US Secretary of State Colin Powell was scathing in his response to the plans set out Tuesday by France, Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg -- which all opposed the US-led war in Iraq -- to boost Europe's self-reliance in defence matters.

At a mini-summit in Brussels, the leaders of the four countries decided to set up their own command headquarters for military operations outside the NATO arena.

They also pledged to create their own rapid reaction force, centred on a Franco-German brigade, although the EU is establishing its own force numbering 60,000 personnel to respond to regional crises.

"What we need is not more headquarters," Powell told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "What we need is more capability and fleshing out of the structure and the forces that are already there."

The summit quartet not only opposed the Iraq conflict but also blocked a US attempt to boost NATO member Turkey's defences in the run-up to the war, sparking fury in Washington.

But Powell's comments also highlighted a long-standing US demand -- European members of NATO must spend more on defence.

In 2002, according to NATO figures, Germany spent 1.5 percent of its gross domestic product on defence, Belgium 1.3 percent and Luxembourg just 0.8. That compares to 2.4 percent for Britain, and 3.3 percent for the United States.

In that regard, a pledge by the four summit participants to "develop their military capabilities" might have been welcomed by others.

But it was included in a proposal to create a "European Security and Defence Union" -- a potentially divisive attempt to forge a twin-track EU for core members to deepen their military cooperation.

Italy, Portugal and Spain, which also sided with Washington over Iraq, reacted with dismay to the summit proposals, while NATO voiced concerns that the new military command could lead to duplication.

"European security and defence policy cannot be set by three or four countries," Spanish Foreign Minister Ana Palacio said.

Many of the proposals already have the backing of other member states in the convention drafting an EU constitution, such as an EU arms procurement and design agency.

But the reactions to the more controversial ideas, such as the military headquarters, left little room for optimism that the EU can resurrect its common defence policy, which is gasping for life after the bitter rows over Iraq.

The British press said the summit was a calculated rebuff to Prime Minister Tony Blair as he seeks to mend transatlantic fences.

The Times said the summit "must count as either one of the most intellectually confused or instead politically dishonest meetings conducted by EU nations", calling the quartet's plans "a divisive and unnecessary strategy".

But Daniel Keohane, a defence analyst at the Centre for European Reform in London, noted that the summit countries had repeatedly stressed their desire to strengthen the European arm of NATO.

"So while there is still some controversy, I think the French and the Germans have reined the Belgians in a bit," he said, after Belgium had called for a permanent military headquarters for the EU seen as rivalling NATO.

"One gets the sense that the French and the Germans went along because the Belgians had stuck with them over Iraq," Keohane added, calling the timing of the summit "appalling".

"Frankly if you don't have the British on board, as well as the Italians and the Spanish and the rest, you're not going to get very far."

SPACE.WIRE