Brussels, 30/03/2009 (Agence Europe) - A debate, chaired by Giles Merritt, Director of the Security and Defence Agenda (SDA), jointly organised with the Hague Centre for Strategic Studies (HCSS) on Thursday 26 March 2009 in Brussels, sought to answer the question raised by the New Horizons' study on whether NATO's solidarity crisis can be patched up. Speakers included Rob de Wijk, HCSS Director; Sven Biscop, Director of the global governance and security programme at the Egmont Royal Institute for International Relations; Cristina Gallach, spokesperson for the EU high representative for common foreign and security policy (CFSP); Zoltan Martinusz, Hungarian Ambassador with NATO; and Jamie Shea, Policy and Planning Director within the NATO secretary general's cabinet.
To the question “What is the purpose of NATO?”, Giles Merrit answered that, in the past, it was to offer protection from Russia, to keep Germany under control and to keep the United States on board. Today, things have changed and there are several currents of opinion which raise the questions of NATO's size and purpose as well as how Europeans and Americans see its future.
The results of the New Horizons study published this month demonstrate that it is “absolutely necessary” to have a new strategic consensus for NATO, Rob de Wijk said. The HCSS study took the form of “active online consultation”. According to the results of the study, “over two thirds of NATO participants, 70% of think tank specialists, and three out of four national planners take the view that the Alliance needs to reassess its objectives and its strategic base”, Mr de Wijk states. However, he goes on to say “the debate is of a politically sensitive kind and will present a major challenge”. The HCSS director concludes from this that it is necessary to strengthen the Alliance core with partnerships in order to be able to face up to the various current and future challenges throughout the world. “NATO's raison d'être is clear, but there are problems”, which are of a political rather than military kind, Mr de Wijk said, concluding that “it is necessary to strike a balance between these two dimensions”.
Rem Korteweg (HCSS) set out the eight challenges contained in the 1,800 comments received on the internet: (1) the financial crisis and the displacement of power at the global level; (2) the shortage of energy resources; (3) key security trends; (4) proliferation, especially nuclear; (5) the mission in Afghanistan; (6) unstable regions; (7) enlargement, which is “inevitable but undesirable”, according to Mr Korteweg; and (8) Russia.
Jamie Shea took the view that it is necessary to support “solidarity because of the larger number of challenges that have to be faced at the present time. The sense of urgency is not the same for all Allies, with varying degrees of political determination and unequal capabilities”. At present, consensus is easier to obtain when launching military campaigns but such campaigns are becoming longer and longer and increasingly difficult. “The Alliance has left the 20th century but has not yet managed to connect with the 21st century”, Shea said, adding that NATO must “single out military policy by developing a transatlantic awareness, reassuring Allies that are afraid for their own security as, being afraid, they would not wish to undertake new challenges, and undertake a more persistent policy towards Russia, in addition to being more active in the transformation of its members' defence”. NATO is no longer an institution but a network. It is therefore necessary to strengthen the links between the institutions rather than enhance the value of each institution individually.
Zoltan Martinusz does not share the view that NATO is going through a solidarity crisis. He stresses it is being forgotten that “NATO's political agenda has extended. Twenty years ago, defence was defined by European security whereas, today, it is defined by security outside the Alliance states”. The political centre of gravity is changing as “it is at European Union level that the member states are developing their capabilities”, Biscop said. The European Union does not use the same tools as NATO, said Cristina Gallach, stressing that military instruments are only used in very specific cases, “as a last resort”. She considers, also, that Europe's relations with Russia are a fundamental problem for security. These relations must be maintained through a “partnership between NATO, the United States and the European Union and cannot be simply settled at Alliance level”, she said.
Consensus is needed between the 27 before discussion with NATO. A strengthened partnership between the United States and the European Union is necessary. Review of NATO's strategic concept, which dates back to 1999, must be launched on the basis of the Alliance security declaration that is to be adopted by the Allies during the Strasbourg-Kehl summit at the end of the week. (E.M.)