1 / 72

How to protect against new threats: NATO and the European Security and Defence Policy.

How to protect against new threats: NATO and the European Security and Defence Policy. Madeleine Hubin (mmhubin@ulg.ac.be). 1. Origin 2. NATO after the collapse of communism 2.1. Evolution of NATO 2.2. Enlargement 2.3. War in Kosovo 2.4. NATO after 9/11: Afghanistan

romney
Download Presentation

How to protect against new threats: NATO and the European Security and Defence Policy.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. How to protect against new threats: NATO and the European Security and Defence Policy. Madeleine Hubin (mmhubin@ulg.ac.be)

  2. 1. Origin 2. NATO after the collapse of communism 2.1. Evolution of NATO 2.2. Enlargement 2.3. War in Kosovo 2.4. NATO after 9/11: Afghanistan 2.5. NATO and the war in Iraq 2.6. Over the past years 3. NATO today: a new strategic concept A. NATO

  3. Beginning of the Cold War : « We are scared » Signature of the Treaty 4 April 1949 : Basis : article 5 Importance of article 4: The Parties will consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened. Warsaw Pact: 1955. 1. Origin of NATO

  4. Menace Rouge

  5. The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually, and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. Art 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty

  6. Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security. Art. 5 (cont.)

  7. A Divided Europe

  8. 2. NATO after the collapse of Communism

  9. Basic mission of NATO still true : « Keep the Americans in, the Germans down and the Russians out ». Willingness to keep an institutional framework for transatlantic relations. Habit of cooperating within NATO and difficulty in creating new institutions. NATO’s appeal to new democracies. Unexpected adaptability of the organisation. Regional tensions in Europe. 2.1. Evolution of NATOReasons for the persistence of NATO

  10. Budgetary cuts. Professionalisation of the army in some States. Downsizing of armies. Deeper technological gap with the USA. The armies of NATO in the 90s.

  11. Peacemaking and peacekeeping operations: Deliberate Force Non-article 5 missions Out-of-zone missions Peace-keeping/ making missions I(mplementation)FOR then S(tabilization)FOR New threats: Weapons of mass destruction International terrorism Missions of NATO in the 90s.

  12. Definition : « All the common means thanks to which potential enemies prevent, settle, reduce, contain or face threats which could lead to a war among themselves »   Extension : Principle of co-operation between the member States and international organisations to promote peacekeeping or peacemaking. Example: Bosnia : Dialogue between the parties in conflict and NATO : Peacekeeping OSCE : Organisation of elections Council of Europe : State European Union : Economic development A new strategy: Co-operative security

  13. North Atlantic Co-operation Council (1991): Forum for consultation and cooperation between NATO and non-member-countries in the Euro-Atlantic area. Partnership for Peace (1994): assists participating countries in restructuring their armed forces to enable them to play their role at home and in NATO-led peace-keeping operations. Mediterranean Dialogue (1995) Euro- Atlantic Partnership Council (1997) Framework for co-operation with the European States

  14. At first, wait and see (1991 – 1997) Then, limited enlargement (July1997 – March 1999) with the admission of Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic on 16 March 1999 23 March: start of « Allied force » operation in Kosovo. (air campaign: 78 days) Afterwards, greater enlargement (negotiations Dec. 2002 until April 2004…): Slovenia, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. April 2009: Croatia and Albania. 2.2. Enlargement

  15. Why enlarge ? What added value do the new member states bring NATO ? What new problems or dangers do new member States bring NATO? What are the terms for new admissions ? What will be the reaction of third parties (mainly Russia) ? At what cost for NATO ? Questions raised by the enlargement

  16. At what cost for new member States ? How to make the present Alliance members agree with enlargement? How to enlarge ? Who ? When ? Consequences on the military plans ? Questions (cont.)

  17. The new members are willing and able to assume the responsibilities and obligations of membership and accept the policies and processes implemented at the time of admission. No State will be admitted if it aims to close the door behind itself, by using its vote to veto other admissions. The states must settle their ethnic problems as well as their border disputes before joining NATO. Enlargement principles

  18. The candidates must be able to contribute to the missions of the Alliance (No « profiteers »). No third party is entitled to interfere in the enlargement process. (Russia) Principles (cont.)

  19. Intervention out of the UN framework (new). Obvious technological gap between the European and American armies. Objective of the operation: « zero casualty ». New member States take part just after joining NATO. Differences among the allies on the way to operate :  The Americans do not want to go to war collectively.  The Europeans want to develop their own capabilities. At first, 43,000 troops were sent. In October 2004, there were 18,000 soldiers from most NATO members, 9 partner countries and 2 non-NATO countries (Argentina and Morocco). Russia took part in SFOR and KFOR until summer 2003. 2.3. War in Kosovo : consequences

  20. Celebration of the Alliance’s 50th anniversary in the middle of the war in Kosovo. Adoption of a new strategic concept which emphasises the new missions of NATO against new threats (multidirectional and often hard to predict): Balkans Focus on weapons of mass destruction Terrorism, organized crime, sabotage, threat to flow of vital resources. Launch of the Membership Action Plan (advice, aid, support in political, economic and legal fields + security) Establishment of a WMD Center Washington Summit (1999)

  21. Enhanced mobility and deployability beyond NATO territory. Sustainability: the forces must be able to carry out long operations. Survivability: ability to protect forces and infrastructure against present and future threats. DCI Domains: Command – Control – Communications – Intelligence – Surveillance- Target Acquisition – Reconnaissance - Strategic transport - Suppression of enemy air defence Adoption of the Defence Capabilities Initiatives (DCI)

  22. Priorities have evolved : Staff cuts. Resources are transferred to the modernization of the equipment. Co-operation on a multinational basis whenever possible. Resources are put in common. Specialization. Cuts in defence budgets

  23. Article 5 enforced: Europe assists the US.  Luxembourg radar aircraft sent. Refusal to use NATO structures for the operations in Afghanistan  US preference for an ad hoc coalition. Use of NATO in the war against terrorism ? National reaction first. NATO leads the operations of ISAF (international security assistance force) in Kabul in 2003.  NATO can operate outside Europe. ISAF today = coalition of 48 countries deployed under UN authority(see ISAF doc.) 2.4. NATO after 9/11: Afghanistan

  24. « Prague Capabilities Commitment » - PCC Streamlined command structure. Stronger commitment to combating terrorism. Set-up of a Response Force of up to 21,000 soldiers for crisis-management operations until 2006. Technologically advanced, flexible, deployable, interoperable and sustainable force (land, sea, air elements). Prague Summit (2002)

  25. Defending against chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear attacks. Ensuring secure command, communications and information superiority. Improving interoperability of deployed forces and key aspects of combat effectiveness. Need for global partners. Providing comprehensive political, economic and military solutions with NGOs, the UN and the EU, the OSCE etc. Objectives of PCC

  26. Divisions among Alliance members. Decision-making process stopped, no consensus. NATO supports the multinational division under Polish command. No NATO-banner troops occupying Iraq NATO training mission since 2004: training security forces, developing security institutions, reform of defence in Iraq. 2.5. NATO and the war in Iraq

  27. NATO will widen its mission of International Security and Assistance Force (ISAF) with the establishment of several additional Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRT). It will also strengthen its support for elections. NATO will end its mission in Bosnia-Herzegovina where it will be replaced by an EU force. However, the latter will be supported by NATO. Istanbul Summit (28-29 June 2004)

  28. Enhancing measures against terrorism: Improving intelligence sharing Quicker response to CBRN attacks Providing assistance to protect major events (Euro 2004, Olympic games) Enhancing co-operation among partners Enhancing the Mediterranean Partnership. Istanbul Co-operation Initiative with the Middle Eastdesigned to promote bilateral co-operation between NATO and interested parties in the region, the Gulf countries, for instance. Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, UAE: crisis management, civil emergency planning and border control. (cont.)

  29. Differing strategic interests between US and Europe. (315,000 > 40,000 US soldiers in Poland, Bulgaria and Romania) 2005 – 2006: 8 simultaneous military out-of-zone operations (EUCOM covers 91 States). Modernisation of the Alliance’s forces. Afghanistan: no increase in troops. Enhanced cooperation with non-member states. Adoption of the Global Policy Directive (recognition of the role of the EU in terms of international security). 2.6. Over the past years Riga Summit 2006

  30. NATO remains an essential place for political consultation as well as a forum to help standardize the tools and processes of joint military action. Consensusin question. Main threats: terrorism and WMD proliferation. Main risks and challenges: instability of failed states, regional crises and conflicts, increased availability of conventional weapons, diversion of emerging technologies, distortion in supplies of vital resources. Riga Summit (2)

  31. To combat those threats, NATO must be able to deploy troops everywhere in the world for long periods of time and lead several operations simultaneously, by using a combination of conventional and nuclear forces. Differing views: US (NATO = world security organisation) >< most European countries (NATO = strictly military organisation, want to rely on the UN and the EU to face crises in the world) Riga Summit (3)

  32. Croatia and Albaniaallowed to join the alliance in 2009. Former YugoslavRepublic of Macedonia: accession vetoed by Greece (name dispute). Ukraine and Georgia: accession postponedindefinitely (by France and Germany, against the will of the USA). NATO will back the construction of the US missile defence system in Poland and the CzechRepublic. Gapbetween western and eastern Europe: distance vs guarantee. France: returning to Integrated Command in 2009. Afghanistan: need for more troops, debate about more involvement. Bucharest Summit 2008

  33. 60th anniversary of NATO Two new member States: Albania and Croatia. New Secretary General as of 1st Aug. (A.F. Rasmussen replaces J. de Hoop Scheffer). France is back in Allied Command (which de Gaulle had left in 1966 to protest against US domination). France wants European headquarters in Brussels. Afghanistan: strategic support of the US, 5,000 additional troops (compared with 17,000 extra troops, and 4,000 instructors for the US alone). Strasbourg Summit (April 2009)

  34. Russia: the NATO-Russia Council is back at work (suspended in August 2008 bec. of crisis in Georgia). Common issues: security, stabilisation in Afghanistan, fight against terrorism, drugs and piracy, non-proliferation and disarmament. Russia: love-hate relationship … Two Russians spies expelled from NATO, two Canadian diplomats expelled from Russia … Need for reinforcing cooperation and relations, for new trust. Russia wants to contribute to the US anti-missile defence system.

  35. Contribution < national sovereignty. Burden-sharing mechanism: 2% of GDP to pay for the NATO operations. ( would represent $ 67 bn). Not met (5/28). Fragmentation of the defence sector in Europe > unnecessary duplication, unhelpful competition, gaps or incompatibilities. In Afghanistan: other actors should share the burden: G8 States, UN, Afghan government. Capabilities, money and political will. Burden sharing in NATO

  36. Active engagement, modern defence 3 essential core tasks: A. Collective defence - Deterrence: appropriate mix of nuclear and conventional capabilities. - Threats: proliferation of ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons, terrorism, cyber attacks, fundamental environmental problems, resource constraints B. Crisis management Political and military tools: prevent, manage, stabilise and support. 3. NATO today : a new strategic concept

  37. C. Cooperative security Partnerships with other States or international organisations. Reinforcement of arms control, disarmament, non-proliferation efforts. • Emphasis on Alliance solidarity, importance of transatlantic consultation and need to engage in a continuous process of reform. • Open-door policy. • Maximising efficiency, improving working methods and spending its resources more wisely.

  38. B. The European Security and Defence Policy

  39. 1. Historical background up to 1998. 2. The golden age of the ESDP: principles, actors, a few missions, European difficulties. 3. Civilian crisis management. 4. The Solidarity clause. 5. New challenges: - lessons learnt from the Iraq crisis - evolution of the approaches - technology and finance - the European Security Strategy : a failure? Plan

  40. The Western European Union Specific European initiative on defence: Brussels Pact 1948 (Benelux, France and the UK). Forerunner of NATO. Objective: to deter German revanchism. Article 5: if one of the members is attacked in Europe, the other members will bring aid and assistance with all possible means, military and others (// art 51 of the UN Charter). 1949: the WEU’s defence functions subsumed into NATO. Considered as the European pillar of NATO then as the security wing of the EU. 1. Historical background up to 1998

  41. European Defence Community (1952-1954): Pleven Plan. Benelux, France, Italy, Germany. The French failed to ratify. Fouchet plan in the 1961: draft treaty for a political community. Failed in 1962, lack of supra-nationalism. 1970: Davignon Plan on European Political Co-operation. External policy Co-operation meetings of foreign ministers. Other defence initiatives

  42. Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe: (1994) active in the early warning conflict prevention, in crisis management and post-conflict rehabilitation. - 56 Member States from 3 continents. - Created in the early 1970s as a multilateral forum for dialogue and negotiation between the two blocks. - Three-fold dimension to security: political and military; economic and environmental; human. - Areas of activity: preventive diplomacy, conflict prevention, democratization, human rights, arms control, economic and environmental security …

  43. Treaty of Maastricht (1992) Creation of a Common Foreign and Security Policy. No proper military capacities > Western European Union. CFSP decisions are still subject to unanimous votes.

  44. Humanitarian and rescue tasks (of nationals). Peacekeeping tasks. Tasks of combat forces in crisis management, including peacemaking or peace-enforcement. Military and civilian crisis management. Collaboration with NATO: avoid duplication and target specific gaps. June 1992: Petersberg Declaration:Missions

  45. Incorporated the Petersberg missions. High Representative + Policy Planning and Early Warning Unit. Development of the European Security and Defence Policy. No European army. National armies remain under the command of national authorities except for the duration of the mission. Treaty of Amsterdam (1997)

  46. Evolution of the attitude of the so-called "neutral" States (Austria, Finland, Ireland, Sweden), which now accept to engage militarily in crisis management. Evolution of Germany which starts using an army again in its foreign policy. Evolution of France which at the time focuses less on building a powerful EU independent from the US. General awareness in Europe, following the crises in Bosnia and Kosovo, of the collective inability to act without the USA, which led either to the absence of any action, or to the US command of operations. Evolution

  47. Saint Malo (1998): Blair (UK) and Chirac (F) emphasis on an autonomous action capability supported by credible armed forces (Bosnia, Kosovo). Cologne Summit (1999): Definition of a Common Defence Strategy. Official launching of ESDP. 2. The golden age of the ESDP

More Related