DOCSLIB.ORG

Re-Thinking Europe's Security Priorities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Re-Thinking Europe's Security Priorities RE-THINKING EUROPE’S SECURITY PRIORITIES 7 NNovemberovember 22011011 RREPORTEPORT EENN - FRFR Co-organised by: From Information to Intelligence Negotiating a contract, • Defence and security forming a partnership, developing international business, • Information technology launching a new product, taking over a competitor… these activities all involve risks. • Telecommunications But they also present tremendous opportunities if the specific risks • Energy and the environment of each situation are properlyPub assessed beforehand. • Healthcare & pharmaceuticals Information is a vital part of this assessment. • Transport Whether an organization needs to be forewarned of upcoming • Banking & Insurance technology disruptions, defend its assets from hostile intentions or promote • Agrifood sector its competitive edge on world markets, • Materials its success always depends on its ability to gather, secure and process strategic information and put it to the best use. This is the service that CEIS, the European Company for Strategic Intelligence, has been offering its clients in both the public and private sectors since 1997. With a clear agenda: to find imaginative, concrete, operational solutions to guarantee success. Olivier Darrason Chairman CEIS • Compagnie Européenne d’Intelligence Stratégique 280, boulevard Saint-Germain • 75007 Paris • France Tel.: (+33) 1 45 55 00 20 • Fax: (+33) 1 45 55 00 60 Email: [email protected] • Web site: www.ceis-strat.com SECURITY AND DEFENCE DAY 2011 3 RRE-THINKINGE-THINKING EEUROPE’SUROPE’S SECURITYSECURITY PRIORITIESPRIORITIES REEPORTPORT 4 SECURITY AND DEFENCE DAY 2011 Giles Merritt Olivier Darrason Foreword Over 40 speakers and 340 participants gathered Ministers Gérard Longuet and Thomas de to exchange their views at the fourth “Security & Maizière for their contributions to this report. Defence Day” in Brussels on 7 November 2011, organised by the Security & Defence Agenda We also extend our thanks to this year’s co- (SDA) and CEIS under the patronage of Poland’s organisers, the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, and EU Presidency. to our partners who contributed to the organi- sation and success of this event: the Madariaga We were particularly struck in this year’s discus- Foundation, the Virtuoso project, financed within sions by the importance of trust among member the 7th European Framework Programme for states and EU institutions. Amid economic and security research, and the EUROCYBEX project, geostrategic turmoil, speakers identified a real financed by the ISEC programme of the Euro- need to build trust in order to move forward and pean Commission’s DG Home Affairs. meet both political and operational objectives. We hope that Cyprus’ EU Presidency in 2012 We would like to thank the speakers for their will lend its patronage to what has become Brus- contributions, in particular Polish Secretary of sels’ flagship security and defence event. We would State for Foreign Affairs Jan Borkowski and Euro- like to invite you to join us for the next SecDef pean Commissioner for Internal Market and Ser- conference, to ensure that we continue to analyse vices Michel Barnier. We also extend our warm- and debate Europe’s key security challenges. est thanks to the French and German Defence Giles Merritt Olivier Darrason SECURITY AND DEFENCE DAY 2011 5 Contents Foreword .....................................................................................................................................4 Op-Ed by Gérard Longuet, French Minister of Defence .................................................................6 Op-Ed by Thomas de Maizière, German Minister of Defence ........................................................7 Programme...................................................................................................................................9 Securing Europe’s neighbourhood..............................................................................................14 The Role of the Weimar Triangle.................................................................................................18 Improving Europe’s situation awareness.....................................................................................23 Strengthening Europe’s crisis management.............................................................................27 Reinforcing the EU drive on defence and security technologies............................................31 Time for Europeans to bite the bullet on pooling and sharing...........................................35 Europe’s efforts to develop its cyber-defences...................................................................39 The challenges for European maritime security..................................................................43 Speakers...................................................................................................................................96 List of participants................................................................................................................113 Version Française....................................................................................................................50 The views expressed in this report are personal opinions of the speakers and not necessarily those of the organisations they represent, nor of the Security & Defence Agenda, CEIS or KAS, their members or partners. Reproduction in whole or in part is permitted, providing that full attribution is made to the co-organisers and to the source(s) in question, and provided that any such reproduction, whether in full or in part, is not sold unless incorporated in other works Français Publisher: Geert Cami Text: Madariaga – College of Europe Foundation Photos: Philippe Molitor Design: Europolitics Print: Identic 6 SECURITY AND DEFENCE DAY 2011 OP-ED “The responsibilities of European defence” 2011 has marked a veritable absent. We draw three lessons from this: first that turning point in the perception NATO is of course indispensable, in particular for of security and defence for all its coordination means made available to the Alliance European countries. Around member states. Second lesson: as the US did not make us, the world is hesitating this crisis a major priority for their forces, nothing between two models. On the would have been possible without certain European one hand, old patterns, heavy countries making their own strategic capabilities avail- Gérard Longuet, and rigid, weaken one after the able to the Alliance. Hence the third lesson: this situa- French Minister other, with the Arab Spring tion could very probably happen again. And here lies of Defence showing that they can give way the emergency. The will of a handful must be replaced to unexpected developments. by that of the entire European Union. On the other hand, a radically new international frame- work is seeing the light of day in which global powers France expects a lot from initiatives that are begin- are seeking the conditions of a new equilibrium. The ning to move the red lines of European defence in hope shared by all, in Europe and the world, is of spite of a difficult context. The Lancaster House treaty course that this new balance becomes a peaceful reality. for example, which unites France to its British ally and We must however face reality: we are all threatened by is based on a common political vision and comparable increasingly violent and systemic economic turbulence, military capabilities, is an integral part of this European and while we know this will be profoundly destabilis- defence ambition and this cooperation is not closed ing, we struggle to grasp their cultural and social conse- exclusive. quences. In terms of security, we must thus prepare for uncertain times, in which solidarity amongst Europe- I am conscious of the need to reflect on an enlarged ans will be the only remedy to the temptation of «each common action and as such I welcome the proposal to his own» which will be our demise. expressed in the framework of the Weimar Triangle which unites Poland, Germany, and France. This is why one of my major preoccupations today is that of capabilities. Let us admit it: in spite of past In a world that is not necessarily more danger- and current exercises, a long-standing temptation in ous but more unstable and thus more unpredictable, Europe has been to mistake pooling and capability the duty to defend regains its meaning and commits abstention. But only reality can be shared, not declara- us to act collectively. I welcome the 2011 edition of tions of intention. Be it in terms of know-how, capa- the SecDef conference, of which I know the quality, bilities or equipment, Europe cannot rely on a virtual and hope all the participants, experts and political roadmap. European credibility, be it within NATO or decision-makers brought together in Brussels had the EU, is at stake. While the Harmattan operation in useful discussions aimed at finding concrete solu- Lybia was a success, the European Union was long tions which Europe needs. SECURITY AND DEFENCE DAY 2011 7 OP-ED “Towards stronger European defence and security” European nations and the within the European context and exploiting the United States are currently options for establishing specialisations in capabili- confronted with a twofold ties and in the division of labour through pooling challenge. On the one hand, and sharing would enhance the potential of Euro- we are faced with growing pean armed forces. This may need time and will security challenges. On
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Differentiated Integration in the Eu
    DIFFERENTIATED INTEGRATION IN THE EU FROM THE INSIDE LOOKING OUT EDITED BY STEVEN BLOCKMANS CONTRIBUTORS STEVEN BLOCKMANS VÍT BENEŠ MATS BRAUN RICHARD CORBETT ELAINE FAHEY ESTER HERLIN-KARNELL THEODORE KONSTADINIDES ADAM ŁAZOWSKI CLAUDIO MATERA JUAN SANTOS VARA CSABA TÖRŐ CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN POLICY STUDIES (CEPS) BRUSSELS The Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS) is an independent policy research institute in Brussels. Its mission is to produce sound policy research leading to constructive solutions to the challenges facing Europe. The views expressed in this book are entirely those of the authors and should not be attributed to CEPS, the European Union or to any other institution with which they are associated. This book is a compilation of papers presented by the authors at an EPIN seminar on “The External Dimension of a Multi-Speed, Multi-Tier European Union” in Brussels on 6 May 2013. The European Policy Institutes Network (EPIN) is a network of 37 think tanks from 26 countries, led by CEPS. EPIN aims to contribute to the debate on the future of Europe through expert analysis and commentary and benefits from the support of the EU under the European Commission’s ‘Europe for Citizens’ Programme. In the framework of this particular research project, EPIN cooperated with the Amsterdam Centre for European Law and Governance (ACELG), the Centre for the Law of EU External Relations (CLEER) and the Faculty of Law of the University of Copenhagen. Cover image: © Jonáš Vacek, 2014 ISBN 978-94-6138-373-0 © Copyright 2014, Centre for European Policy Studies and the authors. All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Union in International Affairs III
    Brussels, 3-5 May 2012 The European Union in International Affairs III Conference venue: Koninklijke Vlaamse Academie van België voor Wetenschappen en Kunsten (KVAB): Paleis der Academiën, Hertogstraat 1, 1000 Brussels Conference 2012 THE EUROPEAN UNION IN INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS III Interdisciplinary Conference 3-5 May 2012 Paleis der Academiën, Brussels Organisation Institute for European Studies, Vrije Universiteit Brussel Egmont - Royal Institute for International Relations Institut d’Etudes Européennes, Université Libre de Bruxelles United Nations University - Comparative Regional Integration Studies With the Support of Brussel Hoofdstedelijk Gewest Koninklijke Vlaamse Academie van België voor Wetenschappen en Kunsten Table of Contents Conference Team 7 Welcome from the Organising Committee 9 Welcome to Brussels 11 Location 12 Conference Venue 13 Overview of the Conference Rooms 14 Registration and Assistance 17 Programme 19 Guidelines for Panels 46 Publication of Conference Papers 46 List of Participants 47 Notes 53 Conference Team Organising Committee Sebastian Oberthür Institute for European Studies, Vrije Universiteit Brussel Marianne Dony Institut d’Etudes Européennes, Université Libre de Bruxelles Luk Van Langenhove United Nations University programme for Comparative Regional Integration Studies, Bruges Sven Biscop Egmont-Royal Institute for International Relations, Brussels Steering Committee Alyson Bailes University of Iceland Salma Bava Jawaharlal Nehru University Dai Bingram Fudan University Chad Damro University of Edinburgh
    [Show full text]
  • Presentation Kit
    15YEARS PRESENTATION KIT TURKISH POLICY QUARTERLY PRESENTATION KIT MARCH 2017 QUARTERLY Table of Contents What is TPQ? ..............................................................................................................4 TPQ’s Board of Advisors ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������5 Strong Outreach ........................................................................................................ 7 Online Blog and Debate Sections ..........................................................................8 TPQ Events ...............................................................................................................10 TPQ in the Media ..................................................................................................... 11 Support TPQ .............................................................................................................14 Premium Sponsorship ............................................................................................ 15 Print Advertising .......................................................................................................18 Premium Sponsor ...................................................................................................19 Advertiser ................................................................................................................. 20 Online Advertising ................................................................................................... 21
    [Show full text]
  • The Netherlands and Nato
    THE NETHERLANDS AND NATO by Ramses A. Wessel, Professor of the Law of the European Union and other International Organizations, University of Twente, Centre for European Studies, The Netherlands A. Joining NATO: Constitutional Questions and Parliamentary Involvement 1. The Relation between the Legal Order of the Netherlands and the International Legal Order In order to understand the relationship between the Netherlands and NATO, one should be aware of the general, somewhat exceptional, relationship this country has with international law and international institutions. Traditionally, the Netherlands has an open attitude towards the international legal order. Its culture of global merchandising ever since the 17th century de¿ ned its position in the world and allowed for other (cultural) inÀ uences to be easily accepted by the Dutch. Some claim that the open attitude may even be a sign of a lack of na- tional sentiments, and indeed, the symbols of national identity (such as the À ag or the national hymn) are perhaps less cherished than in other countries. Joseph Luns, Minister for Foreign Affairs from 1956-1971 and later Secretary General of NATO, used to joke that the open attitude simply follows from the fact that The Netherlands as a small country has a relatively large ‘abroad’. In any case, it is generally held that the strong support for international law follows from a combination of the fact the Dutch are a law-abiding people but at the same time – as a small trading country with insuf¿ cient individual military capacity – need the protection of international rules.1 The openness of the Netherlands’ consti- tutional order is part and parcel of the domestic legal culture and explains the limited discussion (or even the absence of a real debate) on this issue.
    [Show full text]
  • NATO Secretaries-General the Legacies of Joseph Luns and Jaap De Hoop Scheffer
    NATO Secretaries-General The Legacies of Joseph Luns and Jaap de Hoop Scheffer Ryan C. Hendrickson With the end of Jaap de Hoop Scheffer’s term as NATO’s Secretary-General, the time is ripe for an initial assessment of his service as NATO’s chief diplomat. NATO’s secretary-general, an office that did not even exist until three years after the Alliance’s creation, has generated little academic scrutiny. In part, this dearth of research is understandable given the few official powers held by the Alliance’s political leader. The secretary-general is charged with promoting consensus among the Allies – a rather broad responsibility that provides few organisational tools to achieve this end. In addition, the secretary-general must oversee and manage Alliance summits and ministerial meetings, and chair meetings of the North Atlantic Council, but has no voting authority. Given this limited institutional authority, coupled with the political influence of the Alliance’s ‘great powers’ and the organisational authority wielded by NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), most histories of NATO provide little assessment of the secretary-general.1 Three individuals from the Netherlands: Dirk Stikker, Joseph Luns, and de Hoop Scheffer, have served as NATO’s chief political leader, yet each has left his own, quite different, legacy. De Hoop Scheffer’s record, at least at this first early juncture, is very different from those of his Cold War predecessors, and especially from that of his Dutch predecessor, Joseph Luns, who was NATO’s longest serving secretary-general. This essay provides a short comparison of the legacies of Luns and de Hoop Scheffer.
    [Show full text]
  • Het Tijdschrift Dan Kunt U Deze Mailen Naar [email protected] 29 Nobelprijs 13 Dubbelinterview: Jaap De Hoop Scheffer
    cda.nl Nummer 5 | December 2009 h e t tijdschrift Themanummer Redactioneel & colofon Inhoudsopgave redactioneel Vrede INHOUD 8 Kerk in Nood De redactie van CDA.nl wenst u Kerk in Nood zet zich in gezegende Kerstdagen voor vervolgde christenen en alle goeds voor 2010 13 Dubbelinterview In dit nummer: 4 Uit de regio Jaap de Hoop Scheffer 5 Van de voorzitter 6 Interview: en Jack de Vries Ruben van Swieten 8 Kerk in Nood l O H 11 Premier IRK D 12 Gedachte: foto foto Maxime Verhagen Heeft u op- of aanmerkingen over CDA.nl – het tijdschrift dan kunt u deze mailen naar [email protected] 29 Nobelprijs 13 Dubbelinterview: Jaap de Hoop Scheffer Vrouw en Politiek Fotografie Niet alle artikelen in dit tijd- voor de vrede en Jack de Vries Colofon CDA Vrouwen ANP Photo, Harry Breugom, schrift vertolken noodzakelijker- 16 Onze man in … Afrika December 2009 Dirk Hol, iStockphoto wijs de standpunten van het CDA Op 10 december ontvangt y Jaargang 5 | nummer 5 Hoofdredactie of van de redactie. Alle bijdragen maur 17 Partijnieuws Michael Sijbom Aan dit nummer in CDA.nl zijn beschermd door Barack Obama de Nobelprijs is een uitgave voor de 25 Vrouw en politiek CDA.nl werkten verder mee het auteursrecht. Uit deze ANNEN leden van het CDA. De uitgave Eindredactie Jan Schinkelshoek en al onze uitgave mag daarom niets op voor de vrede wordt tenminste zes keer per jaar Lilian Madern en Marjolijn leden en vrijwilligers die deze enigerlei wijze worden overge- ANP | T 29 Nobelprijs voor de vrede verspreid in een oplage van ruim van der Stel uitgave mogelijk hebben nomen zonder voorafgaande foto zestigduizend exemplaren.
    [Show full text]
  • Pan-European Outreach
    ecfr.eu We are living through a global counter-revolution. The institutions and values of liberal internationalism are being eroded beneath our feet and societies are becoming increasingly polarised. The consensus for EU action is increasingly difficult to forge, but there is a way forward. In this new world, the European Council on Foreign Relations will take a bottom-up approach to building grassroots consensus for greater cooperation on European foreign and security policy. Our vision is to demonstrate that engaging in common European action remains the most effective way of protecting European citizens. But we will reach out beyond those already converted to our message, framing our ideas and calls for action in a way that resonates with key decision-makers and the wider public across Europe’s capitals. Mark Leonard, Director “ 9 November is one of these portentous dates which characterised German and European history. I feel you couldn’t have chosen a better day on which to launch the new European Council on Foreign Relations here in Berlin.” Frank-Walter Steinmeier President of Germany at ECFR Berlin, 2017 ecfr.eu OUR LEADERSHIP The European Council on Foreign Mark Leonard Relations (ECFR) is an award-winning Director think-tank that aims to conduct cutting-edge independent research in pursuit of a coherent, effective, Mark is the Director and co-founder of ECFR. He was and values-based European foreign chairman of the World Economic Forum’s Global Agenda policy. Council on Geoeconomics until 2016, director of foreign policy at the Centre for European Reform, and director of We provide an exclusive meeting the Foreign Policy Centre.
    [Show full text]
  • POLAND's FOREIGN and SECURITY POLICY: MAIN DIRECTIONS Agnieszka Bieńczyk-Missala 1
    Revista UNISCI / UNISCI Journal, Nº 40 (Enero / January 2016) POLAND’S FOREIGN AND SECURITY POLICY: MAIN DIRECTIONS Agnieszka Bieńczyk-Missala 1 University of Warsaw Abstract: This article tries to present the main areas of Polish foreign and security policy.Poland’s membership in the EU and in NATO was the strongest determinant of its position in international relations, and the guiding light of its foreign policy. Poland’s work in the EU was focused in particular on EU policy towards its eastern neighbours, common energy policy and security issues, while in NATO, Poland has always been a proponent of the open doors policy and has maintained close relationship with the US, supporting many of its policies and initiatives. Keywords: Poland, European Union Security and Defence, NATO, Poland´s bilateral relations. Resumen: El artículo presenta las principales áreas de la política exterior y de seguridad de Polonia, siendo su pertenencia a la Unión Europea y la OTAN los principales determinantes de su posición en las relaciones internacionales y el foco que ilumina su política exterior. La política y actividades en la Unión Europea se han centrado en particular en la política hacia sus vecinos del Este, mientras que en La OTAN, Polonia ha sido un defensor continuamente de la política de puertas abiertas y ha mantenido una relación muy estrecha con los Estados Unidos, apoyando sus políticas e iniciativas. Palabras clave: Polonia, Seguridad y Defensa de la Unión Europea, OTAN, Relaciones bilaterales de Polonia. Copyright © UNISCI, 2016. Las opiniones expresadas en estos artículos son propias de sus autores, y no reflejan necesariamente la opinión de UNISCI.
    [Show full text]
  • France's Foreign and Security Policy Under President Macron. the Consequences for Franco-German Cooperation
    SWP Research Paper Ronja Kempin (ed.) France’s Foreign and Security Policy under President Macron The Consequences for Franco-German Cooperation Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik German Institute for International and Security Affairs SWP Research Paper 4 May 2021, Berlin Abstract ∎ French President Emmanuel Macron has announced his goal of revitalis- ing Franco-German relations and founding a “new partnership” between Paris and Berlin. However, in foreign and security policy, and in certain areas of his Europe policy, this aspiration has rarely been fulfilled. ∎ The main reasons are structural changes in international relations, which the French and German sides have reacted to differently. Paris is looking for new ways of preserving its autonomy in defence policy and of filling the strategic vacuum that has been created by the waning US interest in Europe and its periphery. Berlin emphasises the development of NATO and the EU as fundamental organisations for German foreign policy. ∎ Reconciling bilateral interests is also complicated by national solo efforts, indifference, and inadequate exchange of experience. ∎ The first precondition for intensifying bilateral cooperation is for Paris and Berlin to conduct a comprehensive review of the international con- flict situation in their existing cooperation formats as regards foreign and security policy. The two governments need to discuss openly to what extent their national interests are concerned, and then determine con- crete measures. ∎ Second, they must refrain from national solo efforts and be sensitive to the other’s pressure points in foreign, security and Europe policy. The Franco-German Parliamentary Assembly needs to urge the executive of both countries to fulfil the Élysée Treaty and the Aachen Treaty.
    [Show full text]
  • Sample Chapter
    Copyright material – 9781137025746 Contents List of Figures, Tables and Boxes viii Preface to the Second Edition x List of Abbreviations xii Introduction 1 Scope, Rationale and Relevance of the Book 1 The Changing Context of EU Foreign Policy 4 Objectives and Approach 6 Outline of Chapters 6 1 The Nature of EU Foreign Policy 11 Understanding EU Foreign Policy 11 Areas of Tension in EU Foreign Policy 19 Back to the Treaties: Principles and Objectives 25 Relational and Structural Foreign Policy 27 The Globalizing Context of EU Foreign Policy 30 Conclusion 33 2 European Integration and Foreign Policy: Historical Overview 35 European Integration: The Product of a Structural Foreign Policy (1945–52) 35 The First Decades (1952–70): A Taboo on Defence, Decisive Steps on Trade and International Agreements 39 European Political Cooperation: Setting the Stage (1970–93) 42 The Maastricht Treaty (1993) and the Illusory CFSP 46 The Amsterdam Treaty (1999) and ESDP: Moving towards Action 51 Eastern Enlargement (2004/07), the Lisbon Treaty (2009) and New Challenges 55 Conclusion 60 3 The EU’s Foreign Policy System: Actors 61 One Framework, Two Policy-making Methods, or a Continuum? 61 The European Council 63 The Council 66 The Commission 72 The High Representative/Vice-President and the EEAS 77 The European Parliament 85 v Copyright material – 9781137025746 vi Contents The Court of Justice 89 Other Actors 90 Conclusion 93 4 The EU’s Foreign Policy System: Policy-making 94 Competences 94 Decision-making 97 Policy-making in Practice 104 Financing EU Foreign
    [Show full text]
  • Forming Coalitions in the Eu After Brexit
    FORMING COALITIONS IN THE EU AFTER BREXIT The Advisory Council on International Affairs is an advisory body for the Dutch ALLIANCES FOR A EUROPEAN UNION THAT government and parliament. In particular its reports address the policy of the Minister of MODERNISES AND PROTECTS Foreign Affairs, the Minister of Defence and the Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation. No. 108, July 2018 The Council will function as un umbrella body with committees responsible for human rights, peace and security, development cooperation and European integration. While retaining expert knowledge in these areas, the aim of the Council is to integrate the provision of advice. Its staff are: Robert Dekker, Jan Willem Glashouwer, Marja Kwast-van Duursen and André Westerink. ADVISORY COUNCIL ON INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS ADVISORY COUNCIL ON INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS P.O.BOX 20061, 2500 EB THE HAGUE, THE NETHERLANDS ADVIESRAAD INTERNATIONALE VRAAGSTUKKEN AIV TELEPHONE +31(0)70 348 5108/60 60 [email protected] WWW.AIV-ADVICE.NL Members of the Advisory Council on International Affairs Chair Professor Jaap de Hoop Scheffer Vice-chair Professor Joris Voorhoeve Members Professor Tineke Cleiren Professor Joyeeta Gupta Professor Ernst Hirsch Ballin Professor Luuk van Middelaar Professor Mirjam van Reisen Monica Sie Dhian Ho Lieutenant-General (ret.) Marcel Urlings Executive Secretary Marja Kwast-van Duursen P.O. Box 20061 2500 EB The Hague The Netherlands telephone + 31 70 348 5108/6060 e-mail [email protected] www.aiv-advice.nl Members of the Committee on forming coalitions
    [Show full text]
  • Bellona 1/2012 SPIS TREŚ CI
    1918–1950 BELLONA 1950–2007 MYŚL WOJSKOWA KWARTALNIK BELLONA Pismo naukowe wydawane przez Ministerstwo Obrony Narodowej Rocznik XCIV (VI) Nr 1/2012 (668) SPIS TREŚ CI BEZPIECZEŃSTWO kmdr J. Ochman Udział prezydencji Polski w kształtowaniu Wspólnej Polityki Bezpieczeństwa i Obrony .............. 7 ppłk rez. dr G. Ciechanowski Polacy pod błękitną flagą ....................................................................................................................... 34 płk dypl. w st. spocz. Z. Czarnotta, płk w st. spocz. dr Z. Moszumański Ocean Indyjski i jego znaczenie geostrategiczne ................................................................................ 47 dr R. Czulda Polityka a strategia bezpieczeństwa – ujęcie teoretyczne .................................................................. 57 płk rez. dr L. Chojnowski Sektorowa analiza bezpieczeństwa ....................................................................................................... 62 kmdr por. M. Nałęcz Reforma sił zbrojnych Federacji Rosyjskiej ....................................................................................... 76 SZTUKA WOJENNA płk w st. spocz. prof. zw. dr hab. L. Wyszczelski Polska sztuka wojenna w okresie narastania zagrożenia wojennego (1935–1939) ......................... 89 wiceadm. w st. spocz. dr inż. H. Sołkiewicz Działania bojowe polskich sił podwodnych podczas drugiej wojny światowej (1939–1945). Cz. II ..108 DOŚWIADCZENIA prof. zw. dr hab. J. Symonides Zastosowanie koncepcji zasady odpowiedzialności za ochronę w konflikcie
    [Show full text]