Considerations on Transatlantic Security

International Conference KNOWLEDGE-BASED ORGANIZATION Vol. XXV No 1 2019

CONSIDERATIONS ON TRANSATLANTIC SECURITY

Mihai Marcel NEAG

“Nicolae Bălcescu” Land Forces Academy, Sibiu, Romania [email protected]

Abstract:The study focuses on the security of the transatlantic space and the role played by its various components in ensuring the stability, security and development of the countries in this space. The role played by the North Atlantic Alliance in the transatlantic space and beyond, as well as contributing to securing the European continent, is also avoided. At the same time, in order to complete the picture of the transatlantic relations, it is necessary to mention the way in which Russia is present in the international relations of South-eastern Europe. The results of this theoretical approach can contribute to creating an overall image of the transatlantic security community and identifying the transatlantic space from a static and dynamic point of view.

Keywords: security community, transatlantic security, security relations

1. Introduction military, technological and economic The events that characterize the current resources available to the countries of the security environment have confirmed that transatlantic space and the political-military insecurity, uncertainty and unpredictability axis, which makes a direct link between persist. It is therefore necessary to rethink these capabilities and military and policy the geopolitical and geostrategic decision-makers. environment in terms of the interests, The strategic dimension of transatlantic diversity of conventional and non- security seeks to highlight the differences or conventional, asymmetric and hybrid threats, approaches between security policy actors involved, and reconfigure new decisions contained in national security strategies to effectively manage these strategies or international organizations, with complex situations. the strategic culture these countries or The concepts of security have the role of organizations have developed over time. The explaining and arguing the positions and political dimension highlights the attitudes of the political-military leaders complexity of the transatlantic security space towards the events in the transatlantic and and how certain variables can influence external internal security environment. The positively or negatively security regardless operational, strategic and political analysis of the operational or strategic dimension of of the transatlantic space can explain the the security community. factors that structurally and institutionally influence the security relations in this 2. Concepts of Transatlantic Security security community. The operational Transatlantic security appears to be a dimension of transatlantic security focuses particular area of reference. It joins a on the analysis of two complementary axes: theoretical concept derived from the study of the axis of capabilities that includes the international relations, a model derived from

114 the historical reality of building relations of transatlantic space security, as threats between the United States of America and come from outside and is important for Western European countries after the understanding the processes that influence Second World War. Transatlantic security, transatlantic relations. together with economics and finance, is a The geopolitical changes in recent years major focus of transatlantic relations. have prompted US and European analysts to Specialty literature deals with the two speak of a “division of labor” outside of the chained components, precisely because of transatlantic security space in an attempt to the importance of security for transatlantic unleash the transatlantic dialogue in the relations. The concept of transatlantic sphere of NATO-EU internal relations. This security offers both a theoretical “division of labor” would enable the US to contextualization and the identification of focus on the new great power of the Asia- the geographic space of analysis through a Pacific region, while the European partners comprehensive approach to the factors and should create a strategic relationship with the actors that constitute and contribute to Russian Federation and Turkey. transatlantic security. The analysis of the security of the The way of approaching transatlantic transatlantic space suffers from the lack of security is different on the two sides of the an integrative reference system in which the Atlantic. The first, represented by the crisis contribution of one or other of the States to of the transatlantic relations in 2003 and due the joint security effort can be assessed on to US intervention in Iraq, brought to the the basis of similar criteria. If the US forefront the contradiction between the US contribution to transatlantic security is clear, and its traditional European partners over the at least at the capabilities level, the opportunity and the legality of the contribution of the other transatlantic intervention, even questioning the security countries to this joint effort is institutional security partnership. The second judged by different criteria in which, in most issue of the ESDP (European Security and cases, quantitative factors are ignored or Defense Policy) development has coagulated omitted in favoring qualitative research around the relationship between interpretations. NATO and EU, the interaction between the The concept of security community emerged two institutions and the responsibilities of in the early 1950s when the Cold War threw each. the Western and Soviet worlds on both sides Transatlantic security has become almost of the Iron Curtain. The role of this concept synonymous with NATO, turning this was given by trying to find solutions to institution into a barometer of the avoid escalating any conflict by creating a transatlantic security relationship. different perspective where peace, as a goal Constrained by the institutional barriers of in itself, would be the primary element. NATO and ESDP, the analysis of In the theory of international relations, the transatlantic security is reduced to a limited term security community was introduced by interpretation by eliminating some Richard W. van Wagenen in 1952 that theoretical factors, actors or interpretations. proposed a vision of a world without wars Thus, the transatlantic security perceived as by initiating an integration process that an interaction between NATO and the EU “allows for a sense of community focuses on internal functional aspects, on accompanied by formal institutions and how European security ambitions seek to practices and informal sufficiently powerful find an autonomous institutional expression and widespread to ensure a peaceful change capable of operating independently or in within a group” [1]. cooperation with NATO. This type of In the socio-constructivist vision of security approach highlights the internal dimension communities, Karl W. Deutsch approaches

115 the concept of a security community through and interests. Under these circumstances, two perspectives: the first, in which any state would be a potential security issue, humanity is perceived as an unbroken string the only solution to securing its own security of wars that will continue indefinitely, the remains the accumulation of a superior second as a development continuation of the economic and military capability. society that will live in peace in one The security approach, known as structural community [2]. From a security point of offensive realism, highlights the idea that view, the security community exists in a real states, and mainly major powers, are forced space where the possibility of violence and to maximize their “relative” power to other war is permanent. Deutsch emphasizes the states to secure their security and survival. primordial importance of political and States, using appropriate circumstances and administrative capabilities and the well-defined strategies, can develop their importance of links and communication relative power without triggering counter- between policymakers and institutions, responses from other states, thus turning into providing effective communication channels regional leaders. This security approach sees both horizontally between different security the need of the state to secure a hegemonic community units and vertically between position as the main cause of international relevant policy levels [2]. Deutsch insecurity. States resort to blackmail or war emphasizes the importance of economic to secure the necessary resources or to stop development as a prerequisite for other states from gaining access to them. maintaining a security community where When they are unable to achieve their own economic conditions allow the equalization goals, states are in conflict with other states, of living standards within the community temporarily maximizing their own “relative” and an advantageous exchange that results in power. In Stephen Walt's opinion, “in an common benefits within an integrated anarchic system states seek to form alliances community [2]. This process of equalization to protect themselves” [4]. would translate into the emergence of a Liberalism is inextricably linked to two strong middle class and would enable the concepts. The first states that peace is more community to become more international. cost-effective than war, trade being a much Deutsch, however, does not refer to global less costly alternative to wealth than peace but is limited to the level of the sanctions or coercive means [5]. The second transatlantic security community, important liberal concept, later emerged, is underlining that the integrative process that of neoliberal institutionalism. It focuses brings with it some common economic on the role of international organizations in benefits. From a security point of view, avoiding conflicts and managing the post- security communities enhance their conflict stage at regional and international capabilities and channels of communication level. The main feature of international through security co-operation and co- organizations is the limitation of the anarchic operation, through stronger military character of the international system through integration, coordination of policies against a set of rules, along with the mediation and internal threats, internationalization of arbitrary capacity of conflict. An important authority, and multi-perspective policies attribute in this liberal interpretation is the where rules are shared at national, primacy of the state as the main agent transnational and supranational level [3]. contributing to the emergence of institutions In the classic version of realism, the and, at the same time, taking advantage of confrontation between states is explained as them by pursuing common interests with a consequence of the aggressive behavior of other states [5]. power-minded political leaders who, using Security institutions have the ability to circumstances, pursue their own purposes alleviate fears among group members

116 because they allow early identification of The North Atlantic Treaty was signed on 4 changes in behavioural patterns, including April 1949 by Belgium, Canada, Denmark, changes in military spending, disposition of France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, units and their planning or projection on the Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom and ground [3]. The European Union is, by the United States of America. The US excellence, the example of a partially mixed committed itself definitively to European security community that incorporates both security and Winston Churchill's dream of economic and institutional liberalism based creating a united Europe would hide behind on the need to build a space of peace. the Iron Curtain. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was 3.Transatlantic security space analysis created as a defensive alliance. The main context goal of the organization was specified in The transatlantic security space has a double Article 5. It stipulated that an attack against valence. The first is space transatlantic, one or more states on the European or which defines the transatlantic security American continent would be considered as community. The second is the interaction an attack against all signatories. For Lord between the transatlantic space and the Bruce Ismay, NATO's first secretary- adjacent regionsand with the exogenous general, the organization aimed to keep factors that come from them. Each of them “Americans in, the Russians out and the operates according to different rules, both Germans down” [6]. contributing to the security of this space. The Americans, however, saw farther than The concept of a transatlantic security just European rivalries. Under the influence community provides explanations on the of Truman's doctrine, which was based on a processes and functionality within this containment policy, the US sought to attract space. The world around this community allied countries outside or outside Western operates clearly differently, with the outer Europe, such as Greece and Turkey. Under space of security communities being the direct threat of the Soviet Union and primarily subject to the need for security, the lacking British support after the end of the provision of resources and the maximization war, Turkey was glad to accept the US of one's own interests. economic aid and NATO membership, The last global conflict and then, above all, considering it to be a new opportunity to the ideological conflict it has followed, led affirm its European vocation and at the same to institutional rapprochement between the time to ensure security against the Soviet two sides of the Atlantic. The Second World threat. War completely devastated the continent In 1952, Federal Germany became a from west to east. The former great powers, member of the North Atlantic Alliance. This Germany, France and the United Kingdom, inclusion actually finalizes the beginning of destroyed by war, left the place to the new the transatlantic security skeleton. This extra-continental powers, the US and the configuration is the core of transatlantic USSR, and a new kind of conflict, animated security that later on, as the continent to the same degree by ideological democratizes, will support the structure of differences and the desire for continental today. Strategic military considerations supremacy. The “New Order,” thought by prevailed against the scepticism of Western Presidents Roosevelt and Truman, hit the European politicians, fear of possible empty rhetoric of the “communist German rearmament moving to a second fraternity.” Under this ideological coverage, level. This moment signals the end of the the Cold War gained momentum. Inside Franco-German antagonism and finally Western Europe, however, the old fears have deprives the UK of the possibility of not disappeared. intervening in the balance of European

117 power on either side. Only from this moment values in geographically or civilization ally we can talk about the existence of two unconnected regions. Attempts by other transatlantic poles, America and Western power poles to cluster around disparate Europe. Transatlantic security, as it is today, geographic areas based on shared values can, however, be duplicated in other regions, have so far failed in the case of the Russian starting from different circumstances. Federation or China. The attempts of the Arab and Muslim states to create a common 4. The transatlantic security space issue space of the transatlantic caliber have also Today we can talk about two security failed. But the transatlantic model is not communities that are very strong in the without problems. Within it there are two Euro-Atlantic area. The first is a pluralist different types of American and European security community that includes NATO approaches, and experience shows that the member countries, those of the EU plus functionality and expansion of this space Switzerland. Within this community, we are depends, without exception, on achieving a dealing with a semi-amalgamated security common viewpoint and combining security community made up of EU Member States. and economic factors. For the time being, NATO space is identified as a pluralist the security component is an apple of security community, based on its discord in transatlantic relations. intergovernmental character and the The transatlantic space, geographically institutional security role that this alliance defined by both sides of the North Atlantic, began to play since the fall of the Iron is structured around two institutional Curtain. Security specialists felt that NATO components, NATO and the EU. This space should be understood as a security institution includes four types of actors: NATO and EU and not as a mere defensive alliance, and the member states, NATO member states only, transformation of NATO's role is very EU member states only and, last but not important, due to the widening of the scope least, countries that would almost and the area of interest [5]. automatically trigger an intervention, NATO transformation from the alliance into including military, of NATO or EU in case a security institution explains the persistence of security challenges. The concept thus has of the North Atlantic Alliance after the end a static representation of its components and, of the Cold War, and is particularly at the same time, a dynamic one of the noticeable at the level of the relationship relationships and interests it carries with with the environment, admission criteria, the itself outside the security community. The area of functionality, and even security process of integration that takes place in the concepts. Transformation is even more transatlantic space requires the transatlantic apparent in comparison to military alliances security community to act as a “common such as the Shanghai Cooperation body” in the face of external threats. In fact, Organization (SCO) or the Collective this integration has been achieved only at Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). different levels, and for this reason, the The transatlantic security space now offers security behavior of the actors in this space the image of a multi-layer community in is heteroclimate. The major differences which their spatiality and functionality between the national capabilities, their overlap and, in some cases, intertwine. The contribution to common security, the transatlantic relationship is one of the few different neighborhoods faced by the actors, that can be called strategic because of the the differences in strategic culture inherited degree of civilization, military, and over the course of history, the different economic integration. economic and energy resources, the different Conceptually, the transatlantic space is the social structure of the states and the only one able to resize by propagating its functioning of the institutions in this

118 community security contribute to the lack of In the context of transatlantic security, a homogeneity of security and defense special case is represented by non-aligned policies. military countries, countries which, although not part of NATO, enjoy indirect protection 5. Contributions to transatlantic security from this organization. These countries, in Transatlantic security encompasses a large turn, have an important influence on number of state actors that are joined by European security and especially on EU supra-state actors in different integration or enlargement. From the group of these cooperation relations. No transatlantic countries, Sweden is the country with the security analysis can circumvent the US, the most powerful military-industrial potential. world's leading economic and military Sweden is one of the most powerful states in power, the most important partner within the EU's military point of view, investing NATO, deeply involved in the European more in defense budget, research and security. Despite significant material and development than Italy or the Netherlands. material cuts, the US still maintains a At the same time, through foreign policy significant number of bases in Western oriented to the “human” security dimension, Europe and, following NATO enlargement Sweden contributes to the development of a in recent years, in south-eastern Europe and non-military approach to security issues [7]. Turkey. Together, by their mere presence on An important security actor in the immediate the continent, they are a solid deterrent to the vicinity of the transatlantic space is the number and quality of troops and their level Russian Federation. Located in the Euro- of equipment. To this itis added a nuclear Atlantic security area, Russia is the main deterrent component that remained continental security interlocutor, partner in operational after the end of the Cold War. NATO, a major supplier of energy resources The naval forces located in the and, last but not least, its own sphere of Mediterranean are putting the US at the top influence in the former Soviet space in of the list of European naval forces. Europe, the Caucasus and CentralAsia. Germany has a special status for several Transatlantic security interests are reasons. Having long been a status a military competing with the Russian Federation in occupied country, Germany was received this area due to several factors, the most with reservations in NATO. The defeat important of which is energy (Caspian suffered in the Second World War imposed resources are an alternative to Russian a special status for Germany on civil- hydrocarbons). military relations. Germany is the only The Russian Federation considered the European country whose army is former Soviet republics as part of its numerically limited to a maximum of immediate neighborhood and acted 370,000 people in peacetime, a figure consistently to re-establish its authority over imposed by third countries. At the same the governments of the new independent time, Germany is the first economy in republics. After the loss of the three Baltic Europe, with a highly military-industrial republics, Russia turned its attention to complex. Germany is a supporter of the Ukraine, Moldova and Belarus, but also to development of a common European the Caucasus and Central Asian republics. security component and a supporter of Thus, Russia pursued its interests in its area NATO and of the American involvement in of influence, capturing in part or in full the continental security. In addition to its direct gas distribution systems in the Caspian Sea influence, Germany also influences the and imposing the purchase prices in the perception of other countries on security former Soviet countries and the selling price issues. to Europe. This strategy managed to resuscitate the Russian economy and the

119 immediate consequence was the significant security component in the EU vision, and increase of the budget for defense and the have to support its civilian efforts. This increase of the military expenses. vision signifies the desire not to limit Iran, a state with significant geostrategic European intervention only to peace- potential, is in the same area that, through building missions but to extend them to the policy of its nuclear ambitions, humanitarian, economic, military and legal influences the security situation in Europe as actions. well as in the Middle East. The relationship Civil-military operations required the between the Russian Federation and Iran development of military capabilities that complicates the security situation, especially could be deployed in military operations through the competition for the theaters. True to its approach, the EU took establishment of a regional leader, a advantage of the concept of Artemis, the EU competition involving Turkey as well. Last Military Rapid Response Concept but not least, the very good economic (EUMRRC), to develop rapid response relations between the Russian Federation capabilities in the form of Battlegroups. The and Turkey could considerably affect concept also envisaged the development of transatlantic security and Western interests logistical support, aerodrome, desant and in this area. sustainability logistics facilities [8]. The EU The transatlantic space is evolving has demonstrated that it can organize a continuously in terms of capabilities. The major civilian mission to work in a EU has evolved into a normative power in multinational framework. Civilian missions which the values of democracy, human are joined by military missions such as rights and good governance have taken the Concordia and Congo. The EU has deployed place of military and military approaches. civilian missions in Bosnia-Herzegovina, For years, the EU has been in a process of Georgia, Iraq, monitoring missions at the development and at the same time of border between Moldova and Ukraine, Gaza, integrating its own defense capabilities, Afghanistan or Georgia. What is important is pursuing, through its policies, to streamline that the EU has managed to set up and defense spending and to develop cooperation manage a pool of civilian experts from between the various components of the diverse fields, able to impose and support European defense industry. The idea of a objectives aimed at improving the common European defense industry market functioning of state structures in the states has, however, hit many national obstacles. where it intervened. Civilian capabilities For these reasons, defense remains the last have been developed through the adoption national “bastion” in a Europe where by the EU Council of the Guidelines for the sovereignty is increasingly limited. Civilian Operations in Crisis Management The enlargement of the EU towards the East on 17 June 2007 (Council of the European cemented the image of a Europe with Union, 2007). The document clarifies alternative security interpretations, in which command and control structures in civilian norms and values became the current crisis management operations, assigning currency of discourse leaders in Brussels, functions, roles and responsibilities to the and the consistent respect of values Civilian Operations Commander [8]. determines the credibility and external European civilian capabilities, by their influence of the EU. This is to try to build a multinational nature and the ability to work positive image of interventions and in cooperation with experts from other intentions in security issues. Mainly, countries, can be considered as a success Europeans have dedicated themselves to both from an institutional point of view and civilian missions, focusing on the from the point of view of mission results. humanitarian nature of interventions, the The development of European civilian

120 capabilities allows bringing together the core some cases, intertwine but, due to the and periphery of the transatlantic space in an different criteria of training and functioning, integrative manner closer to the European are often inconsistent. In turn, the two idea than the collaborative form of NATO communities focus on power poles, the military capabilities. Unfortunately, the EU United States for the pluralist security is reluctant to make available to American community, and the core of the partners through NATO the civil expertise industrialized countries of Western Europe, gained in recent years amid disagreements Germany, France, and the UK for the semi- about the different strategic visions of the amalgamated security community. two transatlantic partners. The two security communities and the two power poles react differently to the security 6. Conclusions environment, each of them having political Making a comprehensive picture of and geopolitical interests that are not always transatlantic security capabilities is hard to the object of the internal relationship. In the figure out. The issue of transatlantic security Transatlantic Security Area, the complexity concerns a significant number of policy and number of formal and informal actors is researchers and analysts who, through their so that the chances of obtaining positive work, provide a publicly documented picture results in foreign policy and security of security and foreign policy relations at approaches depend on a set of appropriate regional and international level. In analyzing circumstances that exist for a limited time. the transatlantic security space, it is The process of expanding the Union and necessary to identify the role and NATO to the east has been criticized on contributions of national and supra-national numerous occasions by the Russian actors in this space to highlight its Federation and even ignored by a too busy complexity, given by the number of actors Western Europe with the Balkan crisis, the involved and by the extent of the war on terror, or the integration process of operational, strategic and political the new democracies in central and Eastern correlations that take place. Europe. Not once in the process of creating We have highlighted the importance of own and distinct security institutions and developing a theoretical analysis framework policies of transatlantic ones, the EU ignored that is capable of reaching a number of the interests of its partners both within the approaches, theories and interpretations transatlantic community and beyond. If capable of putting the analysis under misunderstandings and suspicions between consideration and the actors subject to it. transatlantic partners can be resolved Within the generic security community, through an expanded dialogue, relations with there is a pluralist security community partners outside the transatlantic community coalesced around the US and NATO, and a are more difficult to manage. semi-amalgamated security community, the EU. The two communities overlap and, in

References [1] Wagenen, Richard W. v. (1952), Research in the International Organization Field: Somenotes on a possible focus, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. [2] Deutsch, Karl W., Burell, Sidney A., Kann, Robert A., Lee Jr., Maurice, Lichterman, Martin, Lindgren, Raymond E., Loewenheim, Francis L., Wagenen, Richard W. Van (1957), Political Community and the Nord Atlantic Area - International organization in thelight of historical experience, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

121

[3] Adler, Emanuel, Barnett, Michael (1998a), “A framework for the study of security communities”, în Emanuel Adler, Barnett, Michael, (eds.), Security Communities,Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. [4] Walt, Stephen M. (1985), “Alliance Formation and the Balance of World Power”, International Security, 9(4). [5] Navari, Cornelia (2008), “Liberalism”, în Paul D. Williams, (ed.), Security Studies – An introduction, Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 29-43. [6] Lindley-French, Julien (2007), A Chronology of European Security and Defence 1945- 2007,Oxford: Oxford University Press. [7] Eriksson, Arita (2006), “The Building of a Military Capability in the European Union – Some internal and external implications”, în Jan Hallenberg, Karlsson, Hakan, (eds.), Changing Transatlantic Security Relations - Do the US, the EU and Russia form anew strategic triangle?, Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 44-62. [8] Glière, Catherine (2007), EU Security and Defence: Core Documents 2007, Paris: EUISS - European Union Institute for Security Studies.

122