DOCSLIB.ORG

NATO's Northeastern Flank

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NATO's Northeastern Flank NATO’s Northeastern Flank Emerging Opportunities for Engagement Christopher S. Chivvis, Raphael S. Cohen, Bryan Frederick, Daniel S. Hamilton, F. Stephen Larrabee, Bonny Lin C O R P O R A T I O N For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR1467 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-0-8330-9464-3 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2017 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Cover: AP Photo/Mindaugas Kulbis. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface In 2014, RAND was asked whether new opportunities for U.S. Air Force engagement were emerging in Central Europe as a result of increased Russian activity in the region. This report thus examines the impact of renewed tension between NATO and Russia on a group of key allies and partners in central and northeastern Europe. It provides overviews of how the climate for defense engagement, especially as it relates to the Air Force, is changing in each country. There are in-depth assessments for nine key countries on NATO’s northeastern flank—the Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, and Sweden—that focus on issues relevant to developing robust engagement strategies for these countries. In addition, based on an assessment of how these countries are reacting to the changing regional defense environment and an assessment of emerging U.S. regional defense strategy requirements, the report lays out a strategically grounded list of engagement priorities for the Air Force. While both politics and resources will constrain partnership opportunities and the ability of these countries to contribute to U.S. regional defense objectives, opportunities for strengthening partnerships do exist in multiple areas. The research reported here was commissioned by the Deputy Under Secretary of the Air Force for International Affairs and conducted within the Strategy and Doctrine Program of RAND Project AIR FORCE as part of a fiscal year 2015 project, “New Partnering Opportunities in Central and Eastern Europe.” Human Subject Protections (HSP) protocols have been used in this report in accordance with the appropriate statutes and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) regulations governing HSP. The views of sources rendered anonymous by HSP are solely their own and do not represent the official policy or position of DoD, the Air Force, or the U.S. government. RAND Project AIR FORCE RAND Project AIR FORCE (PAF), a division of the RAND Corporation, is the U.S. Air Force’s federally funded research and development center for studies and analyses. PAF provides the Air Force with independent analyses of policy alternatives affecting the development, employment, combat readiness, and support of current and future air, space, and cyber forces. Research is conducted in four programs: Force Modernization and Employment; Manpower, Personnel, and Training; Resource Management; and Strategy and Doctrine. The research reported here was prepared under contract FA7014-06-C-0001. Additional information about PAF is available on our website: http://www.rand.org/paf/ iii This report documents work originally shared with the U.S. Air Force on October 22, 2015. The draft report, issued in January 2016, was reviewed by formal peer reviewers and U.S. Air Force subject-matter experts. iv Contents Preface ............................................................................................................................................ iii Figures.......................................................................................................................................... viii Tables ............................................................................................................................................. xi Summary ....................................................................................................................................... xii Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................ xxi Abbreviations .............................................................................................................................. xxii Chapter One. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1 European Partnerships in the New European Security Environment ................................................. 2 NATO’s Northeastern Flank .............................................................................................................. 5 Comparative Perspective .................................................................................................................... 7 Subregional Defense Strategy .......................................................................................................... 14 Method ............................................................................................................................................. 15 Part I. The Visegrad Four .............................................................................................................. 17 Chapter Two. Czech Republic: In Havel’s Shadow ..................................................................... 18 Key Background ............................................................................................................................... 19 Relations with the United States and Europe ................................................................................... 23 Relations with Russia ....................................................................................................................... 28 Defense Capabilities ......................................................................................................................... 31 Response to Crimea and the Ukraine Crisis ..................................................................................... 39 Outlook ............................................................................................................................................. 41 Chapter Three. Hungary: Balancing East and West ..................................................................... 44 Key Background ............................................................................................................................... 44 Relations with the United States and Europe ................................................................................... 50 Relations with Russia ....................................................................................................................... 52 Defense Capabilities ......................................................................................................................... 56 Response to Crimea and the Ukraine Crisis ..................................................................................... 63 Outlook ............................................................................................................................................. 64 Chapter Four. Poland: A Growing Regional Role ........................................................................ 67 Key Background ............................................................................................................................... 68 Relations with the United States and Europe ................................................................................... 69 Relations with Russia ....................................................................................................................... 74 Defense Capabilities ......................................................................................................................... 76 Response to Crimea and the Ukraine Crisis ..................................................................................... 89 Outlook ............................................................................................................................................. 91 v Chapter Five. Slovakia: Moving West While Hedging East ........................................................ 94 Key Background ............................................................................................................................... 94 Relations with the United States and Europe ..................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Winners of the Baltic Assembly Prizes 1994 – 2019 1994 1996 1998
    Baltic Assembly Prizes for Literature, the Arts and Science Baltic Innovation Prize Baltic Assembly Medals 6 November 2020 Address by the President of the Baltic Assembly Aadu Must This year the Baltic Assembly, as any contribute to the targeted cooperation of other organisation, has been significantly our states and prosperity of our Baltic affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. region that will be extremely important Despite the difficulties and restrictions to in the years to come. These people meet in person, the traditions of our promote the unity and cooperation of organisation continue but in slightly the Baltic states - we greatly appreciate different format this year. their work. We award the Baltic Assembly Prizes to Unity and cooperation of the Baltic states outstanding people, who have are extremely important for us. We are demonstrated excellence in literature, thankful to all people who feel the same the arts, science and innovation. This way and act in order to bring the countries year’s winners of the Baltic Assembly closer together. The awarding of the Baltic Prizes have used their talent and Assembly Prizes and Medals in Estonia, knowledge to encourage thinking, remind Lithuania and Latvia is our way of saying about the historical milestones of that even though times are tough people are those who hold our nations together Photo by Ieva Ābele (Administration of Parliament of the Republic of Latvia) the Baltic states and make our countries visible in the international arena. Awards and we are grateful for that. We are also have been won in strong competition, as very proud about their achievements.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Introduction: the Enigmatic Zukertort
    Chapter 2 Introduction: The Enigmatic Zukertort The Zukertort is a symphony of irony. Why do you say that? Well, to begin at the beginning, in his annotations to the oft-quoted seminal game on his opening, Zukertort v. Black- burne 1883, Zukertort wrote that he planned to play the whole game on the Q-side. Now players typically think of the system as one long, prepared attack on the enemy’s King. Secondly, the opening is called the “Colle-Zukertort,” even though Colle practically never played it. In fact, in my own personal data- base I have many hundreds of games where Colle played what is now known as the “Colle-Koltanowski,” but not a single game where he played the Zukertort except when his opponent used the Queen’s Indian Defense. Thirdly, it is unclear why the Colle-Koltanowski and the Colle-Zukertort are so often put in the same book. We do not see books for Black containing in-depth coverage of both the Dragon and Najdorf variations of the Sicilian. We do not see repertoire books for White going deeply into both the Botvin- nik and Meran variations of the Semi-slav. Why package these two very different systems in the same text? The Enigmatic Zukertort Fourthly, a thorough inves- very much different than he tigation of the Zukertort will can if he castles early (as we show that it appears to have shall see). no real mainline! Or, rather, I would suggest the stu- its “mainline” is so tactically dent understand the Zuker- different than most of its tort as an opening in which other lines that it is hard to White presents Black the same say whether it is the mainline choice given to the protago- of the system or a popular nists at the end of the movie deviation! Ghostbusters.
    [Show full text]
  • Taming Wild Chess Openings
    Taming Wild Chess Openings How to deal with the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly over the chess board By International Master John Watson & FIDE Master Eric Schiller New In Chess 2015 1 Contents Explanation of Symbols ���������������������������������������������������������������� 8 Icons ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 9 Introduction �������������������������������������������������������������������������� 10 BAD WHITE OPENINGS ��������������������������������������������������������������� 18 Halloween Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.♘f3 ♘c6 3.♘c3 ♘f6 4.♘xe5 ♘xe5 5.d4 . 18 Grünfeld Defense: The Gibbon: 1.d4 ♘f6 2.c4 g6 3.♘c3 d5 4.g4 . 20 Grob Attack: 1.g4 . 21 English Wing Gambit: 1.c4 c5 2.b4 . 25 French Defense: Orthoschnapp Gambit: 1.e4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.cxd5 exd5 4.♕b3 . 27 Benko Gambit: The Mutkin: 1.d4 ♘f6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.g4 . 28 Zilbermints - Benoni Gambit: 1.d4 c5 2.b4 . 29 Boden-Kieseritzky Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.♘f3 ♘c6 3.♗c4 ♘f6 4.♘c3 ♘xe4 5.0-0 . 31 Drunken Hippo Formation: 1.a3 e5 2.b3 d5 3.c3 c5 4.d3 ♘c6 5.e3 ♘e7 6.f3 g6 7.g3 . 33 Kadas Opening: 1.h4 . 35 Cochrane Gambit 1: 5.♗c4 and 5.♘c3 . 37 Cochrane Gambit 2: 5.d4 Main Line: 1.e4 e5 2.♘f3 ♘f6 3.♘xe5 d6 4.♘xf7 ♔xf7 5.d4 . 40 Nimzowitsch Defense: Wheeler Gambit: 1.e4 ♘c6 2.b4 . 43 BAD BLACK OPENINGS ��������������������������������������������������������������� 44 Khan Gambit: 1.e4 e5 2.♗c4 d5 . 44 King’s Gambit: Nordwalde Variation: 1.e4 e5 2.f4 ♕f6 . 45 King’s Gambit: Sénéchaud Countergambit: 1.e4 e5 2.f4 ♗c5 3.♘f3 g5 .
    [Show full text]
  • UNU CRIS Working Papers
    1 | P a g e The author Andrea Cofelice served as Ph.D. Intern at UNU-CRIS in 2011. He is currently a Ph.D. candidate in Political Science – Comparative and European Politics at the University of Siena. He is also a junior researcher at the Interdepartmental Centre on Human Rights and the Rights of Peoples of the University of Padua. United Nations University Institute on Comparative Regional Integration Studies Potterierei 72, 8000 Brugge, BE-Belgium Tel.: +32 50 47 11 00 / Fax.: +32 50 47 13 09 www.cris.unu.edu 2 | P a g e Abstract This paper aims at exploring which factors may promote or inhibit the empowerment of international parliamentary institutions (IPIs). According to the literature (Cutler 2006), an IPI may be defined as an international institution that is a regular forum for multilateral deliberations on an established basis of an either legislative or consultative nature, either attached to an international organization or itself constituting one, in which at least three states or trans-governmental units are represented by parliamentarians, who are either selected by national legislatures in a self-determined manner or popularly elected by electorates of the member states. Their origin dates back to the creation of the Inter- Parliamentary Union (IPU) in 1889, but they mushroomed after the Second World War, especially after 1989-1991 (new regionalism, also known as open regionalism especially in literature on Latin America), and today their presence is established almost everywhere in the world. However, they display sensibly different features in terms of institutional and organizational patterns, rules and procedures, legal status, membership, resources, functions and powers.
    [Show full text]
  • HSA January 2010 Newsletter
    HSA Hungarian Studies Association www.hungarianstudies.info January 2010 NEWSLETTER Election Results: Emese Ivan was elected as vice president, Steve Jobbitt and Catherine Portuges were elected to serve on the executive board, and I was reelected as secretary/treasurer for the next two years. Thank you and congratulations to the others elected. Thus, the current leadership is: President: Paul Hanebrink, Rutgers U., Term: 2010-2011. Email: [email protected] Vice-President*: Emese Ivan, St. John’s U., Term: 2010-2011. Email: [email protected] Secretary-Treasurer: Susan Glanz, St. John’s U., Term: 2010-2011. Email: [email protected] Executive Committee: Steve Jobbitt, California State U.-Fullerton., Term: 2010-2011. Email: [email protected] Catherine Portuges, U of Mass. -Amherst, Term: 2010-2011. Email: [email protected] Julia Bock, Long Island U., Term: 2009-2010. Email: [email protected] Béla Bodó, Missouri State U., Term: 2009–2010. Email: belabodo@ missouristate.edu *According to our by-laws on January 1, 2012, Emese Ivan, our current VP, will automatically assume the position of the president. Report from the Treasurer: Opening balance 12/1/2008 $2,978.59 Income: $1024.91 Subtotal $4003.50 Expenditures*: Central Europeanist meeting at AAASS $375.00 Business meeting at AASS $122.24 PennyWise Consulting (website) $160.00 Bank Service fee $ 5.00 Subtotal $662.24 Closing balance 12/22/2009 $3,341.26 The check for the *article award ($200.00) was mailed, but has not been cashed yet. The Book Award: In 2010, the HSA will be awarding the Book Award. Nominations should be forwarded directly to the Book Prize Committee: Paul Hanebrink, [email protected] Arpad von Klimo, [email protected] Mark Pittaway, [email protected] 1 To be eligible for the Book Award the book must be in English and be published in the last three years.
    [Show full text]
  • Air Force World
    Air Force World C-17 Fleet Hits Three Million Flight Hours C-17 made its maiden flight on Sept. 15, 1991, and the first The C-17 fleet reached three million flight hours on May aircraft was delivered to USAF in June 1993. 5, according to an Air Force release. “It has become the airlifter of choice for our Air Force,” said Col. Amanda Mey- X-37B Returns to Orbit ers, C-17 system program director. A United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket blasted off from Ceremonies were held at Robins AFB, Ga., and JB Cape Canaveral AFS, Fla., at 11:05 a.m. on May 20, car- Charleston, S.C., to commemorate the event. rying the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle. The Air Force owns 222 Globemaster IIIs, and eight The launch marked the fourth time the unmanned space partner nations have 44 of the strategic airlifters. The first plane has deployed into low Earth orbit, with all missions screenshot USAF photo by Ken Wright 12 AIR FORCE Magazine / July 2015 By Aaron M. U. Church, Associate Editor launched aboard Atlas V rockets. The current X-37B mission The AFSPC-5 mission included 10 CubeSats on the carries important new USAF experiments, such as the Hall rocket’s Centaur upper stage, a collaboration between thruster, used to improve similar units onboard Advanced SMC and the National Reconnaissance Office. Extremely High Frequency communication satellites. The Air Force plans to continue using the spacecraft to NATO Gets a Global Hawk test reusability concepts in space. The launch marked the Northrop Grumman rolled out NATO’s first RQ-4 Global 83rd successful launch of the Evolved Expendable Launch Hawk Alliance Ground Surveillance aircraft during a cer- Vehicle, noted Space and Missile Systems Center Com- emony at Palmdale, Calif., in early June, the company mander Lt.
    [Show full text]
  • 23. Baltic Perspectives on the European Security and Defence Policy
    23. Baltic perspectives on the European Security and Defence Policy Elzbieta Tromer I. Introduction Given the choice between the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the Euro- pean Security and Defence Policy as providers of their national security, the Baltic states—Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania—look to the USA. One reason is their perception of Russia as a source of instability. Another is their lack of con- fidence in the ability of the ESDP to deal with present-day threats. Although these three states are eager to be ‘normal’ members of the European Union and thus to join in its initiatives, their enthusiasm for the EU’s development of its own military muscle is lukewarm. An EU with some military capability but without the USA’s military strength and leadership holds little promise for them. Since the ESDP vehicle is already on the move, the Baltic states see their main function as ensuring coordination between the ESDP and NATO. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania want to be ‘Atlanticists from within the ESDP’.1 The Baltic states see themselves as exposed to challenges similar to those confronting the Nordic countries: notably the challenge of the new transatlantic dynamic, which makes it almost impossible to avoid taking sides between the US and Europe on an increasing range of global and specific issues. Being torn in this way is bound to be especially painful for Scandinavian [and Baltic] societies which have strong ties of history, culture and values with both sides of the Atlantic, and which in strategic terms are relatively dependent both on American military and European economic strength.2 The Nordic countries are seen by the Baltic states as allies in this context.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Air Force and Its Antecedents Published and Printed Unit Histories
    UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AND ITS ANTECEDENTS PUBLISHED AND PRINTED UNIT HISTORIES A BIBLIOGRAPHY EXPANDED & REVISED EDITION compiled by James T. Controvich January 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTERS User's Guide................................................................................................................................1 I. Named Commands .......................................................................................................................4 II. Numbered Air Forces ................................................................................................................ 20 III. Numbered Commands .............................................................................................................. 41 IV. Air Divisions ............................................................................................................................. 45 V. Wings ........................................................................................................................................ 49 VI. Groups ..................................................................................................................................... 69 VII. Squadrons..............................................................................................................................122 VIII. Aviation Engineers................................................................................................................ 179 IX. Womens Army Corps............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • We're Not Nazis, But…
    August 2014 American ideals. Universal values. Acknowledgements On human rights, the United States must be a beacon. This report was made possible by the generous Activists fighting for freedom around the globe continue to support of the David Berg Foundation and Arthur & look to us for inspiration and count on us for support. Toni Rembe Rock. Upholding human rights is not only a moral obligation; it’s Human Rights First has for many years worked to a vital national interest. America is strongest when our combat hate crimes, antisemitism and anti-Roma policies and actions match our values. discrimination in Europe. This report is the result of Human Rights First is an independent advocacy and trips by Sonni Efron and Tad Stahnke to Greece and action organization that challenges America to live up to Hungary in April, 2014, and to Greece in May, 2014, its ideals. We believe American leadership is essential in as well as interviews and consultations with a wide the struggle for human rights so we press the U.S. range of human rights activists, government officials, government and private companies to respect human national and international NGOs, multinational rights and the rule of law. When they don’t, we step in to bodies, scholars, attorneys, journalists, and victims. demand reform, accountability, and justice. Around the We salute their courage and dedication, and give world, we work where we can best harness American heartfelt thanks for their counsel and assistance. influence to secure core freedoms. We are also grateful to the following individuals for We know that it is not enough to expose and protest their work on this report: Tamas Bodoky, Maria injustice, so we create the political environment and Demertzian, Hanna Kereszturi, Peter Kreko, Paula policy solutions necessary to ensure consistent respect Garcia-Salazar, Hannah Davies, Erica Lin, Jannat for human rights.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of European Naval Power and the High-End Challenge Jeremy Stöhs
    Jeremy Stöhs ABOUT THE AUTHOR Dr. Jeremy Stöhs is the Deputy Director of the Austrian Center for Intelligence, Propaganda and Security Studies (ACIPSS) and a Non-Resident Fellow at the Institute for Security Policy, HOW HIGH? Kiel University. His research focuses on U.S. and European defence policy, maritime strategy and security, as well as public THE FUTURE OF security and safety. EUROPEAN NAVAL POWER AND THE HIGH-END CHALLENGE ISBN 978875745035-4 DJØF PUBLISHING IN COOPERATION WITH 9 788757 450354 CENTRE FOR MILITARY STUDIES How High? The Future of European Naval Power and the High-End Challenge Jeremy Stöhs How High? The Future of European Naval Power and the High-End Challenge Djøf Publishing In cooperation with Centre for Military Studies 2021 Jeremy Stöhs How High? The Future of European Naval Power and the High-End Challenge © 2021 by Djøf Publishing All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise – without the prior written permission of the Publisher. This publication is peer reviewed according to the standards set by the Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Science. Cover: Morten Lehmkuhl Print: Ecograf Printed in Denmark 2021 ISBN 978-87-574-5035-4 Djøf Publishing Gothersgade 137 1123 København K Telefon: 39 13 55 00 e-mail: [email protected] www. djoef-forlag.dk Editors’ preface The publications of this series present new research on defence and se- curity policy of relevance to Danish and international decision-makers.
    [Show full text]
  • NATO, the Baltic States, and Russia a Framework for Enlargement
    NATO, the Baltic States, and Russia A Framework for Enlargement Mark Kramer Harvard University February 2002 In 2002, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) will be initiating its second round of enlargement since the end of the Cold War. In the late 1990s, three Central European countries—Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Poland—were admitted into the alliance. At a summit due to be held in Prague in November 2002, the NATO heads-of-state will likely invite at least two and possibly as many as six or seven additional countries to join. In total, nine former Communist countries have applied for membership. Six of the prospective new members—Slovakia, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Romania, Albania, and Macedonia—lie outside the former Soviet Union. Of these, only Slovakia and Slovenia are likely to receive invitations. The three other aspiring members of NATO—Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia— normally would stand a good chance of being admitted, but their status has been controversial because they were republics of the Soviet Union until August 1991. Until recently, the Russian government had vehemently objected to the proposed admission of the Baltic states into NATO, and many Western leaders were reluctant to antagonize Moscow. During the past year-and-a-half, however, the extension of NATO membership to the Baltic states in 2002 has become far more plausible. The various parties involved—NATO, the Baltic states, and Russia—have modified their policies in small but significant ways. Progress in forging a new security arrangement in Europe began before the September 2001 terrorist attacks, but the improved climate of U.S.-Russian relations since the attacks has clearly expedited matters.
    [Show full text]
  • PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION in SLOVAKIA 30Th March 2019
    PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN SLOVAKIA 30th March 2019 European Zuzana Caputova becomes the first Elections monitor woman to be president of the Republic Corinne Deloy of Slovakia Results As expected, Zuzana Caputova (Progressive Slovakia, PS) was elected President of Slovakia 2nd round on 30th March. The accession of a woman to this post is a first in the country’s history. The candidate won 58.4% of the vote and therefore won easily against her rival, Vice- President of the Commission, responsible for Energy, Maros Sefcovic, who was supported by the party in office Direction-Social Democracy (SMER-SD), who won 41.6% of the vote. During the first round of the election organised on 16th March last Zuzana Caputova had already taken an comfortable lead over her adversary winning 40.57% of the vote (Maros Sefcovic won 18.66%). Turnout rose to 41.79% and was well below that registered in the second round of the previous election on 29th March 2014 (- 8.69 points). Results of the Presidential election on 16th and 30th March 2019 in Slovakia Turn out: 48.74% (1st round) and 41.79% (2nd round) No of votes won % of votes won No of votes won No of votes won Candidates (1st round) (1st round) (2nd round) (2nd round) Zuzana Caputova (Progressive Slovakia, PS) 870 415 40.57 1 056 582 58.40 Maros Sefcovic 400 379 18.66 752 403 41.60 Stefan Harabin 307 823 14.34 Marian Kotleba (Kotleba-People’s Party-New 222 935 10.39 Slovakia, L’SNS) Frantisek Miklosko, independent 122 916 5.72 Bela Bugar (Most-Hid) 66 667 3.10 Milan Krajniak (We are a family, AME R) 59
    [Show full text]