1 / 16

PfP PLANNING AND REVIEW PROCESS

PfP PLANNING AND REVIEW PROCESS. PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE. PARP. Gordon Monaghan Force Planning Directorate Defence Policy and Planning Division NATO International Staff. CURRENT PARTICIPATION. PARTICIPATING. NOT PARTICIPATING. AUS. AZE. ALB. ARM. KYR. RUS. BLR. CRO. FIN.

tamal
Download Presentation

PfP PLANNING AND REVIEW PROCESS

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. PfPPLANNING AND REVIEW PROCESS PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE PARP Gordon Monaghan Force Planning Directorate Defence Policy and Planning Division NATO International Staff

  2. CURRENT PARTICIPATION PARTICIPATING NOT PARTICIPATING AUS AZE ALB ARM KYR RUS BLR CRO FIN the fomer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia1 TAJ TUM IRL KAZ MOL GEO SWE UZB SWI UKR 1 Turkey recognises the Republic of Macedonia with its constitutional name.

  3. GENERAL OBJECTIVE ESTABLISH /ASSESS INTEROPERABILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR PARTNER FORCES DEVELOP FORCES AND CAPABILITIES FOR PEACE SUPPORT OPERATIONS, SEARCH AND RESCUE AND HUMANITARIAN AID

  4. PARPCYCLE Guidance Implementation Target Setting PARP MINISTERIAL GUIDANCE PARTNERSHIP GOALS COUNTRY ASSESSMENT Summary Report Consolidated Report 2-year cycle

  5. MINISTERIAL GUIDANCE • Prepared every two years and approved by Defence Ministers in June of odd-numbered years • Establishes general planning assumptions, e.g. • Types of operations • Duration • Combat effectiveness • Guidance for the development of Partnership Goals, e.g. • Enhancement of preparedness • Capabilities to counter terrorism • Resource Guidance • Support for development of EU military capabilities (four)

  6. PARTNERSHIP GOALS INTEROPERABILITY OBJECTIVES in first two cycles (1995 AND 1997) • PARTNERSHIP GOALS • introduced in 1999/2000 • reviewed for 2002

  7. PARTNERSHIP GOAL (EXAMPLE) • PG G 0355: LANGUAGE REQUIREMENTS 1. Improve English language skills of all personnel (military and civilian) who are to cooperate with NATO forces in NATO-led PfP operations, exercises and training, or with NATO staffs. These individuals must be able to communicate effectively in English, with added emphasis on operational terminology and procedures. • Continue to ensure that all personnel planned for participation in NATO staffs or other multinational headquarters, and MOD, Joint Forces Staff and other staff personnel who are routinely involved with NATO issues, have English language skills at the minimum as follows (listening, speaking, reading, writing): a. Officers: SLP 3-3-3-3 b. NCOs: SLP 3-2-3-2 • By the end of 200X, ensure that the following personnel subject to deployment on NATO-led PfP operations and exercises or training have the minimum English language skills as follows: a. Officers: SLP 3-3-3-3 b. Appropriate NCOs, OR-5 and above likely to have frequent contacts with personnel of other nations: SLP 3-2-3-2. c. Enlisted personnel of all services planned to operate tactical communications or operate on NATO communications networks: SLP 2-2-2-1

  8. OBJECTIVES REVIEW • To understand each nation’s overall defence organisation, force structure and plans • To assess actual Partnership Goal implementation • To assess overall forces • Levels, structure, readiness, modernisation, capabilities for peace support operations • To highlight results • one of the foundations for the next Partnership Goal cycle

  9. NATO/IS ASSESSMENT • Analysis of country’s defence structure • Nation’s force plans and levels by service • Declarations for NATO-led operations • Overall response to Partnership Goals • Personnel, logistics and readiness • PfP activities • Financial and economic considerations €

  10. CONSOLIDATED REPORT CONSOLIDATED REPORT SUMMARY OF EACH ASSESSMENT NATO PFP POLICY, COMMITMENTS AND CAPABILITIES APPROVED BY PERMREPS AND THEN BRIEFED TO DEFENCE/FOREIGN MINISTERS

  11. MEMBERSHIP ACTION PLAN (MAP) • Launched at 1999 Washington Summit • Seven partners joint NATO in 2004. Three current aspirants. • Defence/military aspects of preparation largely taken forward through PARP • Aim is to prepare aspirants as fully as possible for future membership before any invitations to join NATO • BUT, always emphasised that NATO membership would be a political decision

  12. MAP-RELATED PARTNERSHIP GOALS FOR ASPIRANT NATIONS ONLY • FORCE STRUCTURE REVIEW • LEGAL/CONSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS • REINFORCEMENT / HNS • NATINADS • FREQUENCY MANAGEMENT • SECURITY COOPERATION WITH NATO

  13. PARTNERSHIP ACTION PLANS • VOLUNTARY AND SELF-DIFFERENTIATED • PAP-T - on terrorism • PAP-DIB - on defence institution building

  14. THE FUTURE • Caucasus & Central Asia • Serbia and Montenegro & Bosnia and Hercegovina • NATO Response Force • Mediterranean Dialogue & Istanbul Cooperation Initiative

  15. OPEN QUESTIONS ON LANGUAGE TRAINING • Changes in exam standards? • Are standards set out in Partnership Goals too high? • Relevance of current tuition material? • Separate requirements for military and civilian staffs?

  16. Questions?

More Related