DOCSLIB.ORG

Nato Warsaw Summit Time

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nato Warsaw Summit Time SPRING/SUMMER 2016 SPRING/SUMMER NATO WARSAW SUMMIT TIME TO ACT Anders Fogh Antoni Macierewicz Peter Brookes Rasmussen SECURITY IN A NEW NATO FOR A NATO FIT EUROPE - HOW A NEW AMERICAN FOR PURPOSE TO CHANGE THE ADMINISTRATION NEGATIVE TREND EDITORIAL Tomasz Poręba Tomasz Poręba is a Member of the European Parliament and President of New Direction – The Foundation for European Reform. NATO THE FOUNDATION OF EUROPEAN SECURITY ontrary to popular belief wave of migrants and refugees prevailing since the end towards Europe. Almost all of our of the Cold War, the end neighbourhood is touched by open of the military stand- or frozen conflict, unrest and civil Coff between NATO and Soviet war, whilst exposed to the threat of Union did not mark a new era terrorism. of peace and safety. Under the rule of Vladimir Putin, Russia is Both Europe and NATO face trying to once again assert itself unprecedented threats on many as a world power and regain lost different fronts. These range from influence and prestige by pursuing conventional warfare through an increasingly aggressive and the expansion of terrorist groups, revanchist policy. This coincides radicalisation of our own citizens with the fact that while doing so, to information warfare and the Kremlin is seeking to distract propaganda fuelled mainly by Russian citizens from the country’s the Russia regime. Therefore, the growing internal problems. Warsaw Summit is timely and Turmoil in the Middle East and should be used as an opportunity North Africa, civil war in Syria, to decisively respond to these new and conflicts in Yemen and Libya, forms of threats, which include has brought an unprecedented hybrid warfare and cyber attacks. THE “WEAPONISATION OF INFORMATION” BY THE KREMLIN IS A WELL-THOUGHT THROUGH AND WELL-FUNDED STRATEGY AND SHOULD BE REGARDED AS A THREAT EQUAL TO MORE TRADITIONAL ONES. Despite predictions by numerous that Moscow wanted to change NATO’s Eastern flank and to project the need to dismantle terrorist cells coming to Europe. NATO is aware of the problem and experts that future warfare the political configuration in stability beyond our borders. Today, operating in our own countries. its Stratcom Centre of Excellence in will predominantly belong to Europe and move towards separate not only Ukraine, but also Moldova Last but not least, we have recently Latvia does a great job at exposing special forces and not tanks and agreements between Russia and and Georgia are under threat. Another directly linked threat is the witnessed the revival of a threat Russian lies and manipulation. artillery, the situation in Eastern individual, chosen countries. spread of radicalisation amongst which has already been very Ukraine (and to some degree in However, Moscow’s vision of The second key challenge for the young people. Europe’s population creatively used by the Soviet Union In this publication, we have brought Syria) clearly shows that this is divide et impera rule was much security of NATO countries is is suffering from terrorist attacks before - information warfare together key decision makers and not the case, at least not yet. The broader than just diplomacy. terrorist groups such as Daesh or led by radicals and militants whom targeting both NATO and the EU. The security and defence experts, to threat posed by Russia is much What has followed – including the Al Qaeda. NATO should be ready have been either trained abroad strategic communications employed provide their views ahead of the bigger than it has been since the annexation of Crimea, aggression to militarily counter and fight or have been recruited by terrorist by Russia are not only undermining crucial Warsaw NATO Summit end of the Cold War. As Antoni against Ukraine and intervention terrorist groups which use partisan organisations in Europe and security on Europe’s Eastern border, in Warsaw. The importance Macierewicz, Polish Minister in Syria on the side of Assad regime tactics and often melt into civilian America. These individuals often it is also targeting our partners like of this Summit should not be of Defence, underlined when - clearly shows that the Kremlin is populations or use human shields have European citizenship and are Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova. The underestimated. Wales 2014, saw talking about preparation for determined to pursue its goal of on their own soil. This requires therefore much more difficult to “weaponisation of information” the Alliance change direction to face the NATO Summit in Warsaw, in working on different fronts and a completely different way of track. We also have to remember by the Kremlin is a well-thought a more dangerous world. Warsaw August 2009, one year after the using a variety of tools. Therefore thinking about warfare, especially that experienced radical Islamist through and well-funded strategy 2016 will decide if the needed level meticulously planned aggression the Warsaw Summit should be used in cities and densely populated fighters may - and almost certainly and should be regarded as a threat of support and commitment to this against Georgia, Putin had said as a key platform to strengthen areas. Another side of this coin is do - infiltrate the waves of refugees equal to more traditional ones. change is fully carried out. ■ TABLE OF CONTENTS 14 18 26 28 Antoni Macierewicz Geoffrey Van Orden MEP Anders Fogh Rasmussen Anna Fotyga MEP SECURITY IN EUROPE TIME FOR NATO TO A NATO FIT FOR PURPOSE INDIVISIBLE SECURITY – HOW TO CHANGE THE NEGATIVE TREND GET MORE SERIOUS NATO MEMBERS & PARTNERS 8 NATO WORKING STRUCTURES 10 10 THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT NATO 12 NATO ON DUTY 24 WORLD DEFENCE BUDGETS 2014 30 EXPENDITURE LEVELS IN NATO 31 NATO DEFENCE SPENDING AS GDP 36 NATO-RUSSIA RELATIONS - THE BACKGROUND 42 ALLIED LAND COMMAND IN EUROPE 46 RUSSIA’S TOP 5 MYTHS ABOUT NATO 53 32 44 48 Peter Brookes Dr Roberts Zile MEP Dr Przemysław Żurawski vel Grajewski A NEW NATO FOR A NEW WISHFUL THINKING RUSSIA AS AN EXPORTER OF INSTABILITY AMERICAN ADMINISTRATION VERSUS REALITY New Direction – The Foundation for European Reform, a non-for-profit organisation (ASBL/VZW) registered in Belgium and partly funded www.europeanreform.org follow us @europeanreform by the European Parliament. Registered Office: Rue Du Trône 4, Brussels, 1000, Belgium. Director General: Naweed Khan. The European Parliament and New Direction assume no responsibility for the opinions expressed in this publication. Sole liability lies with the author. NATO MEMBERS & PARTNERS NATO members Partnership for Peace partners Mediterranean Dialogue partners Istanbul Cooperation Initiative partners Partners across the globe HEADS OF STATE ALBANIA BELGIUM BULGARIA CANADA CROATIA CZECH REPUBLIC DENMARK ESTONIA FRANCE GERMANY GREECE HUNGARY ICELAND ITALY Bujar Nishani King Philippe Rosen Plevneliev Queen Elizabeth II Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović Miloš Zeman Queen Margrethe II Toomas Hendrik Ilves François Hollande Joachim Gauck Prokopis Pavlopoulos János Áder Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson Sergio Mattarella LATVIA LITHUANIA LUXEMBOURG NETHERLANDS NORWAY POLAND PORTUGAL ROMANIA SLOVAK REPUBLIC SLOVENIA SPAIN TURKEY UNITED KINGDOM USA Raimonds Vējonis Dalia Grybauskaitė le Grand-Duc Henri King Willem-Alexander King Harald V Andrzej Duda Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa Klaus Werner Iohannis Andrej Kiska Borut Pahor King Felipe VI Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Queen Elizabeth II Barack H. Obama 8 9 NATO WORKING STRUCTURES MEMBER COUNTRIES NATO DELEGATIONS MILITARY REPRESENTATIVES NUCLEAR NORTH PLANNING ATLANTIC GROUP COUNCIL MILITARY International COMMITTEE Military Staff SECRETARY GENERAL SUBORDINATE International Staff COMMITTEES ALLIED ALLIED COMMAND COMMAND AGENCIES OPERATIONS TRANSFORMATION Integrated Military Command Structure 10 11 NATO funding THINGS YOU NEED TO Member countries make direct and indirect contributions to the costs of running NATO and implementing its policies and activities. The greatest part of these contributions is indirect and comes through the Allies’ KNOW ABOUT NATO participation in NATO-led operations. Member countries incur the costs involved whenever they volunteer forces to participate in a NATO operation. For example the cost for providing a fighter jet lies with the nation 6 that makes it available. Direct contributions to NATO’s common budgets are made by members in accordance with an agreed cost-sharing formula based on relative Gross National Income. These contributions finance 10 the costs of NATO’s integrated structures, collectively-owned equipment or installations. An international Security Hub Deterrence In the five decades after World War II, the Alliance successfully prevented the Cold War from becoming The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is one of the world’s major international institutions. It is a “hot”. Under the security umbrella provided by NATO, the people of Europe, Canada, and the United States political and military Alliance of 28 member countries from Europe and North America. The Alliance takes enjoyed the benefits of democratic choice, the rule of law and substantial economic growth. The Alliance’s all its decisions by consensus. Every member country, no matter how large or small, has an equal say in deterrence is based on an appropriate mix of nuclear and conventional capabilities, which remain a core 7 1 discussions and decisions. Member states are committed to individual liberty, democracy, human rights and element of NATO’s strategy. This is matched by Allies’ commitment to arms control, disarmament and non- the rule of law. These values are at the heart of NATO’s transatlantic bond. proliferation. Collective Defence Crisis Management The greatest responsibility of the Alliance is to protect and defend NATO’s territory and populations. Article The Alliance has frequently acted to uphold international peace and security. In 1995, NATO helped to end 5 of NATO’s founding charter, the Washington Treaty, sets out the Alliance’s collective defence commitment. the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina and implemented the peace agreement. In 1999, NATO helped to stop mass It states that an attack on one shall be considered an attack on all.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • About Rasmussen Global Email Address Firm Description the Atlantic, Mr
    LEADING BOUTIQUES, SPECIALISTS AND START-UPS 2020 Office Address 40 Avenue de Broqueville, 1200 Brussels About Rasmussen Global Email Address Firm Description the Atlantic, Mr. Rasmussen and [email protected] Anders Fogh Rasmussen founded his team are in a unique position Telephone Number this campaigns and public affairs to advise clients on transatlantic +32 2 899 9142 firm with a clear purpose: to help issues, international affairs and +45 319 07 900 democratic governments and public policy management. companies committed to open and Key Clients Website Address free markets navigate international See our Transparency Register rasmussenglobal.com politics, shape public policy, and listing for key clients. get their message across. Thought Leadership Key Specialisms We take on projects where we can Mr. Rasmussen and his team make a difference. Combined with regularly publish in top-tier our senior staff’s experience in top Aerospace & Defence international and national media level positions in governments and across sector and medium, on international institutions and a subjects ranging from geopolitics Banking, Insurance and strong media outreach capability, and security to the EU digital agenda. Financial Services we are a powerful ally in the battle for ideas and influence. Mr Rasmussen himself has been at the centre of European and global Digital Services & Rasmussen Global provides a wide politics for over three decades. In Technology Hardware range of services to our clients 2017, he founded the Alliance of including analysis, advice, high-level Democracies Foundation, a non- briefings with a strong tactical focus Energy profit that works to strengthen on delivery, campaign execution, the force for democracy around communication and media the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Anders Fogh Rasmussen – Chairman, Rasmussen Global and Former Secretary General, NATO
    Anders Fogh Rasmussen – Chairman, Rasmussen Global and former Secretary General, NATO Anders Fogh Rasmussen has been at the centre of European and global politics for three decades as Secretary General of NATO, Prime Minister of Denmark, Danish Minister of Economic Affairs, Danish Minister for Taxation and a leading Danish parliamentarian. During the Danish Presidency of the European Union in 2002, he played a key role in concluding accession negotiations with 10 candidates for EU- membership. In 2009 Anders Fogh Rasmussen was appointed NATO’s 12th Secretary General between 1 August 2009 and 30 September 2014. His tenure in NATO marked a fundamental transformation of the Alliance. He oversaw the Alliance’s operational peak with six operations on three continents including Afghanistan, Kosovo and Libya, as well as counter-piracy along the Somali coast, a training mission in Iraq and a counter-terrorism operation in the Mediterranean. He developed a new Strategic Concept, which sets the Alliance’s core future priorities and he launched “Smart Defence” to help nations make more efficient use of their resources through more multinational cooperation. In response to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, he initiated a “Readiness Action Plan” to strengthen the collective defence to an unprecedented level since the end of the Cold War. On 1 October 2014, Anders Fogh Rasmussen established Rasmussen Global. The firm advises clients on a wide range of issues such as international security, transatlantic relations, the European Union, and emerging markets. Rasmussen Global draws on an extensive network of leading policy experts, former officials, business executives and consulting firms across the globe.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Security: UK-US Relations
    House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee Global Security: UK-US Relations Sixth Report of Session 2009–10 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 18 March 2010 HC 114 Incorporating HC 1100-i, Session 2008-09 Published on 28 March 2010 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Foreign Affairs Committee The Foreign Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and its associated agencies. Current membership Mike Gapes (Labour, Ilford South), Chair Rt Hon Sir Menzies Campbell (Liberal Democrat, North East Fife) Mr Fabian Hamilton (Labour, Leeds North East) Rt Hon Mr David Heathcoat-Amory (Conservative, Wells) Mr John Horam (Conservative, Orpington) Mr Eric Illsley (Labour, Barnsley Central) Mr Paul Keetch (Liberal Democrat, Hereford) Andrew Mackinlay (Labour, Thurrock) Mr Malcolm Moss (Conservative, North East Cambridgeshire) Sandra Osborne (Labour, Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock) Mr Greg Pope (Labour, Hyndburn) Mr Ken Purchase (Labour, Wolverhampton North East) Rt Hon Sir John Stanley (Conservative, Tonbridge and Malling) Ms Gisela Stuart (Labour, Birmingham Edgbaston) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/foreign_affairs_committee.cfm.
    [Show full text]
  • Panorama-2017-2018-V3.Pdf
    PANORAMA OF GLOBAL SECURITY ENVIRONMENT 2017-2018 THE CENTRAL EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE ABOUT STRATPOL STRATPOL – Strategic Policy Institute – is an independent think-tank based in Slovakia with focus on international relations and security policy. Its activities cover European security, Transatlantic relations and Eastern Partnership countries. Our research, publications, and events cover issues and developments in Central Europe, Ukraine, states of the South Cauca- sus, as well as NATO, the United States and key strategic regions. Our ex- perts have a proven record in strategic decision-making in their respective governments, military, as well as the world of academia. STRATPOL contributes to academic debate, shapes public opinion through the media and influences policies by formulating recommendations for foreign and security policy decision-makers. STRATPOL has expanded on the professional basis of the Centre for Eu- ropean and North Atlantic Affairs, securing the continuity of the Centre’s projects and partnerships. Among our achievements are the Panorama of global security environment, a reputable peer-reviewed and indexed publication on international relations; yearly South Caucasus Security Forum, a high-level forum for exchanges of views on security developments in the neighborhood, held in Tbilisi, Georgia, and long-term projects on se- curity sector reform and capacity building in Ukraine and Georgia, among others. STRATPOL Štúrova 3, 81102 Bratislava, Slovakia www.stratpol.sk [email protected] All rights reserved. Any reproduction or copying of this work is allowed only with the permission of the publisher. Any opinions and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the authors and should not be con- structed as representing the opinions or policy of any organization partici- pating in preparing the publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Biden's Climate Policy: Global Follower Or Leader?
    1 Biden’s climate policy: global follower or leader? TYPE OF DOCUMENT: POLICY BRIEFING CLASSIFICATION: EXTERNAL January 19, 2021 President Biden vows an ambitious climate policy, leading the US transition to 100 percent clean electricity by 2035, and demanding - in his first year - that Congress legislate for reaching zero emissions by 2050. These efforts, however, might be constrained by differences within the Democratic camp and mid-term elections in critical, fossil fuel-dependent states like Pennsylvania. Yet, even under a cautious scenario, Biden will bring about significant change: on Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance (ESG) reporting standards; re-instating Federal regulations and increasing Federal funding; and – to a lesser extent – on carbon taxation. Under this middle-of-the road scenario, the US and Europe will see a greater level of convergence even if in parallel ‘climate competition’ between great economic powers will intensify. Investment in green technologies will gather pace in the US. Biden’s Climate Plan Key points of Biden’s climate policy include: • Committing two trillion dollars in accelerated investments in green infrastructure over his term, in transitioning the auto industry, power generation, housing, agriculture, and innovation. • Increasing federal procurement by 400 billion dollars in his term to purchase clean energy inputs and establish an Advanced Research Projects Agency for the development and rapid deployment of new, green technologies. • Creating one million jobs in the auto sector, securing large American producers such as General Motors, Fiat Chrysler and Ford, and investing 400 million dollars into the industry to support the adoption of electric vehicles and the transition from petrol-powered vehicles used by federal institutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Foreign Investment Screening and the China Factor New Protectionism Or New European Standards?
    1 Foreign Investment Screening and the China Factor New protectionism or new European standards? TYPE OF DOCUMENT: MEMO CLASSIFICATION: EXTERNAL SOURCES: consultations with officials in Brussels and key European capitals; open sources Nov 16, 2017 Executive Summary • Chinese businesses have increased and diversified their direct investment at an exponential rate throughout Europe. In Germany alone, the increase was ten-fold in 2016 compared to 2015. • Chinese FDI include both state and private acquisitions of strategic infrastructures as well as smaller investments aimed at acquiring cutting-edge technological know-how. • The surge in Chinese investment raises growing concern among governments about the loss of Europe’s technological edge and the transfer of dual-use technologies to China. • Europe has begun to awaken to the need for an EU-wide foreign investment screening mechanism. The Commission has put forth a proposal but one that is much less ambitious than what is already in place in other G7 states. Only 12 out of 28 member states have their own screening mechanisms in place. • The new EU proposal has entered the legislative process in the European institutions. However, it faces a coalition of free-marketeers and recovering southern EU economies dependent on Chinese FDI which oppose a strict screening mechanism at the EU-level. Introduction Since the 2008 financial crisis, Chinese investments in the EU have jumped tenfold, from roughly €2 billion in 2009 to almost €20 billion in 2015. Last year alone, China’s foreign direct investment (FDI) in Europe reached over €35 billion. That is another 77 % increase compared to 2015 and a more than 1,500% increase compared to 2010.1 Meanwhile, European investments in China have decreased by 25% in 2016 and the trend is set to continue this year due to regulatory barriers and a lack of reciprocity.
    [Show full text]
  • The Berlin Pulse! in Last Year’S Edition, We Called 2020 an ‘Eventful Year’ with Germany’S Presidency­ of the European Council and the US Presidential Election
    Involvement or Restraint? 2020 / 21 53 % 78 % say their trust in American democracy feel that transatlantic relations will has weakened in light of the election. normalize again under Joe Biden. 82 % 43 % 23 % say that Germany should remain neutral in case of view France / the United States as Germany’s a Cold War between China and the United States. most important partner in foreign policy. 51 % 45 % 37 % 85 % say Germany and Europe should become perceive migration and feel that democratic states are better more independent from the US. refugees as the suited than non-democratic states feel that Germany and Europe should continue greatest challenge for to meet the international challenges to rely on the partnership with theGERMAN US. German foreign FOREIGN policy. ofPOLICY the 21st century. IN PERSPECTIVE 49With % contributions41 % by Gro Harlem Brundtland, Paolo Gentiloni,say that the COVID-19Peter Altmaier, pandemic H.R. McMaster and others strengthened solidarity within the EU. say the pandemic has weakened solidarity. 21 / A representative survey on German attitudes to foreign policy commissioned by Körber-Stiftung THE BERLINTHE PULSE 2020 Involvement or Restraint? 53 % 78 % say their trust in American democracy feel that transatlantic relations will has weakened in light of the election. normalize again under Joe Biden. 82 % 43 % 23 % say that Germany should remain neutral in case of view France / the United States as Germany’s a Cold War between China and the United States. most important partner in foreign policy. 51 % 45 % 37 % 85 % say Germany and Europe should become perceive migration and feel that democratic states are better more independent from the US.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy Perception Index 2018
    Democracy Perception Index 2018 June 2018 Democracies are losing the hearts and minds of their citizens, world’s largest study on trust in government finds The Democracy Perception Index (DPI) is a research project conducted by ​Dalia Research​, in collaboration with the ​Alliance of Democracies​ and ​Rasmussen Global​, to measure citizens’ trust in government. The DPI survey data ranks countries on how effectively they are ​perceived​ to be delivering core democratic benefits in the eyes of their citizens, including: 1) Political Voice: ​Sense of participation in politics 2) Public Interest: ​Trust that government is working for the people 3) Free Speech: ​Freedom to express opinions 4) Information: ​Access to balanced and neutral information The DPI is the largest single survey conducted at once: covering 125,000 respondents for nationally representative results across 50 countries, from June 6th to June 18th, 2018. This represents over 75% of the world’s population and 75% of the world’s GDP. The Findings The Democracy Perception Index (DPI) finds a majority of people around the world feel like they have no voice in politics and that their governments are not acting in their interest (51% and 58% respectively). In particular, they have little faith that their government is formed “by the people” and works “for the people”. Perhaps most surprisingly, this public disillusionment is higher in democracies than in non-democracies.1 Almost two thirds (64%) of people living in democracies thinks their government “rarely” or “never” acts in the interest of the public, compared with 41% of people living in non-democracies. When asked if they think their voice matters in politics, over half (54%) of citizens living in democracies say their voices “rarely” or “never” matter in politics versus 46% in non-democracies.
    [Show full text]