DOCSLIB.ORG

Archived Content Information Archivée Dans Le

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Archived Content Information Archivée Dans Le Archived Content Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or record-keeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page. Information archivée dans le Web Information archivée dans le Web à des fins de consultation, de recherche ou de tenue de documents. Cette dernière n’a aucunement été modifiée ni mise à jour depuis sa date de mise en archive. Les pages archivées dans le Web ne sont pas assujetties aux normes qui s’appliquent aux sites Web du gouvernement du Canada. Conformément à la Politique de communication du gouvernement du Canada, vous pouvez demander de recevoir cette information dans tout autre format de rechange à la page « Contactez-nous ». CANADIAN FORCES COLLEGE / COLLÈGE DES FORCES CANADIENNES CSC 27 EXERCICE / EXERCISE NEW HORIZONS THE EVOLUTION OF A EUROPEAN SECURITY IDENTITY: IMPLICATIONS FOR CANADA By Lieutenant-Commander Christopher Richards April 2001 This paper was written by a student attending La présente étude a été rédigée par un stagiaire the Canadian Forces College in fulfilment of one du Collège des Forces canadiennes pour of the requirements of the Course of Studies. satisfaire à l'une des exigences du cours. The paper is a scholastic document, and thus L'étude est un document qui se rapporte au contains facts and opinions which the author cours et contient donc des faits et des opinions alone considered appropriate and correct for que seul l'auteur considère appropriés et the subject. It does not necessarily reflect the convenables au sujet. Elle ne reflète pas policy or the opinion of any agency, including nécessairement la politique ou l'opinion d'un the Government of Canada and the Canadian organisme quelconque, y compris le Department of National Defence. This paper gouvernement du Canada et le ministère de la may not be released, quoted or copied except Défense nationale du Canada. Il est défendu de with the express permission of the Canadian diffuser, de citer ou de reproduire cette étude Department of National Defence. sans la permission expresse du ministère de la Défense nationale. THE EVOLUTION OF A EUROPEAN SECURITY IDENTITY: IMPLICATIONS FOR CANADA ABSTRACT / RÉSUMÉ This paper addresses the implications to Canada of the evolving European progress to develop a common defence capability. The author reviews the evolution of this progress, focussing on the emerging European Security and Defence Identity within NATO and the Common European Security and Defence Policy within the European Union. The author shows that while these potentially divergent initiatives are intended to enhance European defence capabilities, they may also adversely affect the effectiveness and preeminence of NATO and the viability of the transatlantic link. The author illustrates how Canada may be affected by these evolving European developments and provides a range of measures that may be taken to mitigate the potential consequences to Canada. INTRODUCTION Throughout the Cold War, European defence was provided through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization1 (NATO). The end of the Cold War, however, initiated an examination of the validity of NATO and the context in which it operated. This change in the strategic environment heralded new opportunities and new risks.2 While Europe has adopted a path to greater integration in security and defence, NATO has maintained the obligation to collective defence and the reinforcement of the transatlantic link. NATO has also developed a political role, including increased political and military partnerships, cooperation and dialogue with other 1 The North Atlantic Treaty, signed in Washington in April 1949, created the NATO Alliance for collective defence as defined in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. The Treaty is of infinite duration and now links 17 European countries, the United States and Canada. 2 Changes in the Euro-Atlantic strategic landscape were reflected in NATO’s 1991 Strategic Concept. 1 h rticip states, including Russia, Ukraine and Mediterranean Dialogue3 countries, and a continued openness to the future accession of new members. During the 1990s, a number of arrangements were also introduced to facilitate joint collaboration and initiatives between NATO, the Western European Union4 (WEU) and the European Union5 (EU). These arrangements facilitated the opportunity for the European allies to assume greater responsibilities for defence, including the development of the European Security and Defence Identity6 (ESDI) within the NATO Alliance. The idea of a common defence capability within Europe was introduced as part of the 7 Treaty on European Union in 1992. Since that time, the EU has been taking important decisions in its efforts to strengthen its security and defence dimension. One decision is the development 3 The Mediterranean Dialogue is an integral part of the Alliance's cooperative approach to security and is based on the recognition that security in the whole of Europe is closely linked to security and stability in the Mediterranean region. The Dialogue was launched in 1994. Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia initially joined the Dialogue. Algeria became a participant in February 2000. The Dialogue is aimed at creating good relations and better mutual understanding throughout the Mediterranean, as well as promoting regional security and stability. It provides for political discussions with the participating countries. 4 peanirticiphhU15.7802h peanTheerticip rticip peanW estrticip peanhernBDC Eurrticipo peanrticip 424.899432 Urticipnion EM(W rticipE U58.3) was 116029.7.78est Tm ()Tm was(rticip)Tj est)Tj429.34 10.0290.36142120.30103 02 58.3 116029.7testE9.7U sta.81999 Tm (atin)TjTw 10460.86062 58.3 116029.7e10.02 in a04 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj486.0 12202 58.3 0116029.7p4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj4910.02 1042332 58.3 116029.71397.559832120.30103 315.78 TmE9.7) (n)Tj 104 0 34 952 58.3 9 116029.7ostab /P <</MCIDTm 17(rticip)Tj 499.102032 10.02107.810522120.30103 58.3 116029.7cess E9.79 of stab Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02112.850632120.30103 E9.7d Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02117.830632120.30103 E9.7 cre Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02132.542272120.30103 E9.79 Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02136.984192120.30103 E9.7t4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj139.745762120.30103 E9.7e Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02144.187682120.30103 E9.7d ne Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02161.133792120.30103 E9.7w04 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj170.840322120.30103 E9.7st4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj177.511752120.30103 E9.7ruct4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj193.044982120.30103 E9.7ures4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj209.715482120.30103 E9.7 de Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02221.63952120.30103 E9.7si.81999 Tm (i)Tj 10.0228.310932120.30103 E9.7g4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj233.290922120.30103 E9.79 Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02238.331042120.30103 E9.7ed Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02247.7722120.30103 E9.7 t4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj253.05372120.30103 E9.7o4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj258.093832120.30103 E9.704 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj260.553832120.30103 E9.7devel4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj282.221362120.30103 E9.7o4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj287.261492120.30103 E9.7p4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj292.241492120.30103 E9.7 a m Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02309.42412120.30103 E9.7o4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj314 464222120.30103 E9.7re i.81999 Tm (i)Tj 10.0327.555632120.30103 E9.79 Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02332.595752120.30103 E9.7t4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj335.357322120.30103 E9.7e Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02339.739122120.30103 E9.7grat Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02355.332462120.30103 E9.7e Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02359.714262120.30103 E9.7d Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02364 754382120.30103 E9.7 f Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02370.574162120.30103 E9.7o4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj375.554152120.30103 E9.7rei.81999 Tm (i)Tj 10.0386.125432120.30103 E9.7g4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj391.105422120.30103 E9.79 9 Tm (rticip)Tj 10.024030.09452120.30103 E9.79 Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02408.069562120.30103 E9.7d Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02413.049562120.30103 E9.7 secu Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02433.381472120.30103 E9.7r Tm (rticip)Tj 10.02436.681122120.30103 E9.7i.81999 Tm (i)Tj 10.0439.442692120.30103 E9.7t4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj442 204252120.30103 E9.7y4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj447.184252120.30103 E9.7 pol4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj462.510122120.30103 E9.7i.81999 Tm (i)Tj 10.0465.271682120.30103 E9.7c4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj469.713612120.30103 E9.7y4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj474.69362120.30103 E9.7 an4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj486.654692120.30103 E9.7d t4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj496.898362120.30103 E9.7o4 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj501.938482120.30103 E9.7 4 31 rticipi rticip atin n pean irticiprticiprticip atine h atin reg rticip rticippeanatini esrticip ooirrticiprticipe hh15.7802 BDC 292.020 0 04.39.73109.7.81999 Tm (atin)Tj 1034 0 6 0 04.39.73109.70.27995 Tm (reg)Tj 10345.02050 104.39.73109.78.81999 Tm (i)Tj 10.0302 07060 104.39.73109.71 Tw 10.02 0 0 10.02 358.55200 104.39.73109.7,.81999 Tm (i)Tj 10.03 10072.0204.39.73109.7 Fr.78 Tm () was est)Tj372 9 993 104.39.73109.781999 Tm (g)Tj 10.02 08 10 0 10.04.39.73109.7ce, L.27995 Tm (reg)Tj 10.0 10762 104.39.73109.78.81999 Tm (i)Tj 10.0402 95620 104.39.73109.7xe1 Tw 10.02 0 0 10.02 410.0847 104.39.73109.7ecuinatiniUhhUh15.7802 BDC 02 0.0650 104.39.73109.7.78 Tm () was est)Tj50 167833 104.39.73109.78d338.81999 Tm (n)Tj 10510.5651 104.39.73109.7 003 315.78 Tm (o)Tj 10527.52824 104.39.73109.7d 3 31 0 1102 2 0 0 1n2T EMC /P <</MCID 17 P <</M0 210.51.03038e United04 315.78 Tm (pean)Tj 0.0527010210.51.030Kingd81 Tw 10.02 0 0 10.02 02 /TT6820210.51.030.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Doubling NATO: Functional and Geographical Enlargement of the Alliance Ergodan Kurt Old Dominion University
    Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Graduate Program in International Studies Dissertations Spring 2010 Doubling NATO: Functional and Geographical Enlargement of the Alliance Ergodan Kurt Old Dominion University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds Part of the International Relations Commons Recommended Citation Kurt, Ergodan. "Doubling NATO: Functional and Geographical Enlargement of the Alliance" (2010). Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), dissertation, International Studies, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/4bgn-h798 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds/75 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Program in International Studies at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DOUBLING NATO: FUNCTIONAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL ENLARGEMENT OF THE ALLIANCE by Erdogan Kurt B.A. August 1996, Turkish Military Academy M.A. July 2001, Naval Postgraduate School A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL STUDIES OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY May 2010 Approved by: ©2010 Erdogan Kurt. All rights reserved. ABSTRACT DOUBLING NATO: FUNCTIONAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL ENLARGEMENT OF THE ALLIANCE Erdogan Kurt Old Dominion University, 2010 Director: Dr. Regina Karp This dissertation studies NATO expansion as institutional adaptation. More specifically, it examines the interaction between NATO's functional and geographical enlargement. This study asserts that there is a close relationship between NATO's new functions and its enlargement.
    [Show full text]
  • Nato Enlargement: Qualifications and Contributions—Parts I–Iv Hearings
    S. HRG. 108–180 NATO ENLARGEMENT: QUALIFICATIONS AND CONTRIBUTIONS—PARTS I–IV HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION MARCH 27, AND APRIL 1, 3 AND 8, 2003 Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 90–325 PDF WASHINGTON : 2003 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 11-MAY-2000 17:42 Nov 12, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 90325 SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana, Chairman CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware LINCOLN CHAFEE, Rhode Island PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio BARBARA BOXER, California LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee BILL NELSON, Florida NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire JON S. CORZINE, New Jersey KENNETH A. MYERS, JR., Staff Director ANTONY J. BLINKEN, Democratic Staff Director (II) VerDate 11-MAY-2000 17:42 Nov 12, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 90325 SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1 CONTENTS Thursday, March 27, 2003—Part I Page Allen, Hon. George, U.S. Senator from Virginia, opening statement .................
    [Show full text]
  • TABLE of CONTENTS 1. Prologue
    TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Prologue .………………...…………………………………………………….page 4 Chapter I Theoretical Framework 2. International relations theories………... …………………...............................page 5 3. Conceptualizing NATO enlargement: an integrated approach……………...…page 9 Chapter II The history and identity of NATO 4. NATO general overview………………………………………...…………...page 11 5. NATO during the Cold War…………………………………...……………..page 13 6. NATO after the Cold War…………………………………...……………….page 17 Chapter III NATO Enlargement 7. Historical Background……………………………………………………….page 23 8. Drivers of enlargement………………………………………………………page 30 9. NATO’s first enlargement round…………………...…………………….....page 32 10. NATO’s second enlargement round………………………………..………...page 35 Chapter IV Black Sea and NATO 1. Black Sea and NATO………………………………………………………..page 40 2. The Black Sea in the context of NATO enlargement…….……………..…...page 41 3. Wider Black Sea Area – Security issues and threats……….………….…....page 43 4. Significance of the Black Sea…………………….……………………….....page 44 5. NATO’s interest in the WBSA……………………….…………………..….page 45 Chapter V Perspectives on the enlargement 1. Russia’s perspective on the enlargement……………………………………page 52 2. Turkey’s perspective on the enlargement…………………………………...page 54 3. NATO Bucharest Summit 2008…………………………...………………..page 57 Chapter VI Study Case, Ukraine 1. Ukraine’s Political Situation…………………………..…………………...page 62 2. NATO and the Orange Revolution …………………………………………page 63 3. Opinion polls on NATO’s enlargement ………………...……………….....page 64 4. Ukraine’s latest status regarding the North Atlantic Alliance……...…….....page 66 5. Conclusions………………………………………………………………….page 73 1 Chapter VII Study Case, Georgia 1. The Rose Revolution…………………………….………………………....page 78 2. Georgia and US, NATO political relations…….…………………………..page 81 3. Georgia as feasible NATO member……….……………………………....page 83 4. Russian – Georgia War 2008; ……….…………………………………....page 85 5. The Aftermath of the 5 days War……….………………………………....page 87 6.
    [Show full text]
  • NATO Enlargement & Open Door
    North Atlantic Treaty Organization Fact Sheet July 2016 NATO Enlargement & Open Door NATO’s “open door policy” is based on Article 10 of the Alliance’s founding document, the North Atlantic Treaty (1949). The Treaty states that NATO membership is open to any “European state in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area”. It states that any decision on enlargement must be made “by unanimous agreement”. NATO enlargement has helped increase stability and prosperity in Europe. It is aimed at promoting stability and cooperation, and at building a Europe united in peace, democracy and common values. Free choice NATO respects the right of every country to choose its own security arrangements. Each sovereign country has the right to choose for itself whether it joins any treaty or alliance. This fundamental principle is enshrined in international agreements, including the Helsinki Final Act and the Charter of Paris for a New Europe. NATO membership is not imposed on countries. Article 13 of the Washington Treaty specifically gives Allies the right to leave should they wish to. Process of Accession European countries that wish to join NATO are initially invited to begin an Intensified Dialogue with the Alliance about their aspirations and related reforms. Aspirants may then be invited to join the Membership Action Plan, a programme which helps nations prepare for possible future membership. Participation does not guarantee membership, but is a key preparation mechanism. To join the Alliance, nations are expected to respect the values of the North Atlantic Treaty, and to meet certain political, economic and military criteria, set out in the Alliance’s 1995 Study on Enlargement.
    [Show full text]
  • NATO Summit Guide Brussels, 11-12 July 2018
    NATO Summit Guide Brussels, 11-12 July 2018 A stronger and more agile Alliance The Brussels Summit comes at a crucial moment for the security of the North Atlantic Alliance. It will be an important opportunity to chart NATO’s path for the years ahead. In a changing world, NATO is adapting to be a more agile, responsive and innovative Alliance, while defending all of its members against any threat. NATO remains committed to fulfilling its three core tasks: collective defence, crisis management and cooperative security. At the Brussels Summit, the Alliance will make important decisions to further boost security in and around Europe, including through strengthened deterrence and defence, projecting stability and fighting terrorism, enhancing its partnership with the European Union, modernising the Alliance and achieving fairer burden-sharing. This Summit will be held in the new NATO Headquarters, a modern and sustainable home for a forward-looking Alliance. It will be the third meeting of Allied Heads of State and Government chaired by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. + Summit meetings + Member countries + Partners + NATO Secretary General Archived material – Information valid up to 10 July 2018 1 NATO Summit Guide, Brussels 2018 I. Strengthening deterrence and defence NATO’s primary purpose is to protect its almost one billion citizens and to preserve peace and freedom. NATO must also be vigilant against a wide range of new threats, be they in the form of computer code, disinformation or foreign fighters. The Alliance has taken important steps to strengthen its collective defence and deterrence, so that it can respond to threats from any direction.
    [Show full text]
  • SECURITY COOPERATION with the Mediterranean Region and the Broader Middle East © JFC Naples
    © JFC Naples SECURITY COOPERATION with the Mediterranean region and the broader Middle East © JFC Naples A Jordanian Navy patrol boat passes ships from NATO’s mine countermeasure force, during an exercise organised under the Mediterranean Dialogue in the Gulf of Aqaba in March 2005 NATO is developing closer security partnerships with countries in the Mediterranean region and the broader Middle East. This marks a shift in Alliance priorities towards greater involvement in these strategically important regions of the world, whose security and stability is closely linked to Euro-Atlantic security. The current drive towards increasing dialogue and cooperation with countries in these regions builds on two key decisions taken at NATO’s summit meeting in Istanbul in June 2004. Allied leaders decided – ten years after the achieve better mutual understanding between launch of NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue – NATO and its Mediterranean partners and to to invite countries participating in the dispel misperceptions about the Alliance. Dialogue to establish a more ambitious and expanded partnership. The Dialogue fosters In parallel, a new, distinct but complemen- links with seven countries stretching from tary initiative was launched at the Istanbul western North Africa around the south- Summit to reach out to interested countries in ern Mediterranean rim to the Middle East: the broader Middle East region. The Istanbul Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Cooperation Initiative aims to enhance Morocco and Tunisia. Through political dia- security and stability by fostering mutually logue and practical cooperation, the Dialogue beneficial bilateral relationships, particularly aims to contribute to regional security and in the context of the fight against terrorism stability, and to promote good and friendly and countering the proliferation of weapons of relations across the region.
    [Show full text]
  • MICROCOMP Output File
    III 106TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION S. RES. 208 Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding United States policy toward the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the European Union, in light of the Alliance's April 1999 Washington Summit and the European Union's June 1999 Cologne Summit. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER 28, 1999 Mr. ROTH (for himself, Mr. LUGAR, Mr. BIDEN, Mr. KYL, Mr. HAGEL, Mr. SMITH of Oregon, Mr. LIEBERMAN, and Mr. HELMS) submitted the fol- lowing resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Rela- tions NOVEMBER 3, 1999 Reported by Mr. HELMS, without amendment NOVEMBER 8, 1999 Considered, amended, and agreed to RESOLUTION Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding United States policy toward the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the European Union, in light of the Alliance's April 1999 Washington Summit and the European Union's June 1999 Cologne Summit. Whereas NATO is the only military alliance with both real defense capabilities and a transatlantic membership; 2 Whereas NATO is the only institution that promotes a uniquely transatlantic perspective and approach to issues concerning the security of North America and Europe; Whereas NATO's military force structure, defense planning, command structures, and force goals must be sufficient for the collective self-defense of its members, capable of projecting power when the security of a NATO member is threatened, and provide a basis for ad hoc coalitions of willing partners among NATO members to defend common values and interests; Whereas
    [Show full text]
  • The European Security and Defense Policy: NATO's Companion
    The European Security and Defense Policy NATO’s Companion —or Competitor? NATIONAL DEFENSE RESEARCH INSTITUTE Robert E. Hunter The research described in this report was conducted jointly by RAND Europe and the International Security and Defense Policy Center of RAND’s National Defense Research Institute, a federally funded research and development center supported by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the unified commands, and the defense agencies under Contract DASW01-01-C-0004. ISBN: 0-8330-3117-1 RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND® is a registered trademark. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of its research sponsors. Cover designed by Stephen Bloodsworth © Copyright 2002 RAND All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from RAND. Published 2002 by RAND 1700 Main Street, P.O. Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2138 1200 South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA 22202-5050 201 North Craig Street, Suite 102, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 RAND URL: http://www.rand.org/ To order RAND documents or to obtain additional information, contact Distribution Services: Telephone: (310) 451-7002; Fax: (310) 451-6915; Email: [email protected] FOREWORD Few issues have been more vexing to American policy analysts and political leaders than the emergence of the European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) in the last two-thirds of the 1990s and con- tinuing into the new century.
    [Show full text]
  • NATO Summit Guide Warsaw, 8-9 July 2016
    NATO Summit Guide Warsaw, 8-9 July 2016 An essential Alliance in a more dangerous world The Warsaw Summit comes at a defining moment for the security of the North Atlantic Alliance. In recent years, the world has become more volatile and dangerous with Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and destabilisation of eastern Ukraine, as well as its military build-up from the Barents Sea to the Baltic, and from the Black Sea to the eastern Mediterranean; turmoil across the Middle East and North Africa, fuelling the biggest migrant and refugee crisis in Europe since World War Two; brutal attacks by ISIL and other terrorist groups, as well as cyber attacks, nuclear proliferation and ballistic missile threats. NATO is adapting to this changed security environment. It also remains committed to fulfilling its three core tasks: collective defence, crisis management and cooperative security. And, in the Polish capital, the Alliance will make important decisions to boost security in and around Europe, based on two key pillars: protecting its citizens through modern deterrence and defence, and projecting stability beyond its borders. NATO member states form a unique community of values, committed to the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law. In today’s dangerous world, transatlantic cooperation is needed more than ever. NATO embodies that cooperation, bringing to bear the strength and unity of North America and Europe. This Summit is the first to be hosted in Poland and the first to be chaired by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who took up his post in October 2014.
    [Show full text]
  • NATO Redefined
    KATHOLIEKE UNIVERSITEIT LEUVEN FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE MASTER IN EUROPEAN POLITICS & POLICIES NATO Past, Present… Future? Master Student: Michail Hamntan Paper presented in the 4th Euro-Atlantic Conference titled ‘21st Century: Challenges facing Europe and North America’ on the 18th of March 2005 at the Egmont Palace in Brussels. ACADEMIC YEAR: 2004-2005 CONTENTS 1.1 Introduction………………………………………………………….…3 1.2 THE ORIGINS OF THE ALLIANCE.………………..……………..3 2. Part I..…………………………………………………..……….…...8 2.1 NATO TODAY - FROM ROME TO ISTANBUL.………………....8 2.1.1 THE ROME SUMMIT - NOVEMBER 1991………………8 2.1.2 THE BRUSSELS SUMMIT - JANUARY 1994………..…...10 2.1.3 THE MADRID SUMMIT - JULY 1997………...…………..11 2.1.4 THE WASHINGTON SUMMIT - APRIL 1999…………….12 2.1.5 THE PRAGUE SUMMIT – NOVEMBER 2002…………….14 2.1.5 THE ISTANBUL SUMMIT - JUNE 2004………..……...….15 2. Part II.………………………………………………..………..…….17 2.1 NATO’s FUTURE: From ISTANBUL and beyond. ………………17 2.1.1 THE ‘BENEVOLENT’ SCENARIO……………………….………17 2.1.2 THE ‘BUSINESS AS USUAL’ SCENARIO…………………….…19 2.1.2 THE ‘DIVORCE’ SCENARIO……………………….…….………21 2.2 PRECONDITIONS……………………….…………………..……….21 3. Conclusion……………………….…………………..……………..23 4. Bibliography………………….…………………..………………....27 2 NATO Past, Present… Future? Introduction This paper, as the title suggests, will be occupied with the study of NATO. It will talk about the creation of NATO, its purpose and its history until now emphasizing on the major historical events in NATO’s life. Later on, it will be discussed how NATO developed in the last 50 years since its creation and especially how is adapting to the changes of the last 15 years after the collapse of the U.S.S.R.
    [Show full text]
  • Istanbul Summit Reader's Guide
    RG_BW_ENG 30-11-2004 14:08 Pagina 1 ISTANBUL SUMMIT READER’S GUIDE RG_BW_ENG 18-11-2004 12:30 Pagina 2 © NATO 2004 ISTRG_ENG1204 RG_BW_ENG 18-11-2004 12:30 Pagina 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 3 INTRODUCTION How to use this Guide . 5 SUMMING UP THE SUMMIT • The Istanbul Declaration: Our security in a new era . 7 • Istanbul Summit Communiqué . 9 Key achievements of the Istanbul Summit . 26 THREE PILLARS Operations and missions • Statement on Iraq . 31 • Statement on Afghanistan by the NATO Secretary General . 33 NATO’s training mission in Iraq . 34 Expanding NATO’s role in Afghanistan . 37 Continued Balkan presence . 43 Operation Active Endeavour . 47 Capabilities • Press Statement for the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Defence Ministers Session . 49 • Press Statement for the meeting of the Defence Planning Committee in Ministerial Session . 50 Delivering on the Prague Capabilities Commitment . 51 Enhanced package of measures for defence against terrorism . 55 NATO Response Force moves forward . 57 Improving chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear defences . 60 Matching NATO’s means to its ambitions . 61 Partnerships • Chairman’s Statement of the meeting of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council at Summit level . 63 • The Euro-Atlantic Partnership – Refocusing and Renewal . 65 • Partnership Action Plan on Defence Institution Building . 75 • Report on the Partnership Action Plan against Terrorism . 79 • Chairman’s Statement – meeting of the NATO-Russia Council at the level of Foreign Ministers . 90 RG_BW_ENG 18-11-2004 12:30 Pagina 4 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS • Chairman’s Statement – meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission at the level of Heads of State and Government .
    [Show full text]
  • The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in Transition
    AUSA BACKGROUND BRIEF No. 81 April1999 F N.JtTO Commemorative 1949 - 1999 The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in Transition Introduction At the end of the Second World War, major European powers-Germany, France and Great Britain­ were in varying states of devastation and exhaustion from a long, bitter war. A power vacuum existed in Europe. With Germany defeated and under allied occupation, and Britain and France preoccupied with reconstruction, only the United States and the Soviet Union were in a posture to assert themselves. The United States, from across the Atlantic, and the Soviet Union, from the eastern periphery of Europe, would soon be engaged in a struggle for the fate of Europe. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) 1 would become a major factor in detern1ining the outcome of this struggle referred to as the Cold War. This paper reviews the evolution of NATO and the adjustments underway and foreseen to keep NATO a relevant and viable defense alliance. Fundamental U.S. interests in a stable and secure Europe underlie continued U.S. military involvement in NATO military structures. Cold War Origins NATO was formed at the height of the post-World War II tensions between the West, led by the United States, and the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union, pursuing a policy of expansion which had begun long before the end of the Second World War, had, by 1945, annexed almost 180,000 square miles of 2 territory with a population of more than 23 million people. This territory included the Baltic states of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, which were annexed in 1940, together with parts of Finland, Romania, easternPoland, northeastern Germanyand eastern Czechoslovakia.
    [Show full text]