Ballistic missile defence
Ballistic missile defence Ballistic missiles pose an increasing threat to Allied populations, territory and deployed forces. Over 30 countries have, or are acquiring, ballistic missile technology that could eventually be used to carry not just conventional warheads, but also weapons of mass destruction. The proliferation of these capabilities does not necessarily mean there is an immediate intent to attack NATO, but it does mean that the Alliance has a responsibility to take this into account as part of its mission to protect its populations. In early 2010, NATO acquired the first phase of an initial capability to protect Alliance forces against ballistic missile threats. At the November 2010 NATO Summit in Lisbon, NATO’s leaders decided to develop a ballistic missile defence (BMD) capability to pursue its core task of collective defence. To this end, they decided that the scope of the current Active Layered Theatre Ballistic Missile Defence (ALTBMD) programme’s command, control and communication capabilities will be expanded beyond the capability to protect forces to also include NATO European populations and territory. In this context, the US European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) and other possible national contributions were welcomed as a valuable national contribution to the NATO ballistic missile defence architecture. NATO’s work on BMD started in the early 1990s in response to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems, including missiles. The initial focus was on protecting deployed NATO troops (Theatre Missile Defence), but work was expanded in 2002 to include considerations of the protection of population centres and territory (Territorial Missile Defence). Components The Alliance is conducting three ballistic missile defence related activities: 1. Active Layered Theatre Ballistic Missile Defence System capability The aim of this capability is to protect NATO deployed forces against short- and medium-range ballistic missile threats (up to 3,000-kilometer range). In order to manage the risk associated with the development of such a complex capability, ALTBMD will be fielded in several phases. The completed capability will consist of a multi-layered system of systems, comprising low and high-altitude defences (also called lower- and upper-layer defences), including battle management, communications, command and control and intelligence (BMC3I), early warning sensors, radars and various interceptors. NATO member countries will provide the sensors and weapon systems, while NATO will develop the BMC3I segment and facilitate the integration of all these elements into a coherent and effective architecture. In 2005, the North Atlantic Council (NAC) established the NATO Active Layered Theatre Ballistic Missile Defence Programme Management Organization (ALTBMD PMO) to oversee the ALTBMD Programme. The NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency (NC3A) and the NATO Air Command and Control System Management Agency (NACMA) are other key NATO bodies involved in the programme. As part of the NATO Agencies reform, these agencies are now grouped under the NATO Communications and Information Agency (NCIA). The initial activities were mainly focused on system engineering and integration work, and on the development of an integration test bed hosted at the NCIA facilities in The Hague, Netherlands. The integration test bed is essential to validate development work. In early 2010, the first operational capability, called Interim Capability, was fielded. It provides military planners with a planning tool to build the most effective defence design for specific scenarios or real deployments. A more robust version of that capability, was fielded at the end of 2010, and provides shared situational awareness. The complete lower-layer and upper-layer capability will be fielded in the 2018 timeframe. 2. BMD for the protection of NATO European territory, populations and forces A ballistic missile defence feasibility study was launched after the November 2002 Prague Summit to examine options for protecting Alliance forces, territory and populations against the full range of ballistic missile threats. The study was executed by a transatlantic, multinational industry team, which concluded that BMD is technically feasible. The results were approved by Allies at the Riga Summit in November 2006, and they have provided a technical basis for ongoing political and military discussions regarding the desirability of a NATO ballistic missile defence system. In this context, at the April 2008 Bucharest Summit, the Alliance also considered the technical details and political and military implications of the proposed elements of the US BMD system in Europe. Allied leaders recognized that the planned deployment of European-based US ballistic missile defence assets would help protect Allies, and agreed that this capability should be an integral part of any future NATO-wide BMD architecture. Options for a comprehensive ballistic missile defence architecture to extend coverage to all Allied territory and populations not otherwise covered by the US system were developed and reviewed at the Bucharest Summit, and the Allies also encouraged Russia to take advantage of US proposals for cooperation on BMD. They also stated their readiness to explore the potential for linking US, NATO and Russian ballistic missile defence systems at an appropriate time. In September 2009, the US announced its European Phased Adaptive Approach for ballistic missile defence in Europe. This new initiative was welcomed by NATO foreign ministers in December 2010. At the Lisbon Summit in November 2010, NATO heads of state and government decided to develop a BMD capability. They agreed that an expanded theatre missile defence programme could form the command, control and communications backbone of such a system. In June 2011, NATO defence ministers approved the NATO ballistic missile defence action plan, which provides a comprehensive overview of the key actions and NAC decisions required to implement the NATO BMD capability over the next decade. In the autumn of 2011, Turkey announced its decision to host a ballistic missile defence radar at Kürecik as an integral part of the NATO BMD capability. Romania and the United States agreed to base SM-3 interceptors at Deveselu airbase in Romania, and a similar basing agreement between the United States and Poland entered into force. In November 2011, the Netherlands announced plans to upgrade four air-defence frigates with extended long-range missile defence early-warning radars as its national contribution to NATO's ballistic missile defence capability. Finally, Spain and the United States announced an agreement to base four Aegis missile defence ships in Rota, Spain, as part of the US contribution to NATO’s BMD capability. Seperately, France plans to develop an early-warning system for the detection of ballistic missiles. In May 2012, NATO Heads of State and Government declared at the Chicago Summit the Interim NATO BMD capability. This capability is the significant first step in NATO’s BMD coverage. It offers the maximum coverage within available means to defend NATO’s populations, territory and forces across southern Europe against a ballistic missile attack. The Alliance remains committed to installing full BMD coverage for all NATO territory by the end of this decade. 3. Missile defence cooperation with Russia In 2003, under the auspices of the NATO-Russia Council (NRC), a study was launched to assess possible levels of interoperability among the theatre missile defence systems of NATO Allies and Russia. Together with this study, several computer-assisted exercises have been held to provide the basis for future improvements to interoperability, and to develop mechanisms and procedures for joint operations in the area of theatre missile defence. NATO and Russia are also examining possible areas for cooperation on territorial missile defence. At the Lisbon Summit, the NRC agreed to discuss pursuing ballistic missile defence cooperation. They agreed on a joint ballistic missile threat assessment, and to continue dialogue in this area. The NRC was tasked to develop a comprehensive joint analysis of the future framework for BMD cooperation. In April 2012, NATO and Russia successfully conducted a computer-assisted missile defence exercise. Mechanisms The Defence Policy and Planning Committee (Reinforced) (DPPC(R)) is the senior NATO committee that oversees and coordinates all efforts to develop the NATO ballistic missile defence capability at the political-military level, as well as providing political-military guidance and advice on all issues related to NATO BMD policy. The Conference of National Armaments Directors (CNAD) is the Senior Policy Committee responsible for the ballistic missile defence programme. The NRC Missile Defence Working Group is the steering body for NATO-Russia cooperation on BMD. Evolution The key policy document providing the framework for NATO’s activities in the area of ballistic missile defence is NATO’s 2010 Strategic Concept. The Strategic Concept recognizes, inter alia, that “the proliferation of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery, threatens incalculable consequences for global stability and prosperity. During the next decade, proliferation will be most acute in some of the world’s most volatile regions.” Therefore, NATO will “develop the capability to defend our populations and territories against ballistic missile attack as a core element of our collective defence, which contributes to the indivisible security of our Alliance. We will actively seek cooperation on missile defence with Russia and other Euro-Atlantic partners.” As a defensive capability, BMD will be one element of a broader response to the threat posed by the proliferation of ballistic missiles. Key milestones Theatre Missile Defence May 2001 NATO launches two parallel feasibility studies for a future Alliance theatre missile defence system. June 2004 At the Istanbul Summit, Allied leaders direct that work on theatre missile defence be taken forward expeditiously. March 2005 The Alliance approves the establishment of a Programme Management Organization under the auspices of the CNAD. September 2006 The Alliance awards the first major contract for the development of a test bed for the system. February 2008 The test bed is opened and declared fully operational nine months ahead of schedule. Throughout 2008 The system design for the NATO command and control component of the theatre missile defence system is verified through testing with national systems and facilities via the integrated test bed; this paves the way for the procurement of the capability. March 2010 The Interim Capability (InCa) Step 1 is fielded. June 2010 NATO signs contracts for the second phase of the interim theatre missile defence capability. This will include the capability to conduct a real-time theatre missile defence battle. At the June 2010 meeting of NATO defence ministers, it is agreed that, should Allies decide at the Lisbon Summit to develop a ballistic missile defence capability for NATO which would provide protection to European Allied populations and territory against the increasing threat posed by the proliferation of ballistic missiles, an expanded theatre missile defence programme could form the command, control and communications backbone of such a system. The US EPAA would provide a valuable national contribution to this capability. July 2010 The more robust Interim Capability (InCa 2) passes key tests during the Netherlands Air Force Joint Project Optic Windmill 2010 exercise. December 2010 At the end of 2010, all InCa 2 components – including BMD sensors and shooters from NATO nations – are linked and successfully tested in an ‘ensemble’ test prior to handover to NATO’s military commanders. InCa 2 is subsequently delivered to the Combined Air Operations Centre (CAOC) in Uedem, Germany. Territorial Missile Defence November 2002 At the Prague Summit, Allied leaders direct that a missile defence feasibility study be launched to examine options for protecting Alliance forces, territory and populations against the full range of ballistic missile threats. April 2006 The study concludes that ballistic missile defence is technically feasible within the limits and assumptions of the study. The results are approved by NATO’s CNAD. 2007 An update of a 2004 Alliance assessment of ballistic missile threat developments is completed. April 2008 At the Bucharest Summit, Allied leaders agree that the planned deployment of European-based US BMD assets should be an integral part of any future NATO-wide missile defence architecture. They call for options for a comprehensive ballistic missile defence architecture to extend coverage to all Allied territory not otherwise covered by the US system to be prepared in time for NATO’s next Summit. April 2009 At the Strasbourg/Kehl Summit, Allies recognise that a future US contribution of important architectural elements could enhance NATO elaboration of the Alliance effort and judge that ballistic missile threats should be addressed in a prioritised manner that includes consideration of the level of imminence of the threat and the level of acceptable risk. September 2009 The United States announces its plan for the EPAA. November 2010 At the Lisbon Summit, the Allies agree to acquire a territorial missile defence capability. They agree that an expanded theatre missile defence programme could form the command, control and communications backbone of such a system. The NRC agrees to discuss pursuing ballistic missile defence cooperation. June 2011 NATO defence ministers approve the NATO Ballistic Missile Defence Action Plan. September 2011 Turkey announces a decision to host a missile defence radar as part of NATO BMD capability. September 2011 Romania and the United States sign an agreement to base interceptors in Romania as part of NATO BMD capability. September 2011 An agreement between Poland and the United States on basing interceptors in Poland enters into force. September 2011 The Netherlands announces plans to upgrade four air-defence frigates with extended long-range radar systems as its national contribution to NATO’s BMD capability. October 2011 Spain and the United States announce an agreement to port US Aegis ships in Rota, Spain, as part of the US contribution to NATO’s ballistic missile defence capability. April 2012 NATO successfully installs and tests the command and control architecture for the Interim Capability at Alliance Air Command Ramstein, Germany. May 2012 NATO Summit in Chicago. Declaration of the Interim BMD Capability. NATO-Russia Council Theatre Missile Defence Project 2003 A study is launched under the NRC to assess possible levels of interoperability among theatre missile defence systems of NATO Allies and Russia. March 2004 An NRC theatre missile defence command post exercise is held in the United States. March 2005 An NRC theatre missile defence command post exercise is held in the Netherlands. October 2006 An NRC theatre missile defence command post exercise is held in Russia. January 2008 An NRC theatre missile defence computer-assisted exercise takes place in Germany. December 2010 First meeting of the NRC Missile Defence Working Group aimed at assessing decisions taken at the Lisbon Summit and exploring possible way forward for cooperation on ballistic missile defence. June 2011 NRC defence ministers take stock of the work on missile defence since the 2010 Lisbon summit. April 2012 Computer-assisted exercise in Ottobrunn, Germany
Belarus, NATO’s relations with -
NATO’s relations with Belarus Belarus joined NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP) in 1995. NATO and Belarus have established a relationship based on the pursuit of common interests, while also keeping open channels for dialogue. Belarus has developed an Individual Partnership Programme (IPP) and participates in the Planning and Review Process (PARP). NATO Allies have expressed their concern at the lack of progress in democratic reforms in Belarus. Nonetheless, NATO Allies believe that keeping open channels of communication, practical cooperation and dialogue is in the best interest of regional security. NATO and Belarus cooperate in a number of areas, including civil emergency planning, scientific cooperation, and defence reforms. NATO will continue to work with Belarus to implement reforms in these areas, while continuing to call on Belarus to increase the pace of its democratic reforms. Framework for cooperation The belief that there is value in communication and practical cooperation is put into practice in several ways. Dialogue takes place within the framework of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) and is facilitated by the existence of Belarus’ diplomatic mission to NATO, which was opened in April 1998. Under the Partnership for Peace, NATO and Belarus are developing practical cooperation in a number of areas through Belarus’ Individual Partnership Programme (IPP). On the basis of the IPP, Belarusian personnel are attending courses in NATO countries and practical cooperation is being developed in areas such as civil emergency planning, crisis management, arms control, air defence and air traffic control, telecommunications and information processing, as well as language training and military education. Key areas of cooperation Security cooperation In 2009, Belarus extended an offer of rail transit to nations participating in NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. Completed in 2010, the agreement allows for the shipment of non-lethal cargo by rail through Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. Another important aspect of security cooperation is Belarus’ participation in the PfP Planning and Review Process (PARP). This is aimed at encouraging transparency and at assisting the country in developing capabilities and interoperability for international peace-support operations. NATO helps set planning targets that will enable Belarus to develop some of its forces and capabilities for potential participation in PfP activities, including NATO-led PfP operations, and in this way contribute to security and stability. Demilitarization project A good example of the tangible benefits of practical cooperation is a PfP Trust Fund project, aimed at helping Belarus meet its obligations under the Ottawa Convention on the prohibition of the use, stockpiling, production and transfer of anti-personnel mines and on their destruction. Completed in January 2007, this joint project, led by Canada and co-funded by Lithuania and Belarus, involved the destruction of some 700,000 anti-personnel mines in Belarus. Science and environment NATO and Belarus also cooperate on security-related science. Scientists from Belarus have taken leading roles in 125 activities, including collaborating with experts from the Czech Republic on exploring safer methods to destroy stockpiles of persistent organic pesticides and holding an advanced study institute course in May 2010 on advanced training of architects of secure networks. Since 2001, Belarus has received grant awards for about 40 cooperative activities under NATO’s Science for Peace and Security Programme. Areas include telecommunications, Chernobyl-related risk assessment studies and explosive material detection systems. An ongoing project has brought together scientists from Belarus, Norway and Ukraine to assess the hazards posed by radioactive contamination in the Polessie State Radiation-Ecological Reserve. In addition, over 75 science fellowships have been awarded to Belarusian scientists to study in NATO countries since 1993. Public information NATO also seeks to contribute to the development of Belarusian civil society. This takes place primarily through public diplomacy activities. Belarusian non-governmental and civil society organisations are encouraged to engage with NATO’s Public Diplomacy Division. In every partner country an embassy of one of the NATO member states serves as a contact point and operates as a channel for disseminating information about the role and policies of the Alliance. The current NATO Contact Point Embassy in Belarus is the embassy of Estonia. Evolution of relations Formal NATO-Belarus cooperation began when Belarus joined the Partnership for Peace in 1995. While relations have fluctuated over the years, NATO Allies firmly believe that a policy of engagement, consultation, and transparency is preferable to pursuing an approach which seeks to disengage and isolate. At the same time, NATO will continue to push Belarus to improve its democratic, human rights, and rule of law standards, in line with the commitments it has undertaken in joining the Partnership fo Peace and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. Key milestones 1992 Belarus joins the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC, later renamed the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council in 1997). 1995 Belarus joins the Partnership for Peace, a programme aimed at increasing security and defence cooperation between NATO and individual Partner countries.. Belarus takes part in a NACC meeting, for the first time, in June, in Oslo, Norway. 1998 Belarus opens a permanent mission at NATO Headquarters. 1999 Belarus temporarily halts all cooperation with NATO, including the PfP programme and EAPC, in protest at NATO’s Kosovo air campaign. 2004 Belarus joins the PfP Planning and Review Process (PARP). 2006 NATO Allies condemn the presidential election in Belarus as failing to meet international standards and conduct a review of NATO-Belarus relations. 2007 NATO and Belarus complete the first PfP trust fund project in Belarus, which destroyed some 700,000 anti-personnel mines. 2010 NATO completes the arrangements with several countries, including Belarus, for the transit of non-lethal ISAF cargo to Afghanistan by rail. 2011 NATO sponsors new flood risk monitoring system in Ukraine and Belarus
Bosnia and Herzegovina, NATO’s relations with -
Last updated: 14-Feb-2013 11:44 Natochannel.tv newYTPlayer('DvpAjTjVV-0','77192m'); Joint press conference by the NATO Secretary General and the Chairman of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina 07 Feb. 2013 The path towards NATO 07 Feb. 2013 Bosnians in Helmand 05 Jan. 2011 Building peace 15 Dec. 2010 Reforming the military 14 Dec. 2010 The road to integration 14 Dec. 2010 Managing the environment 06 May. 2010 Salt of the Earth 26 Apr. 2010 News
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Peace support operations in -
Peace support operations in Bosnia and Herzegovina NATO conducted its first major crisis response operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The NATO-led Implementation Force (IFOR) was deployed in December 1995 to implement the military aspects of the Dayton Peace Agreement and was replaced a year later by the NATO-led Stabilisation Force (SFOR). SFOR helped to maintain a secure environment and facilitate the country’s reconstruction in the wake of the 1992-1995 war. In the light of the improved security situation in both Bosnia and Herzegovina and the wider region, the Alliance brought SFOR to a conclusion in December 2004 and the European Union (EU) took on NATO’s stabilisation role. NATO provides planning, logistic and command support for the EU-led Operation Althea, in accordance with the Berlin Plus arrangements agreed between the two organisations. NATO is also maintaining a military headquarters in Sarajevo. It carries out a number of specific tasks related, in particular, to assisting the government in reforming its defence structures, working on counter-terrorism and apprehending war-crime suspects. Bosnia and Herzegovina became a NATO Partner country in December 2006 and is focusing on introducing democratic, institutional and defence reforms, as well as developing practical cooperation in other areas. Aim and implementation of IFOR and SFOR IFOR The Implementation Force (IFOR) was deployed in Bosnia and Herzegovina in December 1995 with a one-year mandate. IFOR operated under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, deriving its authority from UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1031 of 15 December 1995. This gave it a mandate not just to maintain peace, but also, where necessary, to enforce it. As such and strictly speaking, IFOR was a peace enforcement operation, which was more generally referred to as a peace support operation. This was also the case for SFOR. IFOR’s aim IFOR aimed to oversee implementation of the military aspects of the Dayton Peace Agreement, the accord ending the Bosnian War. Its main task was to guarantee the end of hostilities and separate the armed forces of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, on the one hand, and Republika Srpska, on the other. IFOR in the field IFOR oversaw the transfer of territory between the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republika Srpska, the demarcation of the inter-entity boundary and the removal of heavy weapons into approved cantonment sites. As the situation on the ground improved, IFOR began providing support to organisations involved in overseeing the implementation of the civilian aspects of the Dayton Peace Agreement, including the Office of the High Representative, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and the United Nations. IFOR's goals were essentially completed by the September 1996 elections. As the situation was still potentially unstable and much remained to be accomplished on the civilian side, NATO agreed to deploy a new Stabilisation Force (SFOR) from December 1996. SFOR The Stabilisation Force (SFOR) operated under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, deriving its authority from UN Security Council Resolution 1088 of 12 December 1996. As was the case for IFOR, it was a peace enforcement operation that was more generally referred to as a peace support operation. SFOR’s aim SFOR’s primary task was to contribute to a safe and secure environment conducive to civil and political reconstruction. Specifically, SFOR was tasked to deter or prevent a resumption of hostilities; to promote a climate in which the peace process could continue to move forward; and, to provide selective support within its means and capabilities to civilian organisations involved in this process. SFOR in the field FOR’s activities ranged from patrolling and providing area security through supporting defence reform and supervising de-mining operations, to arresting individuals indicted for war crimes and assisting the return of refugees and displaced people to their homes. Keeping the peace SFOR troops carried out regular patrols throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina to maintain a secure environment. Multinational specialised units were deployed to deal with instances of unrest. SFOR also collected and destroyed unregistered weapons and ordnance in private hands, in order to contribute to the overall safety of the population and to build confidence in the peace process. In 2003 alone, SFOR disposed of more than 11,000 weapons and 45,000 grenades. SFOR was also one of several organisations involved in de-mining in Bosnia and Herzegovina. NATO forces carried out some de-mining themselves and helped to set up de-mining schools in Banja Luka, Mostar and Travnik. They also helped to establish a sniffer dog training school in Bihac. Furthermore, SFOR had Multinational Specialised Units (MSU) that assisted the EU Police Mission (EUPM). The EUPM is responsible for helping the Bosnian authorities develop local police forces that meet the highest European and international standards, through monitoring, mentoring and inspecting police managerial and operational capacities. Reforming defence establishments A key aspect of SFOR's work in Bosnia and Herzegovina concerned reform of the country's defence structures, which had been divided into three rival ethnic groups at the end of hostilities. Within the framework of a Defence Reform Commission, both SFOR and NATO worked to help Bosnia and Herzegovina build a unified command and control structure and to develop joint doctrine and standards for training and equipment that are compatible with NATO and Partnership for Peace (PfP) norms. In March 2004, a state-level Defence Minister brought the country’s two separate armies under a single command structure. NATO's military headquarters in Sarajevo has a leadership role in the Defence Reform Commission and is continuing to work on defence reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Arresting war-crimes suspects Although the apprehension of indicted war criminals was officially the responsibility of the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina, NATO forces were instrumental in most arrests that have taken place. In total, SFOR brought 39 war-crimes suspects to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague (ICTY). SFOR also provided security and logistical support to ICTY investigative teams as well as surveillance of and ground patrolling around alleged mass graves. Through its military headquarters in Sarajevo, NATO remains committed to bring to justice all war-crimes suspects still at large. Contributing to reconstruction In addition to helping other organisations working on Bosnia and Herzegovina's reconstruction, SFOR launched its own Civil-Military Co-operation (CIMIC) projects in areas such as structural engineering and transportation. SFOR participated in the maintenance and repair of roads and railways in collaboration with the local authorities and other international agencies. This work was critical to providing freedom of movement throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina. Command of the missions As for all NATO operations, political control and co-ordination are provided by the North Atlantic Council, NATO’s senior political decision-making body. Strategic command and control is exercised by NATO’s Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers in Europe (SHAPE) in Mons, Belgium. Command of IFOR Admiral Leighton Smith commanded IFOR (COMIFOR) from the start of the operation on 20 December 1995 until 31 July 1996. Admiral T. Joseph Lopez then took command until 7 November 1996, followed by General William Crouch from 7 November 1996 to 20 December 1996. The COMIFOR was based at operational headquarters in Zagreb, Croatia. Lieutenant General Michael Walker, Commander Allied Command Europe Rapid Reaction Corps (COMARRC) acted as Commander for IFOR's land component throughout the operation. Command of SFOR Following the hand-over to SFOR in December 1996, the command structure, as directed by the North Atlantic Council (NAC), was broadened to include a deputy SFOR commander, a deputy operational commander and divisional commanders at the head of each MNTF (1,800 - 2,000 troops). This structure comprised 300 staff at HQSFOR at Camp Butmir in Sarajevo, led by the Commander of SFOR (COMSFOR) and three Multi-National Task Forces (MNTFs) working in different areas: MNTF-North (MNTF-N) based in Tuzla; MNTF-Southeast (MNTF-SE) based in Mostar; and MNTF-Northwest (MTNF-NW) based in Banja Luka. Restructuring of SFOR The NAC reviewed SFOR periodically at six monthly junctures to assess the force's effectiveness. On 25 October 1999 the NAC, based upon the improved security situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, reduced and restructured SFOR. Headquarters remained at Camp Butmir in Sarajevo but MNTFs were reduced in size from divisions to brigades. Each MNTF still retained individual brigade commanders. In addition a Tactical Reserve Force of 1,000 battle-ready troops was created. As was the case with IFOR, every NATO member with armed forces committed troops to SFOR. Iceland, the only NATO country without armed forces, provided medical personnel. Outside of NATO countries, contributors were: Albania, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia (which all became NATO members at a later stage), Austria, Argentina, Finland, Ireland, Morocco, Russia, and Sweden; and by special arrangement with the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand. All forces incorporated into SFOR came under the command of COMSFOR and the NAC. Commanders of SFOR – COMSFOR Gen. William Crouch, US A 20 Dec 1996 - 30 Jul 1997 Gen. Eric Shinseki, US A 30 Jul 1997 - 23 Oct 1998 Gen. Montgomery Meigs, US A 23 Oct 1998 - 18 Oct 1999 Lt. Gen. Ronald Adams, US A 18 Oct 1999 - 08 Sep 2000 Lt. Gen. Michael Dodson, US A 08 Sep 2000 - 07 Sep 2001 Lt. Gen. John B. Sylvester, US A 07 Sep 2001 - 07 Oct 2002 Lt. Gen. William E. Ward, US A 08 Oct 2002 - 01 Oct 2003 Maj. Gen. Virgil L. Packett II, US A 02 Oct 2003 - 04 Oct 2004 Brig. Gen. Steven P. Schook, US A 05 Oct 2004 - 02 Dec 2004 The evolution of NATO’s assistance A four-year war started in Bosnia and Herzegovina when Yugoslavia (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia¹, Montenegro, Serbia and Slovenia) broke up at the end of the Cold War. NATO's involvement in Bosnia and Herzegovina began in 1992. In June of that year, NATO foreign ministers stated that, on a case-by-case basis, the Alliance would support peacekeeping activities under the responsibility of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (subsequently renamed the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe). A month later, in July 1992, NATO began monitoring operations in the Adriatic in support of the UNSCR 713 and 757 imposing an arms embargo and sanctions in the former Yugoslavia. By October 1992, NATO AWACS aircraft were monitoring operations in support of UNSCR 781, imposing a no-fly zone over Bosnia and Herzegovina. And in November, NATO and the Western European Union began to enforce the sanctions and embargo imposed by UNSCR 787. By the end of the year, NATO declared that it stood ready to support peacekeeping operations under the authority of the United Nations. NATO's first ever military engagement After the United Nations authorised the enforcement of a no-fly zone over Bosnia and Herzegovina, NATO began Operation Deny Flight in April 1993. On 28 February 1994, four warplanes violating the no-fly zone were shot down by NATO aircraft in the Alliance's first military engagement. At the request of the United Nations, NATO provided close air support to the UN Protection Force (UNPROFOR) on the ground and carried out air strikes to protect UN-designated safe havens. Air strikes were conducted against targets such as tanks, ammunition depots and air defence radars. NATO’s air operations against Bosnian Serb positions in August and September 1995 helped pave the way for a comprehensive peace agreement. The operation, Deliberate Force, lasted for 12 days and helped shift the balance of power between parties on the ground. It also helped persuade the Bosnian Serb leadership that the benefits of negotiating a peace agreement outweighed those of continuing to wage war. On 14 December 1995, after negotiations in Dayton, Ohio, the General Framework Agreement for Peace was signed in Paris, France. The Dayton Peace Agreement establishes Bosnia and Herzegovina as a single, democratic and multiethnic state with two entities: the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republika Srpska. And the first major crisis response operation IFOR was the Alliance's first major crisis response operation. It was set up to implement the military aspects of the Dayton Peace Agreement, when NATO took over responsibility for military operations in Bosnia and Herzegovina from UNPROFOR. IFOR’s goals were essentially completed by the September 1996 elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, as the situation was still potentially unstable and much remained to be accomplished on the civilian side, NATO agreed to deploy a new Stabilisation Force (SFOR) from December 1996. Mission hand-over to the European Union At their Istanbul Summit in June 2004, NATO leaders decided to bring SFOR to a conclusion by the end of the year as a result of the improved security situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the wider region. The SFOR mission was officially ended on 2 December 2004. In its place, a European Union-led force is deployed, known as Operation Althea. The Alliance is providing planning, logistic and command support for the EU mission, in the framework of a package of agreements known as "Berlin Plus". These agreements provide the overall framework for NATO-EU cooperation. NATO HQ Sarajevo The primary role of this NATO Military Liaison and Advisory Mission (NATO HQ Sarajevo) is to assist Bosnia and Herzegovina with defence reform. It also aims to help the country meet requirements for its participation in NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme. NATO HQ Sarajevo undertakes certain operational tasks such as counter-terrorism while ensuring force protection, support to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, with the detention of persons indicted for war crimes, and intelligence-sharing with the European Union. In sum, the NATO HQ Sarajevo complements the work of the EU mission with specific competencies. Facts and figures Contributing countries Over the course of these missions, a total of 36 Allied and Partner countries contributed troops. In addition, soldiers from five countries that were neither NATO members nor Partner countries participated at different times, namely Argentina, Australia, Chile, Malaysia and New Zealand. Troop numbers IFOR IFOR was a 60,000-strong force that was deployed for one year. SFOR SFOR originally comprised 31,000 troops. By early 2001 they had been reduced to 19,000 and, in spring 2002, the decision was taken to reduce troops to 12,000 by end 2002. By 2004, they totaled 7,000. 1. Turkey recognises the Republic of Macedonia with its constitutional name.
Building Integrity (BI) Programme
Building Integrity (BI) Programme The Building Integrity (BI) Programme is part of NATO’s commitment to strengthening good governance in the defence and security sector. It was established by the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council in November 2007 in the framework of the Partnership Action Plan on Defence Institution Building (PAP-DIB). The BI programme seeks to raise awareness, promote good practice and provide practical tools to help nations enhance integrity and reduce risks of corruption in the security sector by strengthening transparency and accountability. At the NATO Summit in Chicago in May 2012, Allied leaders welcomed the Status Report on Building Integrity and the progress achieved by NATO’s Building Integrity Programme, which has made important contributions to promoting transparency, accountability, and integrity in the defence sector of interested nations. BI is focused in particular on the management of financial and human resources. In taking this work forward, Allies agree that priority should be given to developing a BI contribution to support the Afghan National Security Forces. This is in addition to ongoing efforts to develop a tailored BI programme to support nations in South Eastern Europe. The BI Status Report also highlighted the importance of education and training in building capacity and sustaining change. The North Atlantic Council agree that NATO Military Authorities led by Allied Command Transformation are to develop a BI Education and Training Plan. This will provide the necessary framework for supporting NATO civilian and military efforts to promote good govenance in the defence and security sector as well as addressing requirements for NATO led operations. The BI programme is supported by voluntary contributions to the BI Trust Fund led by Belgium, Norway, Poland, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. Making effective use of resources in the defence and security sector is a challenge faced by all nations. The BI programme of activities and tools are open to all Allies and NATO’s partners in the Euro-Atlantic area, the Mediterranean and the Gulf region, as well as other partners across the globe, including Afghanistan. Implementation Participation in the BI Programme is on a voluntary basis. The NATO International Staff serves as the executing agent and project manager for the BI Programme and works closely with nations and other international organisations as well as representaives of civil society to develop a mulit-year programme to promote awareness and understanding of corruption and its impact on military operations and peace and security as well as practical tools and mechanism - the BI Tool Kit. Where possible the BI programme is being integrated and aligned with national processes as well as NATO partnerhsip mechanisms. BI is also supported by a network of implementing partners – drawn from NATO countries, partner nations and civil society. They include the NATO School in Oberammergau, Germany, the Geneva Centre for Security Policy, the Geneva Centre for Democratic Control of the Armed Forces, Transparency International (UK Defence Team), the Swedish National Defence College, the Bulgarian and Norwegian ministries of defence, and Partnership for Peace Education and Training Centres in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. These institutions support implementation of BI by provide expertise advice on training and education and by hosting BI activities. Building Integrity Tool Kit The Building Integrity Tool Kit includes a BI Self Assessment Survey (available on the NATO website in English, French , Arabic, Dari and Russian) and a Peer Review Process, BI courses certified by Allied Command Transformation, resource material, a Pool of BI Subject Matter Experts and a network of institutions. Nations use the BI Self Assessment Survey to map current practices and procedures in defence and security establishments. The Peer Review is based on an analysis of the completed survey and provides a framework for identifying and promoting good practice as well as developing national action plans and benchmarks. Nations completing the BI Self Assessment may request a Peer Review and expert support to develop a tailored action plan. To date, BI Peer Reviews have been completed for - Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Norway, and Ukraine. Peer Reviews for Hungary, Latvia and Serbia are ongoing. BI courses have been conducted in the EAPC area as well as Afghanistan for more than 550 civil and defence and security personnel. In 2012, BI courses are being conducted at the PfP Centre in Ankara, Turkey, and the NATO School Oberammergau, Germany. The BI Tool Kit also includes resources - “Building Integrity and Reducing Corruption in Defence: A Compendium of Best Practices” (available in English, Arabic, Russian and Ukrainian; see links in right-hand margin). This Compendium provides a strategic approach to reducing corruption risks. It focuses on the practicalities of designing and implementing integrity-building programmes in defence, while taking into account the cultural specifics of defence organisations. BI is supported by a pool of subject matter experts, drawn from national civilian and defence ministries, international organizations and civil society. These experts provide advice and take an active role in the development and implementation of all aspects of the BI programme such as the BI Peer Reviews and pre-deployment activities for ISAF. Video newYTPlayer('4cfNtiqi1F0','90871'); Building Integrity: Publication in Arabic 16 Oct. 2012 Cross-interview with Ambassador Benedict de Cerjat, Head of the Swiss Mission to NATO, Ambassador Dirk Brengelmann, Assistant Secretary General for NATO Political Affairs and Security Policy and Mr. Yassine Foukara, Director of Strategy and Studies of ... Building Integrity: Publication in Arabic 16 Oct. 2012 Cross-interview with Ambassador Benedict de Cerjat, Head of the Swiss Mission to NATO, Ambassador Dirk Brengelmann, Assistant Secretary General for NATO Political Affairs and Security Policy and Mr. Yassine Foukara, Director of Strategy and Studies of ... Building Integrity: MD and ICI 16 Oct. 2012 Remarks by Mr. Nicola de Santis, Head of the Middle East and North Africa Section at NATO Headquarters on Building Integrity and NATO's outreach to the Mediterranean and the Middle East. Building Integrity: DCAF Experts 16 Oct. 2012 Cross-Interview with Dr. Phillip Fluri, Deputy Head at the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces and Professor Haykel Ben Mahfoudh, Senior Advisor at the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces in Tunis on Building Int.