Relations with Russia, and Afghan war dominated NATO talks
28 NATO leaders met at the Lisbon Summit on 19-20th November. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's visit to NATO's Lisbon summit heralded a new era in the military alliance's relations with its Cold War-era adversary, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen has told RIA Novosti.
"It will certainly be a summit that marks a fresh start in our relations," Rasmussen said in an interview on the eve of the landmark meeting. "I hope in particular that NATO and Russia will be moving forward on missile defense cooperation."
NATO and its rationale
It is very important to remember that its 1949 founding documents clearly say that NATO is a defensive organisation, which would go into action only when one of its member states was attacked. It is known as collective defence. NATO (Atlantic Pact) was constituted to counter communism and the Soviet threat during the Cold War. After the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, NATO lost its raison d'être given that Western Europe and the United States were no longer threatened by an invasion from Eastern Europe. NATO thus had the choice between disbanding itself or developing a new reason for its existence. Collective defence has been the principal reason many East European countries to become NATO members since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Other European countries also strive for its membership for the same reason. NATO has celebrated its 60the year of its existence in 2009. Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has gone through to transform itself and whether further transformation is necessary or not is the question. This question is really going to affect the relevance and the viability of the institution and perhaps the very future of the Alliance It is quite a paradox that although there is a tremendous overlap in membership between NATO and the European Union, very often European Union and NATO do not speak with the same voice. What NATO we can do, actually, to make this synergy actually a fact ? NATO's expanded role
At the NATO 50th Anniversary Celebrations in Washington in April 1999, the United States presented to the European states the attack on Yugoslavia as an example of the future role of NATO not as "defensive" organization with the following communiqué: "This new alliance will be bigger, more capable and more flexible, involved in collective defence and capable of undertaking new missions, among which is the active commitment in the management of crises, including the operations of responding to crises. (Washington Summit Communiqué, (24/4/1999)." It meant that NATO would project its military force to resolve crisis beyond its borders not only in Europe, but also in other regions, like the Middle East, Africa and the Indian Ocean. NATO gives itself the right to intervene anywhere in the world for management of crises whenever it feels its interests are threatened, without consulting the United Nations. Thus a new NATO was born and got involved in Afghanistan in 2001 after 9/11. Agenda of the Summit
As NATO prepares to respond to new challenges,--cyber defence, energy security, terrorism, and piracy--the main agenda of the Lisbon Summit was as follows -NATO's third Strategic Concept since the end of the Cold War, defining the Alliance's strategic priorities for the next decade. -NATO missile defence programme -Relations with Russia -Exit Strategy in Afghanistan New Strategic Concept
NATO leaders reaffirmed the concept of collective defence stating that members are "to defend one another against attack, including against new threats to the safety of our citizens", without defining a geographical limit to its theatre of operations. NATO leaders approved a new 'strategic concept', a plan for its development over the next decade. The concept calls on the alliance to expand its military focus from 'classic' war fighting to more complex issues of crisis management and conflict prevention. The new concept would include improving cooperation with non-NATO countries and organisations such as the European Union and UN. However, in deference to Turkey's dispute with EU member Cyprus, the summit only said that NATO would make 'our contribution to create more favourable circumstances' for cooperation. The consideration of strategic concept had also triggered off major reform throughout the entire Organization, which would take place over the time. Missile defence in Europe
In the past, Russia had been fiercely critical of former US missile defence plans, seeing them as a direct threat to the credibility of its nuclear deterrent, and Moscow demanded that a previous blueprint be withdrawn. Furthermore Russia has been wary of NATO's "encirclement. Russia in 2007 suspended the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty dating from the last years of the Cold War that limits NATO and Russian military deployments in Europe. Suspension of CFE Treaty allows Russia to move its tanks and other defence equipment to its western borders and Poland and other Russia's neighbours deplored the suspension. It was believed that the suspension was in response to the US missile defence plan in Eastern Europe. Missile defence cooperation with Russia
At the summit, Barack Obama and his NATO allies agreed to shield Europe's peoples from rogue rocket attacks with a screen of interceptor missiles as "a core element of our collective defence". This would allow in setting up an anti-ballistic missile screen by bringing long-range US missiles to Europe and creating a computer programme to link shorter-range European systems to it This time the leaders have invited Moscow to link its own defensive systems to the grid. And Russia had accepted the invitation. That decision met with thunderous acclaim, with Medvedev calling it 'historic' and German Chancellor Angela Merkel naming it a 'milestone'. However Russian President said many details of the shield plan were still uncertain and that the scheme would "only be peaceful when it is universal". And he warned: "Our participation has to be a full-fledged exchange of information, or we won't take part at all." He also wanted his country to be included in decision-making, something which is a red line for the US and NATO's former communist states. Many strategists believe that if NATO wants to be relevant at the 21st century, NATO-Russia relations need to improve substantially and both sides must take into account any historical sensitivities in bridging differences. That seems to be the only way to move ahead for peace and security in the world. Afghanistan
The next challenge on the NATO summit agenda was Afghanistan. On 20th November, the 28 NATO leaders joined Afghan President Hamid Karzai and the 20 other countries (Australia included) which sent troops to Afghanistan. The UN Secretary General was also present at the meeting. France's new defence minister, Alain Juppe, said this week Afghanistan was a trap for allied troops, adding that French forces would not withdraw fully until Afghan authorities had the situation in hand. The US is wary of giving the impression that the original aim of invading Afghanistan in 2001 - to deny al Qaeda a base to launch more terrorist attacks on the West - will be achieved by then. "I think that, seen retrospectively, we underestimated the challenge and our operation in Afghanistan didn't have sufficient resources, and yes, that was a mistake. We'll make a positive announcement in Lisbon that the handover is about to begin." NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen told Portugal's Renascenca. More than 2,200 Allied troops (including 654 US troops) have been killed in the nine-year-old war launched by the United States after the September 11, 2001 attacks to root out al-Qa'ida leaders and overthrow their Taliban protectors. Canada said this week its 3,000 troops will end their combat mission next year, with 950 remaining to train Afghan troops, and Germany announced it will begin withdrawing in 2012. The Netherlands also is winding down its combat presence. Prime Minister David Cameron has insisted British troops will quit their combat role in Afghanistan by 2015, whatever the security conditions or progress made in tackling insurgents. That would begin next year with an unspecified but small number of areas transferred to Afghan control. Exit strategy from Afghanistan
The draining of ongoing conflict in Afghanistan had prompted an exit strategy and prompted NATO would retreat in future from explicit commitments to a global defence role- role of world's policeman. NATO leaders agreed that allied troops would cede responsibility for security to Afghan forces by the end of 2014. Afghan forces will start taking the lead in security operations in some districts and provinces next year starting from July, gradually spreading throughout the country. A transitional period has been established from July of next year until the end of 2014 by which time, it is hoped, NATO combat operations will end, but a senior US official said US forces would not commit to ending combat missions within that time frame. Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai was in Lisbon, where he signed a long-term security partnership with NATO. NATO's secretary general said the Taliban would not be allowed simply to wait for foreign forces to leave, saying NATO would remain committed. NATO would stay "as long as it takes", Rasmussen said. Meanwhile on 13th November, Afghan President Hamid Karzai surprised the NATO US commander in Afghanistan General David Petraeus when he said the United States must reduce the visibility and intensity of its military operations, especially night raids that fuel anti-American sentiment and could embolden Taliban insurgents. Karzai's remarks came as the international military coalition has stepped up pressure on insurgents at the same time that Karzai has set up a peace council in hopes of reconciling with the top echelon of the Taliban. To many Americans, it's obvious Karzai don't have American troop's to fight against the Talibans and it's time to bring US troops home. Conclusion
The two -day summit has been billed as one of the most important in the NATO's history, as it seeks to update its strategy to face new security threats of the 21st century.
It is very important to remember that its 1949 founding documents clearly say that NATO is a defensive organisation, which would go into action only when one of its member states was attacked. It is known as collective defence. NATO (Atlantic Pact) was constituted to counter communism and the Soviet threat during the Cold War. After the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, NATO lost its raison d'être given that Western Europe and the United States were no longer threatened by an invasion from Eastern Europe. NATO thus had the choice between disbanding itself or developing a new reason for its existence. Collective defence has been the principal reason many East European countries to become NATO members since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Other European countries also strive for its membership for the same reason. NATO has celebrated its 60the year of its existence in 2009. Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has gone through to transform itself and whether further transformation is necessary or not is the question. This question is really going to affect the relevance and the viability of the institution and perhaps the very future of the Alliance It is quite a paradox that although there is a tremendous overlap in membership between NATO and the European Union, very often European Union and NATO do not speak with the same voice. What NATO we can do, actually, to make this synergy actually a fact ? NATO's expanded role
At the NATO 50th Anniversary Celebrations in Washington in April 1999, the United States presented to the European states the attack on Yugoslavia as an example of the future role of NATO not as "defensive" organization with the following communiqué: "This new alliance will be bigger, more capable and more flexible, involved in collective defence and capable of undertaking new missions, among which is the active commitment in the management of crises, including the operations of responding to crises. (Washington Summit Communiqué, (24/4/1999)." It meant that NATO would project its military force to resolve crisis beyond its borders not only in Europe, but also in other regions, like the Middle East, Africa and the Indian Ocean. NATO gives itself the right to intervene anywhere in the world for management of crises whenever it feels its interests are threatened, without consulting the United Nations. Thus a new NATO was born and got involved in Afghanistan in 2001 after 9/11. Agenda of the Summit
As NATO prepares to respond to new challenges,--cyber defence, energy security, terrorism, and piracy--the main agenda of the Lisbon Summit was as follows -NATO's third Strategic Concept since the end of the Cold War, defining the Alliance's strategic priorities for the next decade. -NATO missile defence programme -Relations with Russia -Exit Strategy in Afghanistan New Strategic Concept
NATO leaders reaffirmed the concept of collective defence stating that members are "to defend one another against attack, including against new threats to the safety of our citizens", without defining a geographical limit to its theatre of operations. NATO leaders approved a new 'strategic concept', a plan for its development over the next decade. The concept calls on the alliance to expand its military focus from 'classic' war fighting to more complex issues of crisis management and conflict prevention. The new concept would include improving cooperation with non-NATO countries and organisations such as the European Union and UN. However, in deference to Turkey's dispute with EU member Cyprus, the summit only said that NATO would make 'our contribution to create more favourable circumstances' for cooperation. The consideration of strategic concept had also triggered off major reform throughout the entire Organization, which would take place over the time. Missile defence in Europe
In the past, Russia had been fiercely critical of former US missile defence plans, seeing them as a direct threat to the credibility of its nuclear deterrent, and Moscow demanded that a previous blueprint be withdrawn. Furthermore Russia has been wary of NATO's "encirclement. Russia in 2007 suspended the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty dating from the last years of the Cold War that limits NATO and Russian military deployments in Europe. Suspension of CFE Treaty allows Russia to move its tanks and other defence equipment to its western borders and Poland and other Russia's neighbours deplored the suspension. It was believed that the suspension was in response to the US missile defence plan in Eastern Europe. Missile defence cooperation with Russia
At the summit, Barack Obama and his NATO allies agreed to shield Europe's peoples from rogue rocket attacks with a screen of interceptor missiles as "a core element of our collective defence". This would allow in setting up an anti-ballistic missile screen by bringing long-range US missiles to Europe and creating a computer programme to link shorter-range European systems to it This time the leaders have invited Moscow to link its own defensive systems to the grid. And Russia had accepted the invitation. That decision met with thunderous acclaim, with Medvedev calling it 'historic' and German Chancellor Angela Merkel naming it a 'milestone'. However Russian President said many details of the shield plan were still uncertain and that the scheme would "only be peaceful when it is universal". And he warned: "Our participation has to be a full-fledged exchange of information, or we won't take part at all." He also wanted his country to be included in decision-making, something which is a red line for the US and NATO's former communist states. Many strategists believe that if NATO wants to be relevant at the 21st century, NATO-Russia relations need to improve substantially and both sides must take into account any historical sensitivities in bridging differences. That seems to be the only way to move ahead for peace and security in the world. Afghanistan
The next challenge on the NATO summit agenda was Afghanistan. On 20th November, the 28 NATO leaders joined Afghan President Hamid Karzai and the 20 other countries (Australia included) which sent troops to Afghanistan. The UN Secretary General was also present at the meeting. France's new defence minister, Alain Juppe, said this week Afghanistan was a trap for allied troops, adding that French forces would not withdraw fully until Afghan authorities had the situation in hand. The US is wary of giving the impression that the original aim of invading Afghanistan in 2001 - to deny al Qaeda a base to launch more terrorist attacks on the West - will be achieved by then. "I think that, seen retrospectively, we underestimated the challenge and our operation in Afghanistan didn't have sufficient resources, and yes, that was a mistake. We'll make a positive announcement in Lisbon that the handover is about to begin." NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen told Portugal's Renascenca. More than 2,200 Allied troops (including 654 US troops) have been killed in the nine-year-old war launched by the United States after the September 11, 2001 attacks to root out al-Qa'ida leaders and overthrow their Taliban protectors. Canada said this week its 3,000 troops will end their combat mission next year, with 950 remaining to train Afghan troops, and Germany announced it will begin withdrawing in 2012. The Netherlands also is winding down its combat presence. Prime Minister David Cameron has insisted British troops will quit their combat role in Afghanistan by 2015, whatever the security conditions or progress made in tackling insurgents. That would begin next year with an unspecified but small number of areas transferred to Afghan control. Exit strategy from Afghanistan
The draining of ongoing conflict in Afghanistan had prompted an exit strategy and prompted NATO would retreat in future from explicit commitments to a global defence role- role of world's policeman. NATO leaders agreed that allied troops would cede responsibility for security to Afghan forces by the end of 2014. Afghan forces will start taking the lead in security operations in some districts and provinces next year starting from July, gradually spreading throughout the country. A transitional period has been established from July of next year until the end of 2014 by which time, it is hoped, NATO combat operations will end, but a senior US official said US forces would not commit to ending combat missions within that time frame. Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai was in Lisbon, where he signed a long-term security partnership with NATO. NATO's secretary general said the Taliban would not be allowed simply to wait for foreign forces to leave, saying NATO would remain committed. NATO would stay "as long as it takes", Rasmussen said. Meanwhile on 13th November, Afghan President Hamid Karzai surprised the NATO US commander in Afghanistan General David Petraeus when he said the United States must reduce the visibility and intensity of its military operations, especially night raids that fuel anti-American sentiment and could embolden Taliban insurgents. Karzai's remarks came as the international military coalition has stepped up pressure on insurgents at the same time that Karzai has set up a peace council in hopes of reconciling with the top echelon of the Taliban. To many Americans, it's obvious Karzai don't have American troop's to fight against the Talibans and it's time to bring US troops home. Conclusion
The two -day summit has been billed as one of the most important in the NATO's history, as it seeks to update its strategy to face new security threats of the 21st century.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments