Posted by Kyle Atwell in
Transatlantic Relations on Thursday, April 3. 2008
The NATO Secretary General published an article in the latest NATO Review magazine released last week, where he outlines his priorities for the NATO Summit which is taking place in Bucharest, Romania from April 2-4. In the article, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer says there are four major issue areas that will be focused on at the Summit:
1) Operations (in particular Afghanistan)
2) NATO enlargement
3) NATO transformation
4) NATO partnerships
While NATO as an organization has focused significant resources on these four areas, the media leading up to the summit has largely focused on three issues: whether or not a path to NATO membership will be offered by the Allies to Ukraine and Georgia; speculation on troop increases in Afghanistan; and whether or not France will fully reintegrate into NATO.
This article provides a media round up covering some of the main issues from the days leading up to this week’s Bucharest Summit. The selected articles are not comprehensive, but should provide a decent framework to understand what some of the major chatter will be at the Summit.
OPERATIONS - Afghanistan
Bush to Meet NATO Allies Divided Over Adding Troops in Afghanistan – Washington Post
France has signaled it will announce at this week's NATO summit that it will send another 1,000 troops to Afghanistan, while Britain plans to send about 800 more and Poland has already promised another 400. But Germany and others refuse to contribute additional ground forces, and the United States may have to increase its own commitment to make up the shortfall, U.S. and European officials and analysts said.
Canada to press for more troops in Afghanistan at NATO talks – AFP:
Harper and his senior ministers have been lobbying their European counterparts of late to send at least 1,000 troops, drones and helicopters to bolster Canadian forces fighting insurgents in volatile Kandahar province… Canada's parliament voted earlier this month to extend its military mission in volatile southern Afghanistan to 2011, but only if its allies send reinforcements. Otherwise, Canada would exit at the end of its current mandate in February 2009.
France Faces Censure Over New Afghanistan Troops - DefenseNews
The French conservative government faced a censure motion April 1 in the lower house National Assembly from the Socialist Party, angry at President Nicolas Sarkozy's decision to send an extra 1,000 soldiers to serve in eastern Afghanistan. The nonbinding motion reflects anger on the left at a lack of public debate over the reinforcement of French troops.
NATO Afghan force to get only some extra troops-US - Reuters
NATO leaders are likely to commit more troops this week to help fight Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan but the force will still fall short of what commanders want, the U.S. defense secretary said on Tuesday. French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said Paris might agree to send "a few hundred" more troops to bolster the 47,000-strong NATO forces in Afghanistan. Leaders of the 26-member alliance meet in the Romanian capital Bucharest this week with the mission high on their agenda amid concern about rising violence, particularly in southern Afghanistan.
EXPANSION - Ukraine, Georgia, Albania, Macedonia, Croatia
Bush Supports Ukraine’s Bid to Join NATO - NYT
President Bush expressed strong support on Tuesday for Ukraine’s attempt to join the NATO alliance. His stand risked a diplomatic confrontation with Russia even as the administration sought an agreement with President Vladimir V. Putin over American missile defenses in Europe. Mr. Bush spoke on the eve of a meeting of NATO leaders in Romania at a time when Ukraine’s hopes for putting itself on a clear path to membership appeared increasingly in doubt. Two strong NATO allies, France and Germany, have said they do not favor Ukraine’s membership, partly out of concern it would unnecessarily antagonize Russia.
Diplomatic Tussle over Georgia and Ukraine NATO Bids – EUObserver
Germany and other western European states are attempting to block Georgia and Ukraine from getting the green light to join NATO out of a fear of antagonising Russia. At the 2-4 April meeting, Georgia and Ukraine are hoping to get approval for their membership action plans (MAP). This would be considered as a signal that their application bid is on the right track. The camp of blocking states is said to include Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Portugal and Luxembourg.
NATO to Invite New Members to Join Military Alliance – VOA
Analysts say two countries will be invited to join: Albania and Croatia. But the status of a third country - Macedonia, officially know as The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia - is unclear. Robert Hunter, former U.S. ambassador to NATO in the Clinton administration, says Greece has threatened to veto Macedonia's membership. "The Greeks are worried, because they have a province called Macedonia, and they are worried that maybe somebody is going to grab for that," he said. "I think, this is something where the Greeks really need to recede and accept that a country can call itself what it wants, and better to have them in NATO than not. That should be resolved."
NATO TRANSFORMATION
Defense transformation is a major focus within NATO, and as described by Scheffer: “This means the adaptation of NATO’s own structures and capabilities to the new security environment.” For example, the Defense Investment Division at NATO focuses almost exclusively on capabilities transformation and procurement, especially as new kinds of capabilities are needed to fight against new enemies, such as terrorists.
However, due to the technical and often convoluted nature of these capabilities programs, they are rarely discussed in the mainstream media… to get information on the Defense Against Terrorism program for example usually requires subscription to rather fancy (read: expensive) industry or defense publications, such as Jane’s Group.
At the same time, articles that explore the broader political and strategic role of NATO, as well as ponder existential questions, also fit under transformation. Atlantic Review discusses these articles frequently (you can find many of them here), but for this collection I will limit it to two:
Is NATO Dead or Alive? – The Huffington Post
64,000 allied soldiers are currently deployed on three continents - the highest op tempo in its history. Yes, there is plenty of grousing about troop commitments and caveats but the "facts on the ground" are that 26 NATO nations are operating together in a wide variety of military contingencies. But while much good is being done, NATO is actually doing far less than it should be doing… For several years, NATO's political and military leaders have had literally no time for strategic discussion or planning.
Globalize NATO? by Helle Dale – The Washington Times
What has to be thought through is whether NATO can "go global" without loosing the regional benefits it continues to provide in Europe. NATO still remains the strategic political and military link between the United States and Europe, and it continues to have a stabilizing effect on the European continent as a security guarantee for its new members. We should not lose sight of those core missions.
PARTNERSHIP RELATIONS - Russia, French full reintegration
NATO chief warns Russia against ‘unhelpful rhetoric’ – AFP
NATO chief Jaap de Hoop Scheffer warned outgoing Russian President Vladimir Putin in an interview published Friday against the use of "unhelpful rhetoric" at next week's NATO summit in Romania. "Let's try to avoid unhelpful rhetoric, like 'We will target missiles on nations A, B and C'," Scheffer told the business daily. "That is not only unhelpful but it makes me remember a time when I was growing up when there was a Berlin wall and an Iron Curtain ... So let us refrain from rhetoric."
Lavrov: Russia Still Opposes NATO Expansion, US Missile Defense Plans – VOA
Russia's foreign minister again has expressed opposition to NATO expansion and U.S. plans for a missile defense system in central Europe.
Deficient Proposal – National Review Online
If the Bush administration does decide to endorse the French plan for rejoining NATO’s command, agreeing to support an independent EU defense structure, it would represent a sea change in U.S. strategic thinking that would have a dramatic, negative impact on the future of the alliance. It would shift the political balance of power within NATO away from Washington and London, and toward the main centers of power within the European Union: Paris, Berlin, and Brussels. Far from encouraging European countries from spending more on defense it would foster an even greater dependency culture within continental Europe upon NATO resources. It would lead to a duplication of the NATO command structure, without a doubling of manpower or material.
Morning Bell: What’s at Stake in Bucharest – The Foundry (Heritage Foundation Blog)
What must be avoided at all costs is France’s one-time offer of additional troops for Afghanistan in exchange for U.S. and British backing of an independent European Union defense structure and a leading French role in NATO’s command structure. President Bill Clinton resisted a similar French effort to infiltrate NATO command in 1997 and Bush should do so again at Bucharest. France should only be welcomed back into integrated military NATO command structure when Paris affirms NATO supremacy in European defense and security.
The Path to Full Membership – Spiegel Online
In Bucharest, Sarkozy hopes to initiate the return to a full-fledged position in the military alliance, where France's chair has been unoccupied since the days of President Charles de Gaulle. At the same time, he plans to use the high-level forum to announce, in a showy public performance, his country's stronger military commitment in Afghanistan… His pledge of military assistance is nothing if not calculated. "The president hopes that France's support of the NATO mission will lead, in return, to progress on the common European Defense Pact," says Etienne de Durand, director of the Center for Strategic Studies at the French Institute for International Relations (IFRI), in Paris.
Welcome! You are reading the ATLANTIC REVIEW -- a Press Digest on Transatlantic Relations combined with commentary and analysis by three young professionals from Germany, the Netherlands and the United States. More about us.
The horizontal menu bar at the top helps to navigate this site.
 Subscribe to one of our RSS-Feeds or to our newsletter, which is emailed twice per month.
Only registered users may post comments here. Get your own account here and then log into this blog. Your browser must support cookies. The author does not allow comments to this entry
We appreciate any thoughtful comment!
Would you like to read more?
Have a look at our directory of Atlantic Review posts.
Or check out the constantly updated reading recommendations from our readers in the sidebar: "Tips From Our Readers."
More information on this project in this post. Feel free to comment on any article recommended in the sidebar.
BBCode format allowed. You can make a clickable link with this code:
If you write "[url=http://america-germany.atlanticreview.org]Carnival of US-German Relations[/url]", then this will be displayed: "Carnival of US-German Relations".
And if you write "[url]http://atlanticreview.org/mustreads.html[/url]", then this will be displayed: "http://atlanticreview.org/mustreads.html"
|
or 
: