2001
EUROPEAN SYMPOSIUM
“Transatlantic Security
Relationships:
AGENDA
The twenty-second annual National Defense University European Symposium was
held May 22 through
Report on the proceedings of the 21st Annual
National Defense University European Symposium
1700-1900
Registration and Reception – Marshall Hall (Building 62)
0700-0800 Registration
0800-0815 Welcome – Vice Admiral
Paul G. Gaffney II,
0815-0945 PANEL ONE: The Impact of National Missile Defense (NMD)
and Other Arms Control Issues on Transatlantic Ties
A
·
Can
·
How does size/scope of system and whether this is done in contest of
ABM Treaty or some other informal understandings with Russia and China effect
impact on the Alliance?
·
What extent of European participation in various options for TMD or
NMD? Could other developments in Iran/Iraq affect this calculus?
Presenter: Dr. Robert
Soofer; Special Assistant to the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
·
Are European views shifting from opposition to some kind of
accommodations?
·
Is European advocate preservation and expansion of arms control regimes
such as the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and the Chemical and Biological
Weapons Convention essential or will the Europeans accept informal regimes as a
substitute?
·
Discuss the Anti-ballistic Missile Treaty is a “cornerstone” of
strategic stability and European security, and suggest what the impact of
cancellations might be on European attitudes.
·
Discuss the implications of outright European opposition to US National
Missile Defense.
Presenter: Dr. Joachim
Krause; Deputy Director, Research Institute of the German Council on Foreign
Relations,
·
Discuss Russian Responses to an ABM Treaty termination.
·
Elaborate on possible Russian interests in other informal assurances.
·
Describe Russian approaches to a European missile defense.
Presenter: Dr. Sergey M.
Rogov; Director
of the
Moderator and Discussant:
Ms. Elaine Bunn; Distinguished
Research Professor, Institute
for National Strategic Studies,
0945-1015 Break
1015-1145 PANEL TWO: European Security and Defense Policy
·
Should the
·
What changed on the command arrangements?
·
What roles were created beyond regional peacekeeping for ESDP?
·
In the long run, what role is expected for NATO as the ESDP develops?
·
How can EU decision making be more transparent and avoid a EU bloc in
NATO?
Presenter: A Perspective of the EU Presidency: Jan Knutsson; Minister for Political
Affairs, Embassy of
Presenter: A Perspective of the European Commission:
Mr. Fraser
Cameron; Political Counselor, Delegation of the European Commission to the
·
NATO should remain locus of defense planning. Concern over outcomes at Nice. The 3 D’s Approach.
·
What Kind of capabilities should ESDP develop and how can DCI and ESDP
Helsinki Headline Goals be meshed?
·
How can EU decision making be more transparent and avoid a EU Block in
NATO? Discuss the importance of keeping
NATO consultations vital to
·
Explain
Presenter: Dr. Karen E.
Donfried; Specialist in European Affairs, Foreign Affairs, Defense and Trade
Division, Congressional Research Service,
·
Give European allies more visibility bilaterally and through NATO.
·
Make the EU responsible for maintaining links to NATO.
·
Coordinate bilaterally and multilaterally with non-EU, NATO, and PFP
members.
·
Advocate new EU force structures available to NATO that give incentives
for improvements in areas of key capability.
·
Support Constructive Duplication.
·
Set a positive agenda in NATO of issues central to U.S. Security.
·
Ensure NATO’s primacy by making it the place the EU must come for
Presenter: Dr. Antonio
Missiroli; Research Fellow Western European Union Security Studies Institute Presentation
Moderator and Discussant: Dr. Kori N. Schake;
Senior Fellow, Institute for National
Strategic Studies,
1200-1330 Lunch -
Keynote Presentation " Possibilities For Transatlantic Relationships - A Congressional
Perspective "
Honorable
Curtis Weldon; (R-Pennsylvania)
Chairman, Military Readiness Committee, House Armed Services
INTRODUCED
BY: Vice Admiral Paul G. Gaffney II,
University
1345-1515 PANEL THREE: "The Balkans and Future Transatlantic
Responses - What Kind of Durable Peace?"
Panelists
·
Dame
Pauline Neville-Jones; Governor of the BBC,
·
Ambassador
James F. Dobbins; Assistant Secretary for European Affairs,
·
Dr.
Daniel Serwer; Director of the Balkans Initiative, United States Institute of Peace,
Each
panelist will give a short presentation that reflects their response to selected
statements and questions from the following list. A discussion will follow.
·
Future European Security thinking will be dominated by the Balkans
experience. What impact has the Balkan
experience had on Transatlantic ties?
·
Is
·
Can a common allied implementation strategy-can it be achieved? Can Europe Deliver required military
capabilities?
·
Is EU, OSCE, or NATO paramilitary force the long-term solution to
keeping the peace in the Balkans?
Why? Why Not?
·
Is new burdensharing possible?
Can
·
What objectives does the EU have in the Balkans (as they refer to CFSP
and ESDP)?
·
How are these objectives similar and different from NATO and
·
If NATO should withdraw from the Balkans, would the EU deal with the
Balkans as they do now, or would they be different?
·
What new concepts of burdensharing are required to keep the peace? How much of what kind of military presence is
enough?
·
Is there European consensus on how to implement peach in Kosovo? If so, what is it? If not, why not and what should it be?
·
Propose a long-term strategy to create tolerant democratic societies in
the Balkans.
·
What civil and economic mandates should be proposed for
Moderator: Dr. James A. Schear; Director of Research and
Senior Fellow, Institute for National Strategic Studies,
1515-1545 Break
1545-1715 PANEL FOUR: NATO and European Union Enlargement
Panelist
·
His
Excellency Przemyslaw Grudzinski; Ambassador, Embassy of the
·
Mr.
Walter E. Andrusyszyn; Director, Office of European Security and Political Affairs,
·
Dr.
Rudolf Schumacher; Deputy Political Director, German Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Each
panelist will give a short presentation that reflects their response to
selected statements and questions from the following list. A discussion will follow.
·
Will NATO enlargement strengthen or weaken the transatlantic link
(through EU-NATO cooperation or competition)?
Discuss.
·
Predict the future of NATO and its Political and military role in
fostering European security, and fostering
·
Is expansion of NATO in the best interest of the
·
Will NATO itself be strengthened or weakened by enlargement in terms of
her military capacity and/or political stabilizing role? Discuss.
·
Will enlargement impact the future of PFP and the MAP? Explain.
·
Assuming enlargement, what criteria should be adhered to for furture
enlargement of both NATO and the EU?
·
Who are the candidates and why or why not should they be
considered? Should NATO enlargement
proceed ahead of EU enlargement?
Moderator
and Discussant: Dr. Jeffrey Simon; Senior Fellow,
Institute for National Strategic Studies,
1715-1745 PANEL FIVE: Summing up a Summary Panel that reflects on
what has been said about the transatlantic relationship and sort out where we
might be heading in the next four years.
Moderator: Dr. Stephen J. Flanagan; Director, Institute for
National Strategic Studies,
Dr.
James A. Schear; Director of Research and Senior Fellow, Institute for National
Strategic Studies,
Dr. Richard L.
Kugler;
Distinguished Research Professor, Institute for National Strategic Studies,
Ms.
Elaine Bunn;
Distinguished Research Professor, Institute for National Strategic Studies,
Dr.
Kori N. Schake; Senior Fellow, Institute for National Strategic Studies,
Dr.
Jeffrey Simon;
Senior Fellow, Institute for National Strategic Studies,
Mailing List/Preferences Update