Friends, Foes, and Future Directions: U.S. Partnerships in a Turbulent World: Strategic Rethink

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Friends, Foes, and Future Directions: U.S. Partnerships in a Turbulent World: Strategic Rethink STRATEGIC RETHINK FRIENDS, FOES, AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS U.S. Partnerships in a Turbulent World Hans Binnendijk C O R P O R A T I O N For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR1210 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-0-8330-9220-5 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2016 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. 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.html. 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 This report is the third in a series of volumes in which RAND explores the elements of a national strategy for the conduct of U.S. foreign policy in a fast-changing world. The initial volume in this Strategic Rethink series, Choices for America in a Turbulent World, examined the most critical decisions the next president is likely to face, and thus likely to be debated during the 2016 election campaign. It covered two global issues, climate change and the world economy; assessed potential direc- tions for national defense; evaluated issues related to counterterrorism and cybersecurity; and explored U.S. strategic choices in three key regions, Europe, the Middle East and South Asia, and East Asia. The subsequent studies in this series take up where the initial volume left off and examine in more detail a range of long-term policy issues and organizational, financial, and diplomatic challenges that will confront senior U.S. officials now, in 2017, and beyond, including national defense, institutional reform of the U.S. system for managing national security, reducing strategic surprise, and the global economy. This volume focuses on U.S. friends and potential foes, and ana- lyzes how alliances and partnerships may evolve to meet the diverse potential challenges to regional and global security. It considers the degree to which the United States wishes to be assertive, to collab- orate, or to retrench, given the demands of the emerging strategic environment. This volume should be of interest to defense and foreign policy decisionmakers in the United States and allied nations, analysts, the media, the staff and advisers to the 2016 presidential candidates, non- iii iv Friends, Foes, and Future Directions governmental organizations, and others concerned about the role of the United States and other nations in advancing global security. This project results from the RAND Corporation’s Investment in People and Ideas program. Support for this program is provided, in part, by philanthropic contributions from donors and by the indepen- dent research and development provisions of RAND’s contracts for the operation of its U.S. Department of Defense federally funded research and development centers. Special appreciation goes to the Hauser Foundation for its generous gift in support of the project and to Rita Hauser for encouraging RAND to undertake it. For more information on the International Security and Defense Policy Center, see www.rand.org/nsrd/ndri/centers/isdp or contact the director (contact information is provided on the web page). Contents Preface ............................................................................. iii Figures and Tables ............................................................... ix Executive Summary ............................................................. xi Acknowledgments .............................................................. xix CHAPTER ONE Introduction ....................................................................... 1 CHAPTER TWO The Partnership Setting ......................................................... 3 The Historical Importance of U.S. Partnerships ............................... 3 Global Trends Affecting U.S. Partnerships ..................................... 5 Partnerships Increasingly Require U.S. Political Flexibility ................... 7 Alternative U.S. Approaches to Partnership Engagement ..................... 9 CHAPTER THREE Anatomy of the Potential Adversaries........................................15 China ...............................................................................15 Russia .............................................................................. 24 North Korea .......................................................................29 Iran..................................................................................32 Salafi Jihadists .....................................................................35 Cooperation Among Potential Adversaries ....................................39 These Adversaries Create Vulnerable Partners .................................41 Back to Bipolarity? ............................................................... 43 v vi Friends, Foes, and Future Directions Formidable Adversaries Make U.S. Retrenchment Difficult on Its Partners ....................................................................... 44 A Strategy for Dealing with Potential Adversaries ............................45 CHAPTER FOUR U.S. Constraints Limit Assertiveness ........................................47 U.S. Attitudes Toward Global Responsibility .................................47 Shifting Global Defense Spending ..............................................49 Is the United States Overextended? .............................................52 U.S. Power to Coerce ............................................................ 54 U.S. Energy Exports to Partners ................................................57 The Impact of Budgetary Constraints and Public Attitude ..................58 CHAPTER FIVE European Partners and the “Free Rider” Problem ........................61 Paradigm Lost .....................................................................61 Vulnerable Partners ...............................................................63 Declining Capabilities and Will in Europe ................................... 68 Three Pivotal Partners: The United Kingdom, Germany, and Turkey ......74 Can Venus Become Mars? ...................................................... 80 Assessing the Historical “Free Rider” Problem ............................... 84 Transatlantic Trade and Security ............................................... 90 Europe in North Africa, the Middle East, and Asia ..........................91 A Regional Strategy for Europe ................................................ 94 CHAPTER SIX Asian Partners and Inadequate Security Structures ..................... 97 The U.S. Pivot to Asia ........................................................... 97 Strategic Dangers in Asia ........................................................ 98 Areas of Tension and Vulnerable Nations .................................... 100 Asia’s Security Architecture Is Underdeveloped ............................. 105 Two Pivotal Partners: Japan and India ....................................... 107 The Trans-Pacific Partnership ................................................. 114 Military Options for Dealing with China ................................... 115 Potential Strategies for Managing China ..................................... 117 A Regional Strategy for Asia ................................................... 120 Contents vii CHAPTER SEVEN In Search of a Middle East Partnership Strategy ........................ 123 The Middle East Today ......................................................... 124 Vulnerable American Partners ................................................. 126 Layers of Chaos and Contradiction ........................................... 128 Pivotal Partners: Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan ..................... 131 Russia Joins the Fray ............................................................ 136 Alternatives for a New Middle East Strategy ................................ 137 CHAPTER EIGHT Conclusion: Choosing an Approach........................................ 141 Abbreviations ................................................................... 149 References ....................................................................... 151 Figures and Tables Figures 3.1. Potential U.S. Adversaries ..........................................16 6.1. Disputed Regions in the South China Sea ...................... 101 6.2. East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone............... 102 6.3. ROK-DPRK Maritime Boundaries .............................. 105 6.4. Subjective and Objective Models of Reality .................... 120 7.1. Muslim Population Map: Shi’ites as a Percentage of the Muslim Population ...............................................
Recommended publications
  • Minsk II a Fragile Ceasefire
    Briefing 16 July 2015 Ukraine: Follow-up of Minsk II A fragile ceasefire SUMMARY Four months after leaders from France, Germany, Ukraine and Russia reached a 13-point 'Package of measures for the implementation of the Minsk agreements' ('Minsk II') on 12 February 2015, the ceasefire is crumbling. The pressure on Kyiv to contribute to a de-escalation and comply with Minsk II continues to grow. While Moscow still denies accusations that there are Russian soldiers in eastern Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin publicly admitted in March 2015 to having invaded Crimea. There is mounting evidence that Moscow continues to play an active military role in eastern Ukraine. The multidimensional conflict is eroding the country's stability on all fronts. While the situation on both the military and the economic front is acute, the country is under pressure to conduct wide-reaching reforms to meet its international obligations. In addition, Russia is challenging Ukraine's identity as a sovereign nation state with a wide range of disinformation tools. Against this backdrop, the international community and the EU are under increasing pressure to react. In the following pages, the current status of the Minsk II agreement is assessed and other recent key developments in Ukraine and beyond examined. This briefing brings up to date that of 16 March 2015, 'Ukraine after Minsk II: the next level – Hybrid responses to hybrid threats?'. In this briefing: • Minsk II – still standing on the ground? • Security-related implications of the crisis • Russian disinformation
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Hybrid Tactics in Georgia
    Russian Hybrid Tactics in Georgia Niklas Nilsson SILK ROAD PAPER January 2018 Russian Hybrid Tactics in Georgia Niklas Nilsson © Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program – A Joint Transatlantic Research and Policy Center American Foreign Policy Council, 509 C St NE, Washington D.C. Institute for Security and Development Policy, V. Finnbodavägen 2, Stockholm-Nacka, Sweden www.silkroadstudies.org “Russian Hybrid Tactics in Georgia” is a Silk Road Paper published by the Central Asia- Caucasus Institute and Silk Road Studies Program, Joint Center. The Silk Road Papers Series is the Occasional Paper series of the Joint Center, and addresses topical and timely subjects. The Joint Center is a transatlantic independent and non-profit research and policy center. It has offices in Washington and Stockholm and is affiliated with the American Foreign Policy Council and the Institute for Security and Development Policy. It is the first institution of its kind in Europe and North America, and is firmly established as a leading research and policy center, serving a large and diverse community of analysts, scholars, policy-watchers, business leaders, and journalists. The Joint Center is at the forefront of research on issues of conflict, security, and development in the region. Through its applied research, publications, research cooperation, public lectures, and seminars, it functions as a focal point for academic, policy, and public discussion regarding the region. The opinions and conclusions expressed in this study are those of
    [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: hanebrin@history.rutgers.edu Vice-President*: Emese Ivan, St. John’s U., Term: 2010-2011. Email: emese.ivan@gmail.com Secretary-Treasurer: Susan Glanz, St. John’s U., Term: 2010-2011. Email: glanzs@stjohns.edu Executive Committee: Steve Jobbitt, California State U.-Fullerton., Term: 2010-2011. Email: sjobbitt@fullerton.edu Catherine Portuges, U of Mass. -Amherst, Term: 2010-2011. Email: portuges@complit.umass.edu Julia Bock, Long Island U., Term: 2009-2010. Email: Julia.Bock@liu.edu 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, hanebrin@history.rutgers.edu Arpad von Klimo, aklimo@zedat.fu-berlin.de Mark Pittaway, M.D.Pittaway@open.ac.uk 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]
  • Israel: Background and U.S. Relations in Brief
    Israel: Background and U.S. Relations in Brief Updated January 27, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R44245 SUMMARY R44245 Israel: Background and U.S. Relations in Brief January 27, 2021 The following matters are of particular significance to U.S.-Israel relations. Jim Zanotti Domestic issues: March 2021 election. After the collapse of its power-sharing Specialist in Middle government in December 2020, Israel is scheduled to hold another election for its Eastern Affairs Knesset (parliament) on March 23, 2021. The election will be Israel’s fourth in the past two years—a frequency without parallel in the country’s history. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has managed to maintain power despite an ongoing criminal trial on corruption charges that is set to resume in February 2021. Netanyahu apparently hopes to create a coalition government that will grant him legal immunity or to remain indefinitely as caretaker prime minister (as he did from December 2018 to May 2020) by preventing anyone from forming a coalition without him and his Likud party. Palestinians and Arab state normalization. On the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Trump Administration policies largely sided with Israeli positions, thus alienating Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Chairman and Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas. In the second half of 2020, the Administration pivoted from its January 2020 Israeli-Palestinian peace proposal to helping Israel reach agreements—known as the Abraham Accords—on normalizing its relations with the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco. In connection with its deal with the UAE, Israel agreed in August 2020 to suspend plans to annex part of the West Bank, though announcements related to settlement activity have accelerated since then.
    [Show full text]
  • “Radical Islam: the Challenge in Pakistan & Beyond” Ambassador
    ABRIDGED TRANSCRIPT “Radical Islam: The Challenge in Pakistan & Beyond” Ambassador Husain Haqqani Pakistani Ambassador to the U.S. Jeffrey Goldberg The Atlantic April 2011 MICHAEL CROMARTIE: Our speaker is the Pakistani Ambassador to the United States. He’s the author of a highly praised academic book called Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military. He is a former journalist, but also a former academic at Boston University where he was an associate professor at the Center for International Relations. We could not have anyone both as a practitioner and as a scholar better to speak to our subject this morning than Ambassador Haqqani. AMBASSADOR HUSAIN HAQQANI: Thank you very much, Michael. Let me just start by saying that there are two or three things about Radical Islam that need to be understood and are not all widely understood in the United States. Radical Islam has to be distinguished from Islam as practiced by over a billion people. One billion Muslims are not radical, and that needs to be understood, nor have many of the things that are associated with Radical Islam been part of normal Muslim practice for 1,400 years. There is a tendency in the United States these days to try and sort of link things that are happening in the modern times to things that happened in the medieval times, ignoring the fact that in the medieval times whether you were Christian or Muslim, you behaved a certain way which you do not do in the modern times. The Radical Islam phenomenon has to be understood in its actual context, which is political and not religious.
    [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]
  • Reducing Nuclear Risks in Europe a FRAMEWORK for ACTION
    Reducing A FrAmework For Action Nuclear Risks e dited by Steve AndreASen in Europe And iSAbelle williAmS Featured essay: “the race between ­Cooperation and catastrophe” by sam NuNN Reducing Nuclear Risks in Europe a FrameWork For acTIoN Edit eD by STeve aNDreaSeN aND ISabelle WIllIamS Featured essay: “The race between ­Cooperation and catastrophe” by sam NuNN Nuclear ThreaT INITIaTIve Washington, D.c. t he Nuclear threat INItIatIve NTI is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization with a mission to strengthen global security by reducing the risk of use and preventing the spread of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, and to work to build the trust, transparency, and security that are preconditions to the ultimate fulfillment of the Non-Proliferation Treaty’s goals and ambitions. www.nti.org The views expressed in this publication are the authors’ own and do not reflect those of NTI, its Board of Directors, or other institutions with which the authors are associated. © 2011 the Nuclear Threat Initiative All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval sys- tem, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without written permission of the publisher and copyright holder. c over phoTo oF a u.S. aIr Force F-16 FIghTINg FalcoN aIrcraFT courTeSy oF The u.S. aIr Force. phoTo by maSTer SgT. WIllIam greer/releaSeD. ii T able oF coNTeNTS Acknowledgments v Authors and Reviewers vii summary coNteNt executive summary: Reassembling a More Credible NATO Nuclear Policy and Posture 1 Joan Rohlfing, Isabelle Williams, and Steve Andreasen featured essay: The Race Between Cooperation and Catastrophe 8 Sam Nunn chaPters 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The American Hungarian Federation, Inc. 1) Who Is Doing What?
    The American Hungarian Federation, Inc. THE HUNGARIAN–AMERICAN: The 2nd & 3rd Generations, Newsletter #1, Info #9 Happy New Year in 2004! Contents (Clickable Links) 1) Who is Doing What? ................................................................................................................................ 1 2) The Hungarian Caucus in the US Congress! ............................................................................................. 3 3) AMSz – Washington: Recent Activities.................................................................................................... 4 4) Calls for Help!.......................................................................................................................................... 6 A) Documentary on the 1956 Revolution Moves Forward! ....................................................................... 6 B) New Church and 1956 Memorial in Ohio ............................................................................................. 8 5) Kopjafaink + + + +................................................................................................................................... 8 1) Who is Doing What? · A novemberi New Brunswick-i osszejovetel nem rendezte hivatalosan az 50 eves evforduloval kapcsolatos szervezeti felepitest, es az ezt szervezo AMSz. Ideiglenes Bizottsaga megalakult. Jelentkezni lehet az irodaban, Dr. Szilagyi Palnal avagy Bryan Dawson S.-nal. A Bizottsag eddigi tagjai: Professor Laszlo Gutay, Liptak Bela, Lassan Gyorgy, Lovas Gyorgy, Marer
    [Show full text]
  • Pakistan's Terrorism Dilemma
    14 HUSAIN HAQQANI Pakistan’s Terrorism Dilemma For more than a decade, Pakistan has been accused of sup- porting terrorism, primarily due to its support for militants opposing Indian rule in the disputed Himalayan territory of Jammu and Kashmir. Until September 11, 2001, Islamabad was also the principal backer of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Although Pakistan has now become a key U.S. ally in the war against terrorism, it is still seen both as a target and staging ground for terrorism. General Pervez Musharraf ’s military regime abandoned its alliance with the Taliban immediately after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington. U.S. forces were allowed the use of Pakistani air bases for operations in Afghanistan. Pakistani intelligence services provided, and continue to provide, valuable information in hunting down Taliban and al-Qaeda escapees. The Pakistani military is cur- rently working with U.S. law enforcement officials in tracking down terrorists in the lawless tribal areas bordering Afghanistan. In a major policy speech on January 12, 2002, Musharraf announced measures to limit the influence of Islamic militants at home, including those previously described by him as “Kashmiri free- dom fighters.” “No organizations will be able to carry out terrorism 351 352 HUSAIN HAQQANI on the pretext of Kashmir,” he declared. “Whoever is involved with such acts in the future will be dealt with strongly whether they come from inside or outside the country.”1 Musharraf ’s supporters declared his speech as revolutionary.2 He echoed the sentiment of most Pakistanis when he said, “violence and terrorism have been going on for years and we are weary and sick of this Kalashnikov culture … The day of reckoning has come.” After the speech, the Musharraf regime clamped down on domes- tic terrorist groups responsible for sectarian killings.3 But there is still considerable ambivalence in Pakistan’s attitude toward the Kashmiri militants.
    [Show full text]
  • America's Longest
    AMERICA’S LONGEST WAR I. Why did the U.S. send troops to Vietnam? A. Ho Chi Minh defeated the French in 1954 and Vietnam was split into North and South. B. North Vietnam was led by Communist Ho Chi Minh- South Vietnam was led by U.S. backed Diem. C. Many South Vietnamese opposed U.S. backed Diem. D. Vietcong were South Vietnamese guerrillas who were backed by the North and fought against the South’s government E. President John F. Kennedy believed in the Domino Theory, the idea that if one Southeast Asian country fell to communism, the rest would also, like a row of dominos. F. In 1961, he sent military advisors to help Diem fight the Vietcong G. 1963- Lyndon Johnson became President and sent more aid to South Vietnam H. 1964- Gulf of Tonkin Resolution- after a U.S. ship is attacked, Congress passed this which allowed President Johnson to take “all necessary measures” to prevent another attack I. Thus, the war escalated and by 1968 there were over 500,000 troops fighting in the Vietnam War. J. American soldiers faced many hardships fighting a “guerilla war” in jungle terrain, going on search and destroy missions. A Viet Cong prisoner awaits interrogation at a Special Forces detachment in Thuong Duc, Vietnam, 15 miles (25 km) west of Danang, January 1967 Troops of the 1st Air Cavalry Division check houses while patrolling an area 25 miles (40 km) north of Qui Nhon as part of Operation Thayer, October 1966. The mission was designed to clear out a mountain range where two battalions of North Vietnamese were believed to be preparing for an attack on an airstrip.
    [Show full text]
  • NATO Partnerships and the Arab Spring: Achievements and Perspectives for the 2012 Chicago Summit by Isabelle François
    TRANSATLANTIC PERSPECTIVES 1 NATO Partnerships and the Arab Spring: Achievements and Perspectives for the 2012 Chicago Summit by Isabelle François Center for Transatlantic Security Studies Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University Center for Transatlantic Security Studies Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University The Center for Transatlantic Security Studies (CTSS) serves as a national and international focal point and resource center for multi- disciplinary research on issues relating to transatlantic security. The Center provides recommendations to senior U.S. and inter- national government and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) officials, publishes its research, and conducts a broad range of out- reach activities to inform the broader U.S. national and transatlantic security community. CTSS develops and conducts education and orientation programs for U.S. and allied military officers, government civilians, and interna- tional partners on issues relating to NATO and transatlantic security and defense. In partnership with both U.S. and international govern- ments and with academic and private sector institutions engaged in transatlantic security issues, the Center builds robust and mutually beneficial relationships. Cover: Chicago Skyline from Lake Michigan Photo by Esben Ehrenskjold NATO Partnerships and the Arab Spring: Achievements and Perspectives for the 2012 Chicago Summit NATO Partnerships and the Arab Spring: Achievements and Perspectives for the 2012 Chicago Summit By Isabelle François Center for Transatlantic Security Studies Institute for National Strategic Studies Transatlantic Perspectives, No. 1 National Defense University Press Washington, D.C. December 2011 Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the contributors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Defense Department or any other agency of the Federal Government.
    [Show full text]
  • Info Document on Nato Summit
    214 SESA 18 E Original: English Annual Session KEY OUTCOMES OF THE SUMMIT OF NATO HEADS OF STATE AND GOVERNMENT HELD IN BRUSSELS, BELGIUM, ON 11-12 JULY 2018 Information document www.nato-pa.int October 2018 214 SESA 18 E TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 II. NATO’S MISSION & VALUES .............................................................................. 2 III. THREAT ENVIRONMENT.................................................................................... 3 IV. PRIORITIES ......................................................................................................... 3 A. BURDEN SHARING ............................................................................................. 3 B. DETERRENCE AND COLLECTIVE DEFENCE, AND RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA ................................................................................................................ 7 1. Relations with Russia ........................................................................................... 7 2. Collective Defence and Deterrence ...................................................................... 7 C. PROJECTING STABILITY AND COMBATTING TERRORISM .......................... 10 D. MODERNISING THE ALLIANCE ....................................................................... 11 E. NATO-EU COOPERATION ................................................................................ 12 V. 70TH ANNIVERSARY AND 2019 .......................................................................
    [Show full text]