Henry M. Jackson School Of International Studies University Of .

NATO is composed of precisely the group that would benefit most from increasingsecurity around the globe.During the Cold War NATO stood for security and freedom against dictatorship,but always in a European context. NATO must defend these values in a global context.It should use its resources and economic power to insure stability. With its economic andpolitical influence it can create and enforce global standards of conduct. Wheredemocratic values exist, NATO should be there protecting them.At this point, the reader may become understandably wary. America‘s own effortsat introducing democracy to the rest of the world in the last decade have gonedisastrously awry. Iraq has yet to hold a convincingly democratic election, andAfghanistan continues to be plagued by insurrection. Indeed, the last paragraph, read inisolation, appears to exhibit the sort of neoconservative exuberance that led to thesepredicaments in the first place.In order to prevent future catastrophes, NATO must dust off an old but timehonored strategy: containment. Containment was the strategy that guided Americathrough the Cold War. By permitting communism to exist where it was alreadyestablished, and aggressively opposing it where it was not, NATO was able to outlast theSoviet Union. Containment walks a fine line between unnecessary aggression andunconscionable passivity that is both elegantly simple and demonstrably effective.NATO must adapt this policy of containment to tackle today‘s securitychallenges. But what is NATO to contain? As previously pointed out, individual statesare no longer the biggest threat to NATO‘s members. The answer, it seems, islawlessness. As the following chapters will demonstrate, the transnational security threatsthat NATO faces today are all bred from acts against the established global order.Dictatorial regimes provide funds to terrorist organization, which participate in humanrights violations, which breeds additional regional insecurity. We cannot view thechallenges of the 21st century in a vacuum. Rather, NATO must solve them each bycontaining them all.A perfect example of how such a containment strategy might function isenshrined in the First Gulf War. In what is arguably America‘s first (and last) successfulforay into the Middle East, a coalition of states, including Syria and Egypt, worked to12

protect the sovereignty of a hapless third party. As a happy coincidence, America wasable to stop a nuclear proliferation program in its tracks, which would have otherwiseruined security in the region for the years to come. Unlike the current Iraq War, Americaended the first Gulf War with the adulation of many across the globe, including manycountries in the Middle East.For proof that containment will work, we need look no further than North Africa.Over the two months, as the world watched, citizens rose up against dictators, demandingrights and freedoms unheard of in that region. In Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya, dictators areslowly being displaced, pushed aside in favor of democracy and human rights. Ifprotected and nurtured, democracies can easily flourish from authoritarian states, as seenwith Japan and South Korea. So long as NATO acts to protect nascent democraciesaround the world,Unfortunately, NATO is not set up to engage these issues. After years of theSoviet threat, it is currently better suited for a land battle in Germany than interventionacross the globe. While it is absolutely the correct choice as the world‘s only democraticmilitary alliance, it lacks the mechanisms to do so. The following Task Force is dedicatedto equipping NATO with the tools necessary to realize this dream.NATO‘s New Strategic Concept provides a vigorous defense of its strengths as anorganization. In one of the very first points, it asserts that ―the Alliance remains anessential source of stability in an unpredictable world.‖1 However, it does nothing aboutwhat to do with the Alliance with regards to this point. It discusses burden sharing, andyet the United States overwhelmingly has to carry more weight than the rest of the treatymembers combined. Collective defense is listed as the most important function of NATO,despite the fact that NATO lacks a threat warranting such importance. What the StrategicConcept lists as lower priorities, crisis management and collective security, shouldbecome the new main missions of NATO.These are very real challenges, such as the oncoming conclusion of the mission inAfghanistan and the continuing stewardship of ethno-nationalist tensions in the Balkans.There is also the danger of the fluctuating tensions between NATO and Russia overmissile defense in Europe. But the rise of new non-state threats is the greatest challenge1NATO Strategic Concept.13

facing NATO, from piracy to the ever-increasing number of assaults upon cyber security.While the Strategic Concept mentions the previous challenges, it completely leaves outother new ones that must also be focused upon. The rise of Asia is changing the geopolitical rules that once governed the world, China is now the second largest economy inthe world and still growing, but is still a one-party state with little to no ability for theaverage citizen to gain redress for abuses. But Asia‘s rise has also seen a democraticwave, Indonesia and India; both growing dynamic economies are staunch democracies.Australia and Japan already have a long history of cooperation with NATO members.These are the relationships and partnerships that must be cultivated.NATO has been a body focused upon the threat of a land war in Europe for mostof its existence, and is now making the jump to something new. But to make this jumpNATO must discard, remodel, or add new structures so that it can compete and remainrelevant in this new ever more connected world. The Lisbon Declaration shows thatNATO and its members are aware that a shift needs to occur, but they do not go farenough to really change the overarching direction that NATO is currently following.NATO needs to become more than just a simple alliance of nation-states. It needs tobegin to change into something that will help secure the wellbeing and human rights ofnot just its own members, but the world, as thanks to the shrinking effect caused bymodern technology security issues are no longer only limited to a single country.However, this is not an easy task, NATO must be transformed from anorganization simply concerned with defense security, and into one that has a largerconstabulary role for the entire world. The United States Navy already acts as thearbitrator of the seas, having NATO step up to assist the United States in that regard andbeyond is well within its possibilities. But one of the main changes this will require is amore centralized NATO, wherein the members of the treaty willingly cede some degreeof sovereignty to the organization. This is a larger challenge for the Anglo spheremembers, as they have more fiercely guarded their national sovereignty. The UnitedStates has refused to sign onto the International Criminal Court for fear of thissovereignty loss, and even in the United Kingdom despite their membership in theEuropean Union. Some of the other NATO countries in the EU have shown a greater14

willingness to give up a portion of their national decision making to a larger body, andthey should make a greater effort showing the benefits of this approach.The United Nations both provides an example of what we want to happen andwhat we want to avoid at all costs. There was a great deal of hope placed in the UN afterits initial formation, hope that it would provide truly global governance. This has notcome to pass, and the UN is quite often a distressingly ineffective body that has troubleresponding quickly to any kind of crisis. In order for NATO to take on a greaterconstabulary role we have to insure that whatever executive body is created can actuallyrespond with speed, as new threats will often not give us as obvious a sign that trouble isabout to occur as the Warsaw Pact moving tanks into East Germany would. Threats popup and must be dealt with quickly, if terrorists seize an important oil refinery there needsto be requires an immediate response.But at present NATO does not have a body tasked with looking for these kinds ofthreats, and one of the most important and earliest reforms that would need to be made isa powerful centralized intelligence agency headquartered in Brussels. There alreadyexists within NATO an Intelligence Division of the International Military Stuffunderneath the Military Committee. This provides a good framework for expandedintelligence cooperation, as NATO has already gotten used to a degree of intelligencesharing and working with foreign intelligence agents. This more centralized agencywould be staffed by people forwarded from their various national governments, and whowould need to be given a mission to find information useful to NATO as a whole ratherthan a particular national interest. However, they would also need to keep access to theirnational databases as many NATO countries already have very skilled and large networksthroughout the world.The executive body of the UN, the Security Council, has many qualities that areworth copying for a similar NATO executive body with one exception, the veto.Fortunately there is already a similar body to this which exists within NATO, the NorthAtlantic Council. It would simply need to be strengthened and given greater authority, theability to make security decisions binding upon its members, but must not have countrieswith the veto. The veto slows down decisions and often destroys flexibility until theconcerns of that single country are met, if ever. Now, this is not to say that it should be15

simple majority rule as these would be important security decisions that could have farreaching consequences, but there are ways to do that without giving one country theability to completely stop everything. Even this empowered North Atlantic Councilcannot respond quickly enough to all threats however, so the Council needs an authoritythat can make key on the spot decisions. This authority would be able to make the keydecisions in the event of a matter pressed for time, such as a bomb threat or terroristseizure of important infrastructure without having to call the full Council together. Thisauthority could be invested in a chairmanship that rotates amongst the representatives ofthe different members in the Council.One of the topics we will spend time discussing is the evolution of the UnitedStates‘ relationship with NATO. This is particularly important; the United States hashistorically been hesitant to give up any degree of sovereignty. This is problematicbecause without the resources of the United States NATO lacks the ability to reallyproject influence and respond to threats beyond the North Atlantic and theMediterranean. The United Kingdom has also shown that it is very careful about givingup any control, but its EU membership has shown that it is willing to do so, despite theirvery public repudiation of the euro. These are issues that NATO needs to begin solvingimmediately. This it is not an impossible task. After all, this stronger NATO should allowthe United States to reduce expenditures on defense and security, as that burden would bemore equally shared with their fellow NATO members. .Of course, another key issue is the problem of actually paying for any of thesenew changes. NATO does already have a small budget given to it by the treaty membersbut this amount would not be enough for the expanded and strengthened structures thatwould need to be put into place. A more centralized NATO is would require moreemployees, and would also need to be able to pay for its own fast reaction missions. Allof this requires an increase in the existing NATO budget, at current each NATO nation issupposed to spend two percent of GDP on defense, something which almost none of themdo. If even a small fraction of this amount were given directly to NATO, rather than onpurely national concerns, NATO would have a greatly increased budget allowing it toperform the new mission being given to it. It would also provide a good compromise forthose countries not making the existing two percent commitment, if we assume that each16

member should give 0.5 percent of their GDP to the communal NATO budget that is stillmore than enough to make NATO the single greatest military and security power in theworld while eliminating duplication.This Task Force identifies pressing concerns and considerations for anorganization committed to understanding and tackling the challenges of an ever-evolvingsecurity landscape. The recommendations provided within may require a surplus ofpolitical will but nothing we have suggested is beyond NATO's capabilities. The strengthof an organization lie in its values, and the values that bind NATO members provide theclarity of purpose needed to address security threats, no matter their form. Change isnever easy, but sometimes it is necessary. We have brought together information, andhave provided the best advice and recommendations that we could with what we know.While our recommendations may go beyond what is actually viable with the existingpolitical solution, this does not mean that they are not still good goals. And while manytimes our recommendations may be a simple statement that more attention needs to bepaid to a topic, this does not mean that we are not serious about our belief that NATOneeds to change. If more people start thinking about what is wrong and what needs moreattention, then maybe the change we wish to witness will actually occur.17

18

Part IThe Balkans, Afghanistan and Private Military Contractors:Out of Area Security Challenges and how they Affect NATOPaige Irwin, Gabrielle Gurian, and Kelli Wells19

20

Part I: IntroductionThe Balkans, Afghanistan and Private Military Contractors:Out of Area Security Challenges and how they Affect NATOPaige Irwin, Gabrielle Gurian, and Kelli WellsExecutive SummaryNATO‘s recent involvement in out of area operations such as the Balkans andAfghanistan has led to the continual growth and development of NATO‘s internationalrole. The Balkan campaign and the security challenges posed by the region effectivelycatalyzed the Alliances internal adaption towards crisis management and peacekeeping.Today, the operations in Afghanistan are proving to be the latest challenge for theAlliance. Since Private Military Companies were used in both Afghanistan and theBalkans, and are one of many new development mechanisms that could play a pivotalrole in the future out of area campaigns, they too will be analyzed below along withNATO‘s role in the Balkans and Afghanistan. From looking at the Alliances history ofadaption, it is clear that NATO will continue to redefine its purpose and usefulness bylearning from these operations. The Alliance will move forward with these lessons inmind and continue to adapt according to the external security concerns it faces.In order to demonstrate the role out-of-area operations have played in definingNATO‘s international character, three case studies will be evaluated below. We willbegin with the campaign in the Balkans and then move on to the challenges faced inAfghanistan. Afterwards, we will compare the two operations to better understand thedifferent challenges faced and how the Alliance has responded. Lastly, we willinvestigate the role of PMC‘s and address NATO‘s need to recognize the emerging roleof these Private Military Contract groups in these and future operations.Case 1: The BalkansAfter the fall of the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia was the only country that posed animmediate security challenge to the West, due to the history of hyper-nationalism, intenseethnic division, violence, and political instability throughout the region. After a long21

process of internal policy debates, NATO took on the role of crisis manager in the area.The Bosnian campaign, being NATO‘s first out of area operation, essentially became thekey driver of NATO development. It redefined the contours of its transatlanticrelationship and its core function as ―collective defense.‖ NATO then applied the sameprincipal instruments of intervention and peacekeeping when the issue of Kosovo‘sindependence arose. The progress made within the region over the last 15 years, istestament to the benefits that outside engagement is able to produce in motiving politicalreform. To continue to improve the situation in the Balkans and overcome the challengespresented by the region, NATO must continue partaking in crisis management, the endgoal being the creation of cooperative partnerships and the full integration of all Balkanstates.Case 2: AfghanistanNATO‘s presence and experiences in Afghanistan have highlighted places forimprovement within NATO‘s strategy for entering and sustaining success withdevelopment and combat operations. The war in Afghanistan is an extremely complexoperation that has been a NATO priority for many years. This particular operation ischallenging because of the poor development statistics, lack of basic security andextensive insurgency operations in Afghanistan. The solutions to these problems are hardto define and hard to solve. Afghanistan is receiving support from numerous differentcountries, organizations and agencies. The presence of so many stakeholders and actorshas complicated the formulation of a coherent strategy and a common enforcement andcommand system. Afghanistan has highlighted the importance for strong US-NATOrelations, the importance of NATO being reliable, the need to socially and economicallystabilize states in order to ensure security, how crucial the development of an overallstrategy is and the importance of efficient and clear communication about operations.These lessons will lead to the continual development and growth of NATO as aninfluential and powerful organization.Case 3: Comparative StudyNATO‘s campaigns in Afghanistan and the Balkans have both had enormouseffects on the Alliance‘s international role. Both pose significant challenges for theAlliance, but also provide further experience in peacekeeping, development, dealing with22

ethnic division and working with other influential governments and organizations.Differing agendas and approaches have been used in the two campaigns, which havegiven rise to varying outcomes and sometimes criticism, especially in Afghanistan.Afghanistan has been a unique and difficult endeavor for the Alliance, with a new type ofcultural situation, and differing power dynamics and strategic goals. Some argue that ifthe Alliance is to fail in Afghanistan, its legitimacy and usefulness could be questioned.On the other hand, the Balkan experience of the 1990‘s, and the success seen therethrough peacekeeping and democratic development demonstrates that when challenged,the Alliance is effective. At the same time, there are many lessons that can be taken fromthe Alliances history in the Balkans and its present involvement in Afghanistan, in orderto optimize future out of area and peacekeeping operations.Case 4: Private Military IndustryHaving taken into account the two different outcomes of the NATO operations inthe Balkan region as well as in Afghanistan, it is important to recognize the need forNATO to address the emerging industry of Private Military Companies. The policyrecommendation suggested in accordance with the practices of the Private MilitaryIndustry is the suggestion for NATO to create a NATO approved and applied NATOStandard of Private Military Company Activities, which will be reinforced by NATOmembers operation alongside these deployed PMCs. The contracts of those PMCs thatfall below standard will immediately become defunct and their reputation tainted. Thispolicy recommendation will be a self-reinforcing combination of NATO members andPMCs.23

24

Chapter OneNATO Security Considerations in the BalkansGabrielle GurianThe Western Balkans, a region surrounded by NATO members, is still proving tobe a potential source of insecurity and instability throughout Europe. The history ofnationalism, inte

discredited and the Soviet Union has ceased to exist. NATO has always viewed itself as having three primary responsibilities, collective defense, crisis management, and collective security. Of these collective defense, as personified in Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, has been the most important.