DOCSLIB.ORG

NATO Handbook 1992

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
NATO Handbook 1992 T NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANISATION NATO HANDBOOK NA TO HA NDBOOK 1992 NATO OFFICE OF INFORMATION AND PR ESS BRUSSELS EDITOR’S NOTE The transformation of the security environment in uErope since 1989 has had a profound impact on the North Atlantic Alliance. In addition to major reductions in the levels of armed forces and in aspects of their readiness, availability and deployment, it has led to a number of new or much expanded tasks for the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. These include establishing a process of dialogue and cooperation with the states of Central and Eastern Europe and the newly independent states on the territory of the former Soviet Union; developing a close working relationship with other institutions, notably the CSCE and the WEU; and introducing new command and force structures which reflect the changed strategic environment. In the follow-up to the July 1990 London Declaration on a Transformed North Atlantic Alliance and the publication of the Alliance’s new Strategic Con­ cept, a number of studies were set in hand to consider the future structure and organisation of the Alliance in the light of decreasing defence resources and major strategic change. Some of these studies have led to recommend­ ations on which final decisions have still to be made. Others have not yet reached a conclusion. However in a number of areas important changes affecting the organis­ ation and functioning of the Alliance have already been implemented. To the extent possible such changes are reflected in this volume. The NATO Handbook is not a formally agreed NATO document and does not therefore necessarily represent the official opinion or position of individual member governments on all policy issues discussed. ISBN 92-845-9966-4 NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANISA TION cNATO) The North Atlantic Treaty, signed in Washington on 4 April 1949, created an Alliance for collective defence as defined in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. The Alliance links of urteen European countries with the United States and Canada. MEMBER COUNTRIES Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States. The NATO Emblem was adopted as the symbol of the Atlantic Alliance by the North Atlantic Council in Octo­ ber 1953. The circle is the symbol of unity and cooper­ ation and the compass rose suggests the common road to peace taken by the 16 member countries of the Atlantic Alliance. The blue background represents the Atlantic Ocean. TABLE OF CONTENTS page What is NATO? 11 The Fundamental Tasks of the Alliance 12 Origins of the Alliance 14 NATO Today 15 PART I - HOW NATO WORKS Machinery of Cooperation 23 Fundamental Operating Principles 29 Joint Decision-Making 29 Political C onsultation 31 Crisis Management 34 The Defence Dimension 34 Consultations on Nuclear Issues 37 Economic Cooperation 38 Public Information 40 The Common Infrastructure Programme 42 Logistic Support 43 Armaments Cooperation 44 Armaments Planning 45 Standardization 46 Communications and Information Systems 47 Air Defence 47 Civil Emergency Planning 49 Civil and Military Coordination of Air Traffic Management 50 Scientific Cooperation and Environmental Challenges 51 PART II - THE FUTURE ROLE OF THE ALLIANCE An E ra of Political Change 57 The New Security Architecture 64 A Broad Approach to Security 65 The Alliance’s Strategic Concept 66 Dialogue, Partnership and Cooperation 68 The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe 71 Europe’s Security Identity and DefenceR ole 72 Arms Control 73 7 PART III - ORGANISATION AND STRUCTURES NATO Headquarters 83 PermanentR epresentatives and National Delegations 83 The International Staff 83 The Secretary General 84 Office of the Secretary General 84 Executive Secretariat 86 Office oflnform ation and Press 86 NATO Office of Security 88 Division of Political Affairs 89 Political Affairs Directorate 89 Economics Directorate 89 Division of Defence Planning and Policy 90 Directorate of Force Planning and Policy 90 Nuclear Planning Directorate 90 Division of Defence Support 91 Directorate of Armaments and Defence Research 91 Directorate of Command Control and Communications 91 Directorate of Air Defence Systems 92 Directorate of Cooperation, Planning and Standardization 92 Division of Infrastructure, Logistics and Civil Emergency Planning 92 Infrastructure Directorate 93 Logistics Directorate 93 Civil Emergency Planning Directorate 94 Scientific Affairs Division 95 Office of Management 95 Office of the Financial Controller 96 Office of the Chairman of the Budget Committees 96 International Board of Auditors 96 Production and Logistics Organisations 97 National Military Representatives 98 The Military Committee 98 International Military Staff 101 Organisation of the International Military Staff 102 The Role of Allied Military Forces 103 The Integrated Military Command Structure 105 Allied Command Europe (AC E ) 106 The Supreme Allied Commander, Europe (SACEUR) 106 Allied Command Atlantic (ACLANT) 108 8 The Supreme Allied C ommander, Atlantic (SACLANT) 108 Allied Command Channel (ACCH AN) 109 The Commander-in-Chief Channel (CINCHAN) 109 Canada-United States Regional Planning Group 110 Forces A v ailable to NAT O 110 ACE Mobile Force (AMF) 111 Standing Naval Forces 112 Reserve Forces 113 Military Agencies and Organisations 113 Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development (AGAR D ) 113 Military Agencyo fr Standardization (MAS) 114 NATO Electronic Warfare Advisory Committee (NEWAC) 114 EURO/NATO Training Group 115 Military Committee Meteorological Group (MCMG) 115 Military Telecommunications and CIS Agencies 115 SHAPE Technical Centre 116 SACLANT Undersea Research Centre 116 NATO Defense College 117 PART IV - INTER LOCKING INSTITUTIONS The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) 121 The European Community (EC) 123 The Western European Union (WEU) 126 The Council of Europe 129 PART V - OTHER INTERGOVERNMENTAL AND NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONS North Atlantic Assembly (NAA) 133 Atlantic Treaty Association (ATA) 135 Interallied Confederation of Reserve Officers (CIOR) 137 The Eurogroup 139 Independent European Programme Group (IEPG) 140 9 APPENDICES APPENDIX I THE NO RTH ATLANTIC TREATY 143 APPENDIX II THE ALLIANCE’S STRATEGIC CONCEPT 147 APPENDIX III MEMBERS OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC COUNCIL 161 APPENDIX IV MEMBERS OF THE MILITARY COMMITTEE 163 APPENDIX V MAJOR NATO COMMANDERS 165 APPENDIX VI PRINCIPAL OFFICIALS OF THE INTERNATIONAL STAFF 167 APPENDIX VII PRINCIPAL OFFICIALS OF THE INTERNATIONAL MILITARY STAFF 169 APPENDIX VIII PRINCIPAL NATO AGENCIES 171 APPENDIX IX ABBREVIATIONS IN COMMON USE 173 APPENDIX X CHRONOLOGY 177 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS NATO’s Civil and Military Structure 20 Principal Committees of the Council 32 NATO International Staff 85 Divisions of the International Staff 87 NATO Military Structure 99 NATO International Military Staff 99 10 WHAT IS NATO? The North Atlantic Treaty of April 1949 brought into being an Alliance of independent countries with a common interest in maintaining peace and defending their freedom through political solidarity and adequate military defence to deter and, if necessary, repel all poss­ ible forms of aggression against them. Created within the framework of Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, which reaffirms the inherent right of individual or collec­ tive defence, the Alliance is an association of free states united in their determination to preserve their security through mutual guarantees and stable relations with other countries. NATO is the Organisation which serves the Alliance. It is an inter-governmental organisation in which member countries retain their full sovereignty and independence. The Organisation provides the forum in which they con­ sult together on any issues they may choose to raise and take decisions on political and military matters affecting their security. It provides the structures needed to facili­ tate consultation and cooperation between them, not only in political fields but also in many other areas where policies can be coordinated in order to fulfil the goals of the North Atlantic Treaty. NATO’s essential purpose is thus to safeguard the free­ dom and security of all its members by political and military means in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter. Based on common values of democracy, human rights and the rule of law, the Alliance has worked since its inception for the establishment of a just and lasting peaceful order in Europe. This Alliance objective remains unchanged. NATO also embodies the transatlantic link by which the security of North America is permanently tied to the security of Europe. It is the practical expression of effective collective effort among its members in support of their common interests. The fundamental operating principle of the Alliance is that of common commitment and mutual cooperation 11 among sovereign states based on the indivisibility of the security of its members. Solidarity within the Alliance, given substance and effect by N A TO ’s daily work in politi­ cal, military and other spheres, ensures that no member country is forced to rely upon its own national efforts alone in dealing with basic security challenges. Without depriving member states of their right and duty to assume their sovereign responsibilities in the field of defence, the Alliance enables them through collective effort to enhance their ability to realise their essential national security objectives.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NATO Expansion: Benefits and Consequences
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2001 NATO expansion: Benefits and consequences Jeffrey William Christiansen The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Christiansen, Jeffrey William, "NATO expansion: Benefits and consequences" (2001). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 8802. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/8802 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ■rr - Maween and Mike MANSFIELD LIBRARY The University of M ontana Permission is granted by the author to reproduce this material in its entirety, provided that this material is used for scholarly purposes and is properly cited in published works and reports. **Please check "Yes" or "No" and provide signature** Yes, I grant permission X No, I do not grant permission ________ Author's Signature; Date:__ ^ ^ 0 / Any copying for commercial purposes or financial gain may be undertaken only with the author's explicit consent. MSThe»i9\M«r«f»eld Library Permission Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. NATO EXPANSION: BENEFITS AND CONSEQUENCES by Jeffrey William Christiansen B.A. University of Montana, 2000 presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts The University of Montana 2001 Approved by: hairpers Dean, Graduate School 7 - 24- 0 ^ Date Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty: Past, Present, and Uncertain Future
    NOTES ARTICLE 5 OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY: PAST, PRESENT, AND UNCERTAIN FUTURE Broderick C. Grady* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ......................................... 169 II. THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY: ITS ORIGINS AND PRECEDENTS... 171 A. The Atlantic Charter .................................. 171 B. The Brussels Treaty .................................. 173 C. The Rio Pact ........................................ 174 D. The Formationof the North Atlantic Treaty ................ 175 MI. ARTICLE 5: CONTEXT AND MEANING ........................ 177 IV. THE LIMITATIONS ON ARTICLE 5: ARTICLE 6 AND THE UN CHARTER .......................... 180 V. ARTICLE 5: THE PRESENT: SEPTEMBER 11 AND THE INVOCATION OF ARTICLE 5 ............................................. 185 A. Problems with the Invocation After 9/11 .................. 185 B. Difficulties in Invoking Article 5 Against TerroristGroups ..................................... 187 C. Did Article 5 Need to Be Invoked at All? .................. 188 * J.D. 2003, University of Georgia School of Law; B.A. 1999, Washington & Lee University. 168 GA. J. INT'L & COMP. L. [Vol. 31:167 VI. THE UNCERTAIN FUTURE OF ARTICLE 5: CONCLUSIONS ......... 193 A. Does the Invocation of Article 5 Have any Value as Legal Precedent? ............................. 193 B. Invoking Article 5 in the Future ......................... 197 20021 ARTICLE 5 OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY I. INTRODUCTION In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the United States government acted to combat terrorism and bring those who supported the perpetrators of the attacks to justice.' President George W. Bush created the position of Director of Homeland Security, naming former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge to the post;' Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act, containing several anti-terrorism provisions;3 and throughout the country, officials took steps to tighten security at likely targets, including airports, sporting events, and government buildings." The United States was not alone, however, in responding to the tragedy of September 11.
    [Show full text]
  • Transformation of Nato in the Face of Transnational Terrorism
    TRANSFORMATION OF NATO IN THE FACE OF TRANSNATIONAL TERRORISM A Master’s Thesis by SEBAHAT BULDUK Department of International Relations Bilkent University Ankara September 2009 To my parents and Ertuğrul TRANSFORMATION OF NATO IN THE FACE OF TRANSNATIONAL TERRORISM The Institute of Economics and Social Sciences of Bilkent University by Sebahat BULDUK In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS In THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS BILKENT UNIVERSITY ANKARA September 2009 I certify that I have read this thesis and have found that it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in International Relations. Assoc. Prof. Ersel AYDINLI Supervisor I certify that I have read this thesis and have found that it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in International Relations. Asst. Prof. Tarık OĞUZLU Examining Committee Member I certify that I have read this thesis and have found that it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Arts in International Relations. Asst. Prof. Aylin GÜNEY Examining Committee Member Approval of the Institute of Economics and Social Sciences Prof. Dr. Erdal Erel Director ABSTRACT TRANSFORMATION OF NATO IN THE FACE OF TRANSNATIONAL TERORISM Bulduk, Sebahat M.A. Department of International Relations Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Ersel Aydınlı September 2009 Transnational terrorism with special reference to the September 11 attacks in 2001 on the territory of the United States has significant impacts on NATO’s approach to terrorism at rhetorical, practical and institutional levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Greece and NATO Master's Thesis Presented
    The “Menace from the North” and the Suppression of the Left: Greece and NATO Master’s Thesis Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University Ioannis Pavlou, B.A. Graduate Program in Slavic and East European Studies The Ohio State University 2015 Thesis Committee: Georgios Anagnostou, advisor Anthony Kaldellis Copyright by Ioannis Nikos Pavlou 2015 Abstract In the aftermath of the Greek Civil War, the right-wing elements of Greece’s government felt that they needed to join NATO to protect Greek interests from the perceived threat posed by Communism and their Balkan neighbors. Throughout this period of time, the Greek state implemented several drastic and often undemocratic motions that led to measures against minority groups, suppressing left-wing politicians, and applying old nationalistic rhetoric such as the “Menace from the North” to the situation with the Communist regimes in their neighboring countries. During this time, Greek interests often were pushed aside in order to appease the United States and other members of NATO while at other points, Greece nearly went to war with their NATO ally Turkey over the future of Cyprus. Meanwhile, Greece’s new-found alliance with NATO led to an improvement of their military capabilities to the point where the highly nationalistic, anti-Communist army would seize control of the government in 1967 and form a Military Junta. During the seven years of military control, NATO continued to work with the Military Junta which in turn would have drastic consequences when Greece nearly went to war with Turkey over Cyprus.
    [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]
  • NATO As a Factor of Security Community Building
    NATO as a Factor of Security Community Building: Enlargement and Democratization in Central and Eastern Europe EAPC-NATO Individual Fellowship Final Report 1999-2001 BY CORNELIU BJOLA CENTRAL EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY International Relations and European Studies Program Email: [email protected] DISCLAIMER The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or the Central European University (CEU), Budapest. The author wishes to thank to the NATO Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council and to the CEU International Relations Department for financial and academic support. List of Tables and Graphs Table 1: Level of political engagement with NATO……………………………………. 29 Table 2: Level of military engagement with NATO…………………………………….. 30 Table 3: Major political-military agreements between Hungary and Romania…………. 32 Table 4: Foreign and military policy orientations……………………………………….. 33 Table 5: Legal basis of the Hungarian and Romanian NSSP……………………………. 36 Table 6: Restructuring of the armed forces……………………………………………… 38 Table 7: Readiness status of the Romanian and Hungarian armed forces………………. 40 Table 8: General framework of democratic civilian control of the military…………….. 43 Graph 1: Major bilateral agreements……………………………………………………. 30 Graph 2: Official high-level meetings…………………………………………………... 31 Graph 3: Trade relations………………………………………………………………… 49 Graph 4: Satisfaction with democracy…………………………………………………... 50 Graph 5: Respect for human rights……………………………………………………… 50 Graph 6: Public support for extremist parties…………………………………………… 50 Graph 7: NATO centripetal influence…………………………………………………… 57 2 TTAABBLLEE OOFF CCOONNTTEENNTTSS INTRODUCTION 4 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 7 RESEARCH DESIGN 11 A) TESTING HYPOTHESES : 11 B) CONSTRUCTION OF VARIABLES , METHODOLOGY: 12 C) CASE STUDIES , DATA SOURCES : 13 I. BUILDING TRUST BETWEEN FORMER ENEMIES 15 SEARCHING FOR A NEW IDENTITY 15 EXPORTING STABILITY TO THE EAST 17 TAKING ON NEW RESPONSIBILITIES 21 II.
    [Show full text]
  • A Primer to the Wales NATO Summit: NATO, Summit Agenda, Likely Results, Canadian Interest
    A Primer to the Wales NATO Summit: NATO, summit agenda, likely results, Canadian interest Aby POLICY Colin Robertson PAPER September, 2014 POLICY PAPER A Primer to the Wales NATO Summit: NATO, summit agenda, likely results, Canadian interest by Colin Robertson CDFAI Vice President September, 2014 Prepared for the Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute 1600, 530 – 8th Avenue S.W., Calgary, AB T2P 3S8 www.cdfai.org ©2014 Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute ISBN: 978-1-927573-00-6 A Primer to the Wales NATO Summit residents, Prime Ministers, and ministers responsible for foreign affairs and defence will meet in Newport, near Cardiff in Wales for the 26th NATO summit, September 4-5, at the P invitation of UK Prime Minister David Cameron. With ‘partner’ nations also present, leaders of 60 countries are expected at the summit. The conference takes place against a backdrop of the ongoing Ukrainian crisis and continuing turmoil in the Middle East and North Africa. As host David Cameron observed in his letter to fellow leaders "In 2014, the world is more unpredictable than ever and we meet at another pivotal moment in the history of the alliance." Or, as President Obama said last week at a party fundraiser, "If you watch the nightly news, it feels like the world is falling apart." Both leaders are also conscious of the domestic backdrop: the Scottish referendum on independence (September 18) and the US midterms (November 4). WHAT IS NATO? In the wake of the Second World War, the victors set up a series of international institutions. The foremost was the United Nations, with universal membership designed to advance human progress and prevent the “scourge of war”.
    [Show full text]
  • The Southern Flank of NATO, 1951-1959: Military Stategy Or Poltical Stabilisation? Chourchoulis, Dionysios
    The southern flank of NATO, 1951-1959: military stategy or poltical stabilisation? Chourchoulis, Dionysios The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without the prior written consent of the author For additional information about this publication click this link. https://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/jspui/handle/123456789/702 Information about this research object was correct at the time of download; we occasionally make corrections to records, please therefore check the published record when citing. For more information contact [email protected] 1 THE SOUTHERN FLANK OF NATO, 1951-1959. MILITARY STRATEGY OR POLITICAL STABILISATION? Dionysios Chourchoulis Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Queen Mary University of London Department of History September 2010 2 ABSTRACT In 1951-52, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation established the Southern Flank, a strategy for the defence of the eastern Mediterranean in the Cold War involving Greece, Italy and Turkey. Among its many aims, the Southern Flank sought to mobilize Greece and Turkey as allies and integrate them into the Western defence system. Throughout 1950s, the alliance developed the Southern Flank and in 1959, it was finally stabilized as fractious Greek-Turkish relations were improved by the temporary settlement over Cyprus. These events are the focus of this thesis. It examines, among other things, the initial negotiations of 1951-52, the Southern Flank‟s structure and function and relative value in NATO‟s overall policy, and its response to the challenges of the eastern Mediterranean in the early Cold War.
    [Show full text]
  • Prepared Statement for Committee on Foreign
    PREPARED STATEMENT FOR COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE HEARING ON NATO ENLARGEMENT APRIL 3, 2003 by Jeffrey Simon* Senior Research Fellow Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University NATO, the core institution defining the transatlantic relationship, stands at a crossroad. Now that the Alliance’s 21-22 November 2002 Prague Summit has passed into history, NATO will need to focus on implementing its decisions that include the adoption of transformed command arrangements, a NATO Response Force (NRF), a Capabilities Commitment to deal with post-September 11th security challenges, and substantial enlargement of the North Atlantic Council (NAC) to 26 members in 2004. The “new” NATO will be a very different organization from what it has been. On balance, integration of the seven new members on NATO will make a modest but generally quite positive contribution to this transformation of transatlantic security affairs. The European Union (EU)’s decision at Copenhagen on 12-13 December 2002 to enlarge from 15 members today to 25 by mid-2004 will similarly challenge and transform that organization. In 2004 eight of NATO’s new members (Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Slovakia, and Slovenia) also will be in a “new” EU. The dual (NATO and EU) enlargement will further reduce the “variable geometry” that has existed between the two institutions in Europe and result in “mingling EU and NATO cultures” with unknown, but potentially significant consequences. However, the EU’s eight new NATO members, who have recent historical memory of Soviet domination, joined the Alliance because they see it as the best vehicle to guarantee their security and defense concerns and strongly support the active U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Involvement of Non-Eu European Nato Members in Common Security And
    ANKARA ÜNĐVERSĐTESĐ AVRUPA TOPLULUKLARI ARATIRMA VE UYGULAMA MERKEZĐ Araştırma Dizisi No: 37 INVOLVEMENT OF NONEU EUROPEAN NATO MEMBERS IN COMMON SECURITY AND DEFENSE POLICY: THE TURKISH CASE Dr. eyda HANBAY Ankara-2013 Involvement of NonEU European NATO Members in Common Security and Defense Policy: The Turkish Case ANKARA ÜNĐVERSĐTESĐ YAYINLARI NO: 368 ISBN: 978605-136090-4 Ankara Üniversitesi Avrupa Toplulukları Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi, 2013 Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Yayıncı izni olmadan, kısmen de olsa fotokopi, film vb. elektronik ve mekanik yöntemlerle çoğaltılamaz. Ankara Üniversitesi Avrupa Toplulukları Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Araştırma Dizisi ATAUM Kitap Yayın Komisyonu Prof. Dr. Tuğrul ARAT Prof.Dr.Çınar ÖZEN Doç. Dr. Sanem BAYKAL Deniz SENEMOĞLU (ATAUM) Demet Halime SEZGEN (ATAUM) ATAUM Yönetim Kurulu Prof.Dr.Çağrı ERHAN Doç.Dr.Sanem BAYKAL Doç.Dr.Erdem DENK Prof.Dr.Celal GÖLE Prof.Dr.Tuğrul ARAT Prof.Dr.Erel TELLAL Prof.Dr.Fethi AÇIKEL Prof.Dr.Hasan ŞAHĐN Yrd.Doç.Dr.Đlke GÖÇMEN Murat YAPICI (Dış Ticaret Müsteşarlığı) Nazife GÜLGEN (Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı) Dr.Hakan KARABACAK (Maliye Bakanlığı) Pınar TANLAK (Avrupa Birliği Genel Sekreterliği) Kaya TÜRKMEN (Dışişleri Bakanlığı) Ankara Üniversitesi Avrupa Toplulukları Araştırma ve Uygulama Merkezi Araştırma Dizisi No: 37 ANKARA ÜNĐVERSĐTESĐ BASIMEVĐ Đncitaşı Sokak No: 10 06510 Beşevler / ANKARA Tel: 0 (312) 213 66 55 Basım Tarihi: ……………. II CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES......................................................................................... VI LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS.......................................................................VII
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    USNATO READER TABLE OF CONTENTS Michael Newlin 1963-1967 Political-Military Officer, US Mission to Regional Organizations, Paris, France Thomas W. Wilson 1964-1968 Political Advisor, US Mission to NATO, Brussels Harlan Cleveland 1965-1969 U.S. Permanent Representative, Paris & Brussels Donald A. Kruse 1965-1968 Political Military Advisor, NATO, Paris 1968-1970 Assistant to NATO Security General, Paris Charles Anthony Gillespie 1967-1968 Administrative and Security Officer, US Mission to NATO, Brussels Robert A. Martin 1967-1969 Arms Control and Disarmament Officer, US Mission to NATO, Brussels Marten Van Heuven 1967-1970 Legal Advisor, US Mission to NATO, Brussels Joseph F. Donelan, Jr. 1968-1969 Comptroller, US Mission to NATO, Brussels Raymond L. Garthoff 1968-1970 Counselor for Political-Military Affairs, US Mission to NATO, Brussels John W. Kimball 1968-1969 Executive Assistant, US Mission to NATO, Brussels 1969-1971 Political Military Affairs, US Mission to NATO, Brussels Gerald B. Helman 1968-1973 Political Officer, US Mission to NATO, Brussels Ralph Earle, II 1969-1972 Defense Advisor, US Mission to NATO, Brussels 1 Lucian Heichler 1970-1971 Senior Officer Training, NATO Defense College, Rome, Italy Perry W. Linder 1970-1973 Deputy Administrative Officer, US Mission to NATO, Brussels Theodore Wilkinson 1970-1974 Political-Military Officer, US Mission to NATO, Brussels Thomas M. T. Niles 1971-1973 Deputy Chief of Mission, US Mission to NATO, Brussels John Brayton Redecker 1972-1974 Executive Officer, US Mission to NATO, Brussels Mark C. Lissfelt 1973-1976 Assistant Director, US Mission to NATO, Brussels Bruce W. Clark 1973-1977 Special Assistant to Ambassador, US Mission to NATO, Brussels Stephen J.
    [Show full text]