DOCSLIB.ORG

NATO's Mediterranean Dialogue, As Well As to Get a Better Appreciation of Each Partner's Specific Objectives and Priorities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NATO's Mediterranean Dialogue, As Well As to Get a Better Appreciation of Each Partner's Specific Objectives and Priorities RESEARCH PAPER No. 137 NOVEMBER 2009 NATO’s MEDITERRANEAN DIALOGUE: AN ASSESSMENT YANNIS A. STIVACHTIS (Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University and Senior Advisor at RIEAS) BENJAMIN JONES (Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University) RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR EUROPEAN AND AMERICAN STUDIES (RIEAS) # 1, Kalavryton Street, Alimos, Athens, 17456, Greece RIEAS url: www.rieas.gr RIEAS MISSION STATEMENT Objective The objective of the Research Institute for European and American Studies (RIEAS) is to promote the understanding of international affairs. Special attention is devoted to transatlantic relations, intelligence studies and terrorism, European integration, international security, Balkan and Mediterranean studies, Russian foreign policy as well as policy making on national and international markets. Activities The Research Institute for European and American Studies seeks to achieve this objective through research, by publishing its research papers on international politics and intelligence studies, organizing seminars, as well as providing analyses via its web site. The Institute maintains a library and documentation center. RIEAS is an institute with an international focus. Young analysts, journalists, military personnel as well as academicians are frequently invited to give lectures and to take part in seminars. RIEAS maintains regular contact with other major research institutes throughout Europe and the United States and, together with similar institutes in Western Europe, Middle East, Russia and Southeast Asia. Status The Research Institute for European and American Studies is a non-profit research institute established under Greek law. RIEAS’s budget is generated by membership subscriptions, donations from individuals and foundations, as well as from various research projects. The Institute is autonomous organization. Its activities and views are independent of any public or private bodies, and the Institute is not allied to any political party, denominational group or ideological movement. Dr. John M. Nomikos Director 2 RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR EUROPEAN AND AMERICAN STUDIES (RIEAS) Postal Address: # 1, Kalavryton Street Athens, 17456, Greece Tel/Fax: + 30 210 9911214 E-mail: [email protected] Administrative Board John M. Nomikos, Director Gustavo Diaz Matey, Senior Advisor Yiannis Stivachtis, Senior Advisor Darko Trifunovic, Senior Advisor Charles Rault, Senior Advisor, Research Team Andrew Liaropoulos, Senior Analyst Vasiliki Koulani, Junior Analyst Konstantinos Louridas, Junior Analyst Maria Alvanou, Senior Analyst Andreas G. Banoutsos, Senior Analyst Aya Burweila, Senior Analyst International Advisors Richard R. Valcourt, Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence Shlomo Shpiro (PhD), Bar Illan University Prof. Daniel Pipes (PhD), Director, Middle East Forum Prof. Miroslav Tudjman (PhD), University of Zagreb and Former Director of the Croatian Intelligence Service 3 Col (ret) Virendra Sahai Verma, Former Military Intelligence Officer from India James Bilotto, CBRN Chief Operating Officer Prof. Anthony Glees (PhD), Director, Center for Security and Intelligence Studies, Buckingham University Prof. Vasilis Botopoulos (PhD), Chancellor, University of Indianapolis (Athens Campus) Prof. Peter Gill (PhD), University of Salford Andrei Soldatov (MA), Journalist, Editor of Agentura.ru (Russia) Chris Kuehl, Armada Corporate Intelligence Review Zweiri Mahjoob (PhD), Centre for Strategic Studies, Jordan University Meir Javedanfar (PhD), Middle East Economic-Political Analysis Inc. Daniele Ganser (PhD), Basel University Prof. Siegfried Beer (PhD), Director, Austrian Centre for Intelligence, Propaganda and Security Studies Prof. Herman Matthijs (PhD), Free University of Brussels Prof. Michael Wala (PhD), University of Munich Prof. Wolfgang Krieger (PhD), University of Marburg Michael Tanji, Director at Threatswatch.org - (OSINT) Prof. Ioannis Mazis (PhD), Ionian University Robert Nowak (PhD Cand), Institute of History of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Bureau of the Committee for Special and Intelligence Services (Prime Minister’s Chancellery) Lauren Hutton (PhD), Researcher, Institute for Security Studies (South Africa) LTC General, Prof. Iztok Podbregar (PhD), University of Maribor, Former National Security Advisor to the President of the Republic of Slovenia, Former Chief of Defense (CHOD), Former Director of the Slovenian Intelligence and Security Agency, Former Secretary of the Slovenian National Security Council. 4 Research Associates Ioannis Konstantopoulos (PhD), Intelligence Studies Liam Bellamy (MA), Maritime Security (Piracy) Spyridon Katsoulas, (PhD Candidate) Greek-American Relations Ioannis Kolovos (MA), Illegal Immigration in Greece Naveed Ahmad (MA), South-Central Asia and Muslim World Ioannis Moutsos (MA), Independent Journalist Nadim Hasbani (MA), Lebanon-Syria and North African States Nikos Lalazisis (MA), European Intelligence Studies RESEARCH PAPER No. 137 NOVEMBER 2009 NATO’s MEDITERRANEAN DIALOGUE: AN ASSESSMENT Yannis A. Stivachtis (Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University and Senior Advisor at RIEAS) Benjamin Jones (Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University) After the Cold War ended, NATO experienced an unprecedented transformation from a military alliance focused on collective self-defense to a multi-dimensional alliance that is capable of handling the emerging security environment mainly through out of area operations. With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, NATO was forced to search elsewhere for a purpose of existence and a strategic framework to carry it into the twenty-first century. NATO’s members turned close to home to Eastern and 5 Southeastern Europe, as well as the Mediterranean and realized that the organization needed to have the ability to handle different types of threats such as terrorism, weapons of mass destruction proliferation, and even social or economic problems. As a result, NATO began to focus on these regions as the starting point for security and stability building initiatives. NATO’s post-Cold War transformation accelerated after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, and resulted in the strengthening of NATO’s approach to the Southeastern European and Mediterranean security environment. The Mediterranean region is important to the security and stability of many NATO members. Around twenty countries share a coastline on the Mediterranean shores and even more rely on its strategic and economic importance. The stability of the region has been a focus of NATO for quite some time. During the Cold War, NATO’s primary objective was to control the activities of the Soviet Mediterranean Fleet and minimize Soviet political influence over the countries of Northern Africa and the Middle East. Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has focused on the Mediterranean because of the various types of security threats (political, societal, economic and environmental) emanating from the southern shores of the Mediterranean Sea, as well as the proximity of the region to the Middle East. During the 1999 Washington Summit, NATO proclaimed, “security in the whole of Europe is closely liked to security and stability in the Mediterranean” (NATO, 2000). Security and stability in the Mediterranean is closely tied to two forms of security: hard and soft. Hard security is related to issues that stem from terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and sources of conflict, while soft security is related to political, economic, and social issues. According to RAND’s analysis, “problems that have occurred in the Mediterranean sprung from similarly trends, unresolved questions of political legitimacy, relentless urbanization and slow growth, resurgent nationalism, and religious radicalism” (Larrabee et al. 1998, p. 2). By concentrating on the Mediterranean, NATO hoped it could help stabilize the transforming security environment by providing the necessary institutional mechanisms in the region for its allies and partners. Since many of NATO’s members are located in the Mediterranean basin, it was strategically important for NATO to be involved in the area. Because of the emergence of new type of threats, as well as existing conflicts, the prospect for instability was too great for NATO not to be involved, so, as a result, NATO 6 established the Mediterranean Dialogue as a key component of its post-Cold War strategy. The Mediterranean Dialogue In 1994, NATO embarked on its Mediterranean initiative aimed at increasing stability in the region by establishing the Mediterranean Dialogue, a regional partnership between NATO and Mediterranean states. The establishment of the Dialogue represents one of NATO’s official steps in adapting to the post-Cold War security environment, and according to Alberto Bin, has become a “key instrument in support of the Alliance’s overall strategy of partnership, dialogue, and cooperation” (Bin 2002, p. 2). The Mediterranean Dialogue originated with five participating countries, which included Egypt, Israel, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia, and within a few years, Algeria and Jordan followed. The logic for the cooperation among the participants rests on the fact that “a strong and confident relationship between NATO and the countries of the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf regions will build trust and encourage mutual understanding” (Rizzo 2007, p. 10). This style of relationship builds upon the concept that working together, sharing expertise, and cooperation will make NATO, its member countries,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Other Co-Operation Initiatives in the Mediterranean
    6 Anexos ingles ES07:00 Med. en cifrasgraf 13/9/07 11:19 Página 359 Chronologies Other Cooperation Initiatives in the Mediterranean 1. NATO’s Mediterranean This occurred, for instance, in October Since 1997, the measures of practical Dialogue and the Istanbul 2001 following the September 11 at- cooperation for enhancing mutual trust Cooperation Initiative tacks and in 2004 to celebrate the ten are laid down in an annual Work Pro- Appendices years of the MD. The political dimen- gramme that comprises a wide range of In January 1994, in view of the positive sion of the Dialogue includes visits by security-related activities. results of the Peace process in the senior NATO officials to MD countries to At their Summit meeting in Istanbul in Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the heads of meet with their authorities and become 2004, NATO leaders committed to work state and government taking part in the more familiar with the objectives and towards making the MD a true Partner- Brussels NATO Summit called for a new priorities of each country. The practical ship and individualising priority areas in 2007 initiative geared toward Mediterranean dimension includes activities aimed at the document, “A more Ambitious and countries that were not NATO mem- planning for civil emergencies, crisis Expanded Framework for the Mediter- Med. bers. The main objective of the Mediter- management and border security, in ad- ranean Dialogue” aimed at enhancing ranean Dialogue (MD) was, and still is, dition to a military programme. The lat- political dialogue; developing defence to contribute to regional stability and ter includes the possibility for Mediter- system reforms and contributing to the security, improve the mutual under- ranean Partners to observe NATO’s fight against terrorism.
    [Show full text]
  • Building a Potential to Counteract Hybrid Threats Through Cooperation and Regional Security
    Information & Security: An International Journal Emil Eftimov, v.39:1, 2018, 13-20 https://doi.org/10.11610/isij.3901 BUILDING A POTENTIAL TO COUNTERACT HYBRID THREATS THROUGH COOPERATION AND REGIONAL SECURITY Vice Admiral Emil EFTIMOV Abstract: The main goal of this article is to present and discuss the opportunities to deepen cooperation between the Alliance and partners in countering hybrid threats. The focus is put on the eastern and southern NATO flanks, where the most advanced partner formats like Partnership for Peace (PfP) and Mediterranean Dialog (MD) have been developed. The first conclusion is that NATO partnership programs and the vari- ous initiatives in the interest of the partners are aimed at achieving stability in the pe- riphery of the Alliance by increasing partners’ resilience to various types of threats. In addition, the author argues that success in countering hybrid threats in the current se- curity environment is impossible without parallel and coordinated action of NATO in coordination with other international organizations, especially the European Union. Keywords: NATO, EU, Partnership for Peace, Mediterranean Dialogue, hybrid threats, resilience, international military cooperation. Introduction The strategy on NATO role in countering the hybrid type of war states that the first reaction or response comes from the nation under threat / attack, and the member states of NATO should build a set of capabilities and countermeasures. Also, there is a provision for the possibility of help or assistance by organizations whose members or partners these states are. In this case, the fundamental role of NATO in supporting the member states and partners is in the military aspect.
    [Show full text]
  • How Does Nato Work?
    WHAT IS NATO? Visit our website : www.nato.int #WEARENATO The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is one of the These countries meet to cooperate in the field of world’s major international institutions. It is a political security and defence. In this respect, NATO provides and military alliance that brings together 30 member a unique link between these two continents for political countries from Europe and North America. and security cooperation. PROTECTING PEOPLE COMBATING NEW THREATS We often take it for granted that we can walk around freely in As the nature of threats changes, so must the methods a safe and economically stable environment. Security in all of preserving peace. NATO is reorienting its defence areas of everyday life is key to our well-being. capabilities towards today’s threats. It is adapting forces and developing multinational approaches to deal with terrorism, FORGING PARTNERSHIPS failed states and other security threats such as weapons of mass destruction. Establishing dialogue and cooperation is crucial for peaceful relations and deeper international understanding. BUILDING PEACE & STABILITY NATO provides a unique opportunity for member and partner countries to consult on security issues to build trust The benefits of stability can be enjoyed simultaneously by and, in the long run, help to prevent conflict. many parties. Through practical cooperation and multilateral initiatives, It is crucial to stabilise regions where tensions pose security countries are facing new security challenges together. threats. This is why NATO takes an active role in crisis- management operations, in cooperation with other international organisations. WHAT DOES NATO DO? NATO is committed to protecting its members efforts fail, it has the military capacity needed to through political and military means.
    [Show full text]
  • Mediterranean Dialogue. the Barcelona Process
    Mediterranean dialogue. The Barcelona Process Source: CVCE. José Luis Neila Hernández. Copyright: (c) CVCE.EU by UNI.LU All rights of reproduction, of public communication, of adaptation, of distribution or of dissemination via Internet, internal network or any other means are strictly reserved in all countries. Consult the legal notice and the terms and conditions of use regarding this site. URL: http://www.cvce.eu/obj/mediterranean_dialogue_the_barcelona_process-en- 2c8f7745-69f4-469e-8d5b-6ded200fec64.html Last updated: 08/07/2016 1/4 Mediterranean dialogue. The Barcelona Process José Luis Neila Hernández The Mediterranean is an open book whose pages testify to the complexity of a history marked by meetings of minds and misunderstandings between Europeans and the Islamic-Arab world. Over the last two centuries, these sideways glances and the Mediterranean’s geo-historic reality have developed along uneven lines manifested, for example, in European/Western hegemony, embodied in colonialism, and the Arab world’s increasing awareness of its position, expressed through a search for new directions prompted by the Arab Renaissance (Nahda), and for ways to embrace Western European modernity while preserving its identifying codes. Decolonisation was to focus debate within southern Mediterranean Islamic-Arab societies on how to meet the challenge of modernisation and identity preservation. The development of international society — the Cold War and the profound changes occurring in its wake — and of the very future of Europe, particularly the European integration process, were to have far-reaching consequences in the Mediterranean. This area has been an abiding concern since the early days of European integration because of its connection with certain European countries, particularly France.
    [Show full text]
  • NATO and the Mediterranean1
    Strategic Sectors | Security & Politics 1 Panorama NATO and the Mediterranean Charlotte Brandsma play a central role in an effective strategy South. Senior Program Officer, Mediterranean Programme This article will take a closer look at the current The German Marshall Fund of the United States, Brussels and future challenges that the Mediterranean se- curity environment poses to the alliance, discuss Strategic Sectors | Security & Politics the evolving strategy of NATO towards the region 4 April 2019 marked the 70th anniversary of the and how that strategy is perceived by regional signing of the Washington Treaty, the founding stakeholders. It will argue that, to remain relevant document of the North Atlantic Treaty Organiza- in the future, NATO must put more energy and re- tion (NATO). A time for celebration, but also a time sources into its partnerships and focus on the for reflection on the strengths and weaknesses of Mediterranean Dialogue partnership, as well as on the alliance, and its readiness to confront the cooperation with the European Union and other threats of the future from both within NATO and regional and international organizations.3 beyond its borders. As NATO Secretary General 232 Jens Stoltenberg noted in his speech in front of the United States Congress, the organization faces an Why the Mediterranean Matters unprecedented set of challenges, including a gen- erational fight against terrorism, containing a more The Mediterranean space holds an enormous assertive Russia, competition with China and the amount of challenges
    [Show full text]
  • Mediterranean Dialogue
    PRESS - INFO - PRESS MEDITERRANEAN DIALOGUE The Washington Summit will give fresh impetus to developing NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue, which was launched in 1994 and currently involves six non-NATO countries: Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia. The Dialogue is aimed at creating good relations and better mutual understanding throughout the Mediterranean, and at promoting security and stability in the region. It reflects the view that security in that region is linked to security in Europe. Political discussions with participating countries provide an opportunity to share views on a range of security issues relevant to the region. Moreover, an annual work programme sets out measures for practical cooperation that focus on building confidence through cooperation on security related issues in the military field, as well as in the areas of information, civil emergency planning and science. All participating countries are offered the same basis for discussion and activities but the level of engagement varies from country to country. Activities take place on a self-funding basis. This limits the capacity of some countries to participate. In December 1998, NATO Foreign Ministers agreed to explore ways of enhancing cooperation with Mediterranean Dialogue countries. As a result, Heads of State and Government have decided to enhance both the political and practical dimensions of the Dialogue, including through further opportunities for discussion and strengthened cooperation in areas where NATO can bring an added value, particularly in the military field, and where the Dialogue countries have expressed interest. NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue complements other international efforts in the region such as the European Union’s Barcelona Process, the Middle East Peace Process, and the Mediterranean initiatives of the Western European Union (WEU) and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
    [Show full text]
  • Other Cooperation Initiatives in the Mediterranean
    Chronologies Other Cooperation Initiatives in the Mediterranean s e c i d n e 1. NATO Mediterranean Dialogue share views on security matters and dis - self-differentiation while preserving uni - p p and Istanbul Cooperation Initiative cuss the current status of the MD. The ty and the non-discriminatory character A structure of the MD can be conducted on of the MD. This improvement in the prac - The Mediterranean Dialogue (MD) is a bilateral level (that is to say 26 NATO tical field of the MD consisted in: pro - considered an integral part of the North countries and the MD country interested), moting military-to-military cooperation, Atlantic Alliance’s cooperative approach on a multilateral level (involving the 26 combating terrorism through effective to security and it reflects the Alliance’s NATO countries and the 7 MD countries) intelligence sharing and maritime co - 8 0 views that security in Europe is deeply or, finally, on a regional level (involving operation, promoting democratic control 0 2 linked to stability in the Mediterranean re - two or more countries in the cooperation). of armed forces and enhancing coop - . d e gion. The MD indeed aims at: contribut - The dialogue is progressive in terms of eration in the area of civil emergency M ing to regional security and stability, participation and substance, thus allow - planning. At the same Summit, the Al - achieving better mutual understanding ing the number of partners and the con - liance, considering itself ready for new between NATO and its Mediterranean tent of the Dialogue to evolve over time. challenges, decided to undertake a new Partners and dispelling misconceptions Besides, all the Mediterranean partners initiative.
    [Show full text]
  • IN the MED How NATO Can Refocus Its Efforts in the South and Italy Can Lead the Charge
    MORE IN THE MED How NATO Can Refocus its Efforts in the South and Italy Can Lead the Charge Ambassador (Ret.) Alexander R. Vershbow Lauren M. Speranza The Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security works to develop sustainable, nonpartisan strat- egies to address the most important security challenges facing the United States and the world. The Center honors General Brent Scowcroft’s legacy of service and embodies his ethos of non- partisan commitment to the cause of security, support for US leadership in cooperation with allies and partners, and dedication to the mentorship of the next generation of leaders. The Scowcroft Center’s Transatlantic Security Initiative brings together top policymakers, gov- ernment and military officials, business leaders, and experts from Europe and North America to share insights, strengthen cooperation, and develop innovative approaches to the key challenges facing NATO and the transatlantic community. This report was produced as part of the Transatlantic Security Initiative’s work focused on NATO’s southern neighborhood and Mediterranean security, in partnership with Leonardo. About Our Partner Leonardo is a true transatlantic company. Headquartered in Italy, the company has a global foot- print with major industrial activities in Italy, Poland, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Leonardo recognizes the importance of NATO and the critical role its industrial dimension plays in enabling the Alliance to meet its objectives. To that end, Leonardo has been a consistent and long-term provider of security technology and expertise to NATO across its strategic systems, including Alliance Ground Surveillance (AGS), Air Command and Control System - Integrated Air Missile Defence (ACCS – IAMD), Allied Future Surveillance and Control (AFSC), cyber defense (NCIRC), and electronic warfare.
    [Show full text]
  • MEIJI INSTITUTE for GLOBAL AFFAIRS MIGA Column “Global Diagnosis”
    MEIJI INSTITUTE FOR GLOBAL AFFAIRS MIGA Column “Global Diagnosis” June 01, 2016 Kei Nakagawa Visiting Professor, Meiji Institute for Global Affairs, Meiji University Short Curriculum Vitae) Kei Nakagawa Hagoromo University of International Studies Faculty of Social SciencesProfessor Ph.D.(Middle Eastern and North African Studies), University of Tokyo. Assumed her present post after working as a Visiting Researcher at the Mohammed V University (Rabat), a Fellow of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, and Researcher and Cultural Attaché at the Embassy of Japan to Tunisia. Her specialty is Middle Eastern and North African Studies. She particularly specializes in North African political history and contemporary politics. She worked as an international electoral observer for the parliamentary election of the Kingdom of Morocco in November 2011. The Current Situation of Trans-Mediterranean Cooperation and Challenges for the Future The ancient Romans, who controlled the entire Mediterranean region, called the present day Mediterranean “Our Sea (Mare Nostrum).” In the age of the Roman Empire, which achieved victory in the wars with Carthage, in present-day Tunisia, and ruled over the entire Mediterranean region, the Mediterranean Sea was the Roman inland sea. Since then, while the Mediterranean has been the setting of many battles, its coastal areas have also come to enjoy rich prosperity. This Mediterranean is now a sea of refugees risking their lives to cross over into Europe, and has become a region of frequently occurring terrorism, not only Syria and Libya, where civil wars have yet to be settled but Europe too, on the northern coast of the Mediterranean.
    [Show full text]
  • Mediterranean Security After EU and Nato Enlargement
    © Rubbettino Military Centre for Strategic Studies - Rome ZTBW Bundeswehr Transformation Center - Berlin © Rubbettino Mediterranean security after EU and Nato enlargement A joint research project between Military Centre for Strategic Studies (Rome) and Bundeswehr Transformation Center (Berlin) ZTBw team Ralph Thiele, Wolf Kinzel, Frank Kolstelnik, Gerd Föhrenbach CeMiSS team Carlo Finizio, Olga Mattera, Paolo Quercia Rubbettino © Rubbettino Copyright © by CeMiSS Centro Militare di Studi Strategici Piazza della Rovere, 83 - 00165 Roma (RM) e-mail: [email protected] © 2005 - Rubbettino Editore 88049 Soveria Mannelli - Viale Rosario Rubbettino, 10 -Tel. (0968) 662034 www.rubbettino.it © Rubbettino Sommario 1 Foreword p. 7 2 Executive Summary 9 3 Part One: Introduction 3.1 Creating the “Common Security Area Europe” 17 3.2 Living the EU-NATO Strategic Partnership 19 4 Part Two: Perceptions of the enlargements 4.1 Effects of EU and NATO Enlargements on the Mediterra- nean: Italian and German Points of View 25 4.1.1 Italian interests 25 4.1.2 German interests 34 4.2 Core Findings of selected national perceptions 42 4.2.1 The new EU member states 42 4.2.1.1 Cyprus 42 4.2.1.2 Malta 43 4.2.1.3 Slovenia 44 4.2.2 The Would-be EU-Members 46 4.2.2.1 Turkey 46 4.2.2.2 Bulgaria 50 4.3 Core findings on regional points of view 51 4.3.1 The Mediterranean Dialogue Countries and NATO 51 4.3.1.1 The Eastern Mediterranean Countries: Egypt, Jordan and Israel 51 4.3.1.2 The Western Mediterranean Countries: Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya 55 5 © Rubbettino 4.3.2 The Mediterranean Dialogue Countries and the European Union p.
    [Show full text]
  • Other Cooperation Initiatives in the Mediterranean
    Chronologies Appendices Other Cooperation Initiatives in the Mediterranean 1. NATO’s Mediterranean mentary to other regional or interna- small arms & light weapons, public di- Dialogue and Istanbul tional initiatives; it has both a political plomacy, scientific and environmental Cooperation Initiative and practical dimension. Until 2011, the cooperation, as well as consultations on overall responsibility for the MD fell to terrorism and the proliferation of weap- Instability in the Mediterranean region is the Mediterranean Cooperation Group ons of mass destruction (WMD). The important to NATO Allies and partners (MCG), established at the Madrid Sum- military dimension of the practical coop- both for humanitarian and geopolitical mit in 1997. It was then replaced by the eration includes invitations to Dialogue reasons as security in the Middle East Political and Partnerships Committee, countries to observe – and in some and North Africa is organically related which is responsible for all partnerships. cases participate – in NATO/PfP military to security in Europe. NATO has devel- The Committee meets at the level of exercises, attend courses and other Other Cooperation Initiatives in the Mediterranean oped a network of partnership with Political Counsellors on a regular basis academic activities at the NATO School seven southern Mediterranean countries to discuss all matters related to the (SHAPE) in Oberammergau (Germany) under the Mediterranean Dialogue Dialogue including its further develop- and the NATO Defense College in (MD), as well as with four countries of ment. At the 2004 Istanbul Summit, Rome (Italy), and visit NATO military the Gulf region through the Istanbul NATO’s Heads of State and Govern- bodies.
    [Show full text]
  • THE EU and NATO | the ESSENTIAL PARTNERS European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS)
    he essential partners dited by dited and Katharine A.M. Wright E Gustav Lindstrom and Thierry Tardy from With contributions Daniel Fiott, Christian Kaunert, Bruno Lété, Alexander Mattelaer, Hanna Smith, Simon J. Smith, Bart M.J. Szewczyk, Ori Wertman T THE EU NATO AND SEPTEMBER 2019 THE EU AND NATO | THE ESSENTIAL PARTNERS European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS) 100, avenue de Suffren 75015 Paris http://www.iss.europa.eu Director: Gustav Lindstrom © EU Institute for Security Studies, 2019. Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged, save where otherwise stated. The views expressed in this publication are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the EUISS or of the European Union. print ISBN 978-92-9198-837-2 online ISBN 978-92-9198-836-5 CATALOGUE NUMBER QN-01-19-491-EN-C CATALOGUE NUMBER QN-01-19-491-EN-N DOI 10.2815/644113 DOI 10.2815/493939 Published by the EU Institute for Security Studies and printed in Belgium by Bietlot. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2019. Cover image credit: NATO THE EU AND NATO The essential partners Edited by Gustav Lindstrom and Thierry Tardy With contributions from Daniel Fiott, Christian Kaunert, Bruno Lété, Alexander Mattelaer, Hanna Smith, Simon J. Smith, Bart M.J. Szewczyk, Ori Wertman and Katharine A.M. Wright The editors Gustav Lindstrom is the Director of the EU Institute for Security Studies. Thierry Tardy is Director of the Research Division at the NATO Defense College (Rome). Contents Introduction 3 Gustav Lindstrom and Thierry Tardy 1 The scope of EU-NATO cooperation 5 Thierry Tardy and Gustav Lindstrom 2 Countering hybrid threats 13 Hanna Smith 3 Operational cooperation 21 Bart M.J.
    [Show full text]