Hampton Roads International Security Quarterly |
||||||||
|
||||||||
To subscribe to the electronic or print edition of Hampton Roads International Security Quarterly, please use the link at the top of this page. To purchase a print copy of a single issue of HRISQ through Amazon.com, please click here. To view back issues online (subscribers only), please use the Archive link at the top of this page.Volume X, Nr. 3
|
||||||||
NATO at the Crossroads - Once AgainSidney E. DeanOnce again, it seems that the future of NATO is at stake. Or so many analysts say. After the Cold War ended, the North Atlantic alliance searched for a new raison-d’etre. It found its first new mission – ironically – in supporting the nations of the former Warsaw Pact. Welcoming the eastern European states into the greater European political family, supporting the democracy process and stability there as well as in the former member states of the Soviet Union. Along the way the Alliance was drawn into armed action to end the civil war and genocide on the Balkans, an operation which was largely labeled a stability operation. Then came 9/11. The Alliance was brutally reminded that it still is, first and foremost, a defensive military pact. The terrorist outrage perpetrated in the US led to NATO’s first and only invocation of the Article 5 Clause which says – in effect – that an attack against one member is an attack against all. Nearly ten years later, the Alliance is still deeply engaged in Afghanistan. Elsewhere, NATO anti-terrorism and anti-piracy operations are becoming routine. But everyone agrees that – with or without exit timetables – NATO’s engagement in Afghanistan cannot be open-ended. Already alliance members are forced to reduce commitments elsewhere or postpone vital modernization and procurement in order to pay for current operations in Central Asia. Which leads to the obvious question: what will the post-Afghanistan alliance look like? What will its roles and missions be? Some advocate a return to the traditional North Atlantic focus, while others call for an even more globally active – and proactive – alliance policy. Obviously a defense body composed of 28 disparate members cannot and should not make major policy decisions on an ad hoc basis – or at least keep such decision-making to a minimum. Therefore NATO routinely formulates Strategic Concepts to guide the organization. These documents are replaced whenever the security environment undergoes major changes. New Strategic Concepts were promulgated in 1991 and 1999, respectively shaped by the collapse of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact and by events on the Balkans. But the world has changed again over the last decade. Illusions of a safer, gentler world order have been torn to shreds, not only by the dramatic events of a single day in 2001, but by years of low- to medium-intensity terrorism in Europe and around the world. London and Madrid, Bali and Mumbai are only the better known of countless incidents. At the other end of the threat spectrum loom nuclear ambitions by nations such as Iran and North Korea, as well as the – to phrase it diplomatically – growing assertiveness of Russia and the People’s Republic of China. The North Atlantic alliance must once again re-calibrate itself. The upcoming NATO summit in Lisbon, planned for 18-19 November 2010, will focus on the Alliance’s next major Strategic Concept. As does this issue of Hampton Roads International Security Quarterly. German Chancellor Angela Merkel opens this issue with a comprehensive vision of global cooperation. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton presents the United States views regarding the future NATO Strategic Concept. NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen provides insight from two distinct angles; first, he discusses the lasting validity of NATO’s core missions – defense of alliance territory and deterrence of aggression – as well as the realities of reform and modernization in an era of tight budgets. Two senior military officers weigh in next: NATO SACEUR US Navy Admiral James Stavridis presents a blow-by-blow discussion of NATO priorities, while the allied commander for transformation, French Air Force General Stephane Abrial, discusses his command’s contribution to keeping the Alliance viable. Finally former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright summarizes the NATO Experts Group’s recommendations for the new Strategic Concept. We wrap up with three documents, including an in-depth overview of the past and current Strategic Concepts and the environments which influenced them. As always, we wish you interesting reading. |
||||||||