta condemned Russia's invasion of Ukraine, adopted all EU sanctions against Russian nationals, and has even provided Ukraine with hu- manitarian aid. But even these actions, which are not military in nature, have put Malta on Russia's bad list along with the rest of the EU. In these circumstances, Malta should be asking itself whether it makes sense to remain aloof from enhanced defence and military cooperation at EU level. Even as a neutral state – although neutrality's relevance should be debated – Malta should be able to shape the EU's defence and security policy. As a starter, Malta should join PESCO (Permanent Structured Cooperation), the EU's security policy cooperative arm. Being militarily prepared must never be viewed as anathema to the pursuit of peace. Norway is a shin- ing example of this. The Nordic country is a member of NATO, a military alliance, and yet it has often acted as a successful peace broker and mediator on the world stage. Malta can emulate Norway's example by tak- ing a more active role on the world stage to act as a mediator – it successfully negotiated a UN Security Council resolution last year asking for humanitarian pauses in Gaza but it can do much more. However, in being a peace broker Malta must nev- er close its eyes to any potential threats it may face. It is in Malta's interest to be part of a strong EU that is able to defend its values and its member states. Being naïve is not an option. Quote of the Week "It was never about me." Opposition leader Bernard Grech when asked about his dismal trust rating in the latest MaltaToday survey and whether he is an albatross around the PN's neck MaltaToday 10 years ago 23 February 2014 State moves in to take control of local wardens THE running of Malta's local enforcement sys- tem has become too costly to keep up with the expectations of the two private companies which provide Malta's and Gozo's 44 local councils with wardens, CCTV cam- eras, and speed cameras, and the only way it can survive is to issue more tickets and col- lect more fines. But Labour seems to be living up to a warn- ing sounded by Joseph Muscat in 2011 that the "sub- sidised racket" of local enforcement would longer be tolerated under a new govern- ment. "Yesterday, parliamentary secretary for local government José Herrera unveiled plans for a new centralised unit to take over the manning of local wardens. Herrera has pledged a 30% reduction in costs - a reduction that industry insiders de- duce can only be achieved by cutting out the private sector. But the parliamentary secretary said that today's system was built on the misleading as- sumption that it should make money for local councils when in reality, uncollected fines and a decline in contraventions and speed- ing offences being committed, has rendered the system unsustainble to run. Herrera's solution will be to turn the LES in- to a national unit of wardens serving councils, rather than the private operators taking over 70% of the total fines issued over the years. Labour taking on 'subsidised racket Malta's local warden system is in the pro- cess of being reformed, 14 years after it was first introduced – but the jury is out on what government's plans for a centralised unit means for people like Kenneth De Martino, whose Guard & Warden Service runs the gamut of local enforcement services, deploy- ing wardens to the coun- cils, monitoring CCTV systems and also processing speed camera fines. ...