2004 EUROPEAN SYMPOSIUM

NATO and the Challenges of Global Security

January 28-29, 2004

Current As Of:  08 March 2004

Objectives:

    As NATO member governments prepare for the June 2004 Istanbul Summit their forces are heavily engaged in a range of stability operations, and simultaneously working to enhance their capabilities to respond to future tasks.  This conference will:  

Program (All events in Baruch Auditorium, Eisenhower Hall (ICAF), except as noted.):  

Wednesday, January 28, 2004  

0800 - 0930  Registration Eisenhower Hall, Room 107  

0945 -           Welcome remarks – Lt Gen Michael M. Dunn, USAF, President, National Defense University  

Panels I – III  Assessing NATO and NATO Supported Operations (Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq)

                Eight years after initial deployment of military forces to the Balkans, NATO is still providing and leading large peacekeeping and security missions in Bosnia and in Kosovo.  More recently, NATO has moved from providing indirect support to stabilization operations in Afghanistan to assuming direct command over ISAF, and is now beginning to move beyond the capital.  The long-term consequences of these deployments on NATO force structure, decision-making, and command structure are uncertain.  The first three panels will review and assess NATO/NATO-members’ strengths and weaknesses in three operational settings.  From all, we will attempt to draw-out the lessons most relevant for future NATO involvement in new out of area missions.

    How well have NATO's headquarters-level institutions (e.g., NAC, DPC, SACEUR/SHAPE, etc.) shouldered the burdens of oversight/direction of field operations?  How well has NATO coordinated with other organizations (e.g., EU, UN, etc), especially on the civilian side, in these various types of operations?  What lessons that can be drawn from Alliance support of Turkey in advance of, and during the war in Iraq?  How well is NATO supporting Poland in its leadership of a multilateral division conducting stabilization operations in Iraq?  How adequate are NATO’s pre-deployment planning and coordination processes?  How suitable are the forces provided by NATO-member countries, to include their training, tactics, doctrine, equipment and logistical support, to accomplish the full range of missions required of them?  

1000 – 1200  PANEL I:  Assessing NATO Operations in the Balkans  

Moderator: Dr. Steven Meyer, Professor of Political Science, Industrial College of the Armed Forces, National Defense University

Panelists:

1220 – 1350  Luncheon (Marshall Hall, Room 155)

Keynote Speaker:  Dr. J.D. Crouch II, Associate Professor of Defense and Strategic Studies at Southwest Missouri State University, and former Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy

Introduced by Lt Gen Michael M. Dunn, USAF, President, National Defense University  

1405 – 1545  PANEL II: “Assessing NATO Operations in Afghanistan  

Moderator: Ambassador Robert Oakley, Distinguished Research Fellow, Institute for National Strategic Studies, National Defense University

Panelists:

1600 – 1730  PANEL III: “Assessing NATO’s Evolving Role in Iraq”  

Moderator:  Dr. Andrew L. Goodman, Office Director for Regional Security and Arms Transfer Policy and Special Advisor for Operation Iraqi Freedom, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, U.S. Department of State

Panelists:

Thursday, January 29, 2004  

0830 – 1000    PANEL IV: “Developing and Deploying NATO’s Forces for the 21^st Century”

The North Atlantic Council’s 1 December 2003 Final Communiqué set a high standard, “Our military capabilities must be able to respond rapidly and effectively, wherever the Alliance decides, to the challenges to our security, from wherever they may come, including the challenges posed by terrorism.”  Are the supporting elements of the NRF and other initiatives -- i.e., training, logistics, intelligence, communications and command and control -- mobile, flexible, and robust enough to meet future challenges?  What are the challenges ahead in developing the other capabilities that NATO Ministers have indicated the NRF requires, including the NATO multinational Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Defence (CBNR) Battalion and missile defenses? What are the consequences of NATO’s expansion on timely decision-making?  

Moderator:  Mr. Lawrence Chalmer, Director, NATO Staff Officer Orientation Course, National Defense University

Panelists:

1020 – 1200      PANEL V:  NATO Cooperation with the European Union

     The Berlin Plus arrangements have shown promise as a framework of cooperation with the EU in the Balkans and could serve as a guide for other efforts.  What is the future role of the EU in stabilizing the Balkans?  What impact will strained U.S. – European relations have on NATO – EU cooperation?  How well are EU and NATO force development and transformation initiatives coordinated, so as to enhance cooperation on the ground?  How do we promote defense reform in non-NATO EU countries and improve the interoperability of Partner forces across the full range of missions that Partners and Allies might carry out together?  

Moderator:  Mr. Leo Michel, Senior Research Fellow, Institute for National Strategic Studies, National Defense University

Panelists:

1220 – 1400    Luncheon (Marshall Hall, Room 155)

 Speaker:  Honorable Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, Secretary General of NATO

Introduced by Ambassador Nicholas R. Burns, U.S. Permanent Representative to NATO  

1420 – 1600  PANEL VI: The Future of NATO’s Relations with Partners

There will soon be more members of NATO than partners in the Partnership for Peace.  Some of the partners have no interest in membership in the Alliance, some who seek this goal will likely find it an elusive one for some time.  Since its inception, PFP’s role as “the best path to NATO membership” has energized participation.  Still, NATO members and partners agree that PFP can play a valuable role in enhancing military and security cooperation between NATO and non-member states.  NATO remains committed to enhancing cooperation with Russia, Ukraine, yet concrete progress has been elusive.   

Given this context, how should PFP programs be adapted to enhance cooperation with and stability in the fragile, less developed countries of the Balkans, Central Asian, and the Caucuses?  How do we continue to promote defense reform in Partner countries and improve the interoperability of Partner forces across the full range of missions that Partners and Allies might conduct together?  

    What have been the main impediments to advancing NATO cooperation with Russia and Ukraine?  How can these impediments be overcome?  Are shared concerns over terrorism sufficient to sustain enhanced trust and cooperation?  Are there other areas of cooperation that should be pursued more vigorously – development of missile defense systems or counter-proliferation efforts?  

Moderator:  Dr. Theresa Sabonis-Helf, Professor, National War College

Panelists:

1615 – 1730  PANEL VII: “Istanbul and Beyond: Assessing NATO’s Future” 

The Istanbul Summit marks the seventh time heads of state and government have gathered since 1990 to contemplate the future course of the Alliance.  Some see Istanbul as an opportunity to continue a successful transformation; others see it as an effort to mask fundamental strains in transatlantic relations.  The first school argues that despite current tensions in the aftermath of the Iraq War, the Alliance rests on a bedrock of common values and largely convergent security interests.  Others contend that the disparities in power between the Unites States and Europe, differing values, and diverging priorities and strategies for managing global security problems are causing the United States and Europe to drift apart and NATO is headed for an inevitable demise.   

What does NATO’s record in dealing with the Balkans, Afghanistan, Iraq, and the war on terrorism suggest about the future of the Alliance and transatlantic relations? Can NATO-member national leaders garner support from their legislatures and the general public for the political, economic, and human sacrifices required to sustain a NATO with global reach?  What role can and should NATO play in international conflict prevention and stabilization efforts in Southwest Asia and the Greater Middle East ? What are the other key political and military requirements for renewing and sustaining the transatlantic partnership?  Can a more balanced strategic partnership be forged between the EU and the United States?   

Moderator: Dr. Stephen J. Flanagan, Director, Institute for National Strategic Studies, National Defense University

Panelists:

Mailing List/Preferences Update

INSS Homepage

NDU Homepage

INSS Conferences Home Page