Transatlantic Security and Defense Links at Risk? NATO, the United States and the European Union at a Crossroads By Elena Kemmerzell I Abstract This paper deals with the coexistence of NATO and the EU’s security and defense policy. It analyzes if transatlantic relations are threatened, e.g. by European security policy-related solo efforts like the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO). The research questions are ‘What are the security interests of NATO Allies within the Alliance?’ and ‘In what way do the EU’s efforts to strengthen its own security and defense policy influence the transatlantic relationship?’. The analysis shows that American isolationism is not present currently and that strengthening European security and defense is an asset and not a threat to NATO. Hence, neither NATO nor the US should worry about European endeavors as they have advantages for NATO’s military strength, although its development proceeds slowly. Potential progress will show if the EU can implement its security and defense undertakings. Key words: NATO, security and defense policy, EU, PESCO, transatlantic relations Die vorliegende Studie behandelt die Koexistenz der NATO und der Sicherheits- und Vertei- digungspolitik der EU. Es wird analysiert, ob die transatlantischen Beziehungen gefährdet sind, beispielsweise durch europäische sicherheitspolitische Alleingänge wie die Permanente Strukturierte Zusammenarbeit (PECSO). Die Forschungsfragen sind „Was sind die Sicher- heitsinteressen der NATO-Alliierten innerhalb der Allianz?“ und „Inwiefern beeinflussen die Anstrengungen der EU, ihre Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik zu stärken, die transatlanti- schen Beziehungen?“. Die Analyse zeigt, dass derzeit kein amerikanischer Isolationismus präsent ist und dass die Stärkung europäischer Sicherheits- und Verteidigungsmechanismen ein Asset und kein Konkurrenzverhalten für die NATO darstellt. Aufgrund dessen sollten sich weder die NATO noch die USA um europäische Vorhaben sorgen, da diese Vorteile für die militärische Stärke der NATO haben, diese Entwicklung jedoch nur langsam voranschreitet. Potentielle Fortschritte dieser Vorhaben werden zeigen, ob die EU ihre Sicherheits- und Ver- teidigungsvorhaben umsetzen kann. Schlagwörter: NATO, Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik, EU, PESCO, transatlantische Beziehungen II Table of Contents 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 2. Theoretical Approach to Neorealism ................................................................................. 3 3. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization ............................................................................ 8 3.1. The Founding of NATO, Its Development and Command Structure .......................... 8 3.2. NATO’s Strategic Concepts ...................................................................................... 13 3.3. Outstanding NATO Operations ................................................................................. 15 3.4. Current Challenges of NATO .................................................................................... 20 4. Exemplary Actors within NATO and Their Security Interests in the Light of Current Internal Challenges ........................................................................................................... 25 4.1. The United States within NATO ............................................................................... 27 4.2. Germany within NATO ............................................................................................. 33 4.3. Poland within NATO ................................................................................................. 38 5. The European Union’s Own Security and Defense Efforts and Its Relationship to NATO ............................................................................................................................... 42 5.1. The History of the European Union’s Security and Defense Efforts ........................ 42 5.2. Permanent Structured Cooperation ............................................................................ 45 5.3. The European Union’s Strengthening of Its Own Security and Defense Policy in Relationship to NATO ........................................................................................... 49 6. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 56 7. Bibliography ..................................................................................................................... 59 7.1. Primary Sources ......................................................................................................... 59 7.2. Secondary Sources ..................................................................................................... 64 8. Appendix: Self-Conducted Interviews ............................................................................. 71 8.1. Self-Conducted, Personal Interview with James D. Bindenagel ............................... 71 8.2. Self-Conducted, Personal Telephone Interview with Elisabeth Braw ...................... 79 III List of Abbreviations ACO Allied Command Operations (Strategic Level) ACT Allied Command Transformation (Strategic Level) AIRCOM Air Command AU African Union AWACS Airborne Warning and Control System BC Before Christ CARD Coordinated Annual Review on Defence CDU Christian Democratic Union of Germany CFSP Common Foreign and Security Policy CIA Central Intelligence Agency CISG Center for International Security and Governance CSDP Common Security and Defence Policy DGAP Deutsche Gesellschaft für Auswärtige Politik e. V. (German Council on Foreign Relations) DSACEUR Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe EAEC European Atomic Energy Community EC European Communities ECSC European Coal and Steal Community EDA European Defence Agency EDC European Defence Community EDF European Defence Fund EEAS European External Action Service EEC European Economic Community ESDI European Security and Defence Identity ESDP European Security and Defence Policy EU European Union EUFOR European Union Force EULEX European Union Rule of Law Mission EUPOL European Union Police Mission FNC Framework Nations Concept GDP Gross Domestic Product HR/VP High Representative/ Vice President IFOR Implementation Force IV IR International Relations ISAF International Security Assistance Force ISIL Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant ISIS Islamic State of Iraq and Syria JFC Joint Force Command (Operational Level) JISR Joint Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance KFOR Kosovo Force LANDCOM Land Command MAPE Multinational Advisory Police Element MARCOM Maritime Command MoD Minister of Defense (oftentimes also used for Ministry of Defense) NAC North Atlantic Council NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization NCS NATO Command Structure NFS NATO Force Structure NIP National Implementation Plan NPT Non-Proliferation Treaty NRC NATO-Russia Council NRF NATO Response Force NTCB-I NATO Training and Capacity Building Activity in Iraq (as of December 2017, now called NMI: NATO Mission in Iraq) OPCOM Operational Command PESCO Permanent Structured Cooperation PfP Partnership for Peace PiS Prawo i Sprawiedliwość (Law and Justice) PRT Provincial Reconstruction Team PSC Political and Security Committee RAP Readiness Action Plan SACEUR Supreme Allied Commander Europe SACT Supreme Allied Commander Transformation SDI Strategic Defense Initiative SFOR Stabilisation Force SHAPE Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe SIPRI Stockholm International Peace Research Institute V SSC Single Service Command (Tactical Level) TEU Treaty on European Union TFEU Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union UK United Kingdom UN United Nations UNPROFOR United Nations Protection Force US(A) United States (of America) USSR Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (Soviet Union) VJTF Very High Readiness Joint Task Force WEU Western European Union VI 1. Introduction “As Europeans look at the best way to organise their foreign and security policy cooperation, the key is to make sure that any institutional change is consistent with basic principles that have served the Atlantic partnership well for 50 years. This means avoiding what I would call the Three Ds: decoupling, duplication, and discrimination.”1 Former Secretary of State of the United States of America (USA), Madeleine Albright, was skeptical about a strengthened European security and defense policy that should exist next to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which the United States (US) is part of. She already voiced her concern about the European Union’s (EU) project in the late 1990s but the topic is by no means outdated. Rather, it is still present today and relevant more than ever. As most NATO Nations are also members of the EU2, the US constantly fears that the EU’s plans to strengthen its own security and defense will lead to the following: a decoupling on the Eu- ropean side from the United States, leading to a weakening of NATO which usually repre- sented strong transatlantic ties; duplications concerning defense capabilities which would be a waste of resources; and discrimination, meaning that those NATO members who are not part of the EU will suffer from disadvantages and exclusion within the transatlantic Alliance.3 In the past 20 years, the European Union’s attempts to become a more independent securi- ty and defense actor have shown results, although the projects