NATO - North Atlantic Treaty Organization

  • Economics, Defence and security -
    Defence and security economics Economic security is a critical dimension of NATO’s priorities with Allies and global partners. The potential disruption to the flow of economic resources comprising people, goods and strategic commodities can pose challenges and opportunities to the security of the Alliance, as underlined by NATO’s Strategic Concept – the official document that sets out NATO’s enduring purpose, nature and fundamental security tasks. A proper understanding of defence and security economics is an essential contribution to NATO’s work in pre-conflict, conflict and post-conflict environments. At present, NATO’s efforts are focused on Afghanistan, international economic security, partnerships and supporting the development and sharing of economic intelligence. Economic cooperation has always been an important aspect of the Alliance. Article 2 of the North Atlantic Treaty, clearly states that member countries “will seek to eliminate conflict in their international economic policies and will encourage economic collaboration between any or all of them.”  Economic cooperation between Allies and, over time, with partners began formally in 1957 with the establishment of the Economic Committee. The Committee conducted multi-faceted work on economic security until mid-2010, when it was dissolved and its tasks pursued within other committees. The Defence and Security Economics (DSE) section of the Political Affairs and Security Policy Division of the International Staff constitutes the core team that deals with defence and security economics on a day-to-day basis. Core tasks Afghanistan The primary work of DSE is directed to supporting NATO’s efforts in Afghanistan and to providing assessments on international economic security in a world where the balance of international economic power is changing. In this regard, DSE has developed various important initiatives in support of NATO ISAF and Afghanistan. Firstly, DSE has significantly contributed to the development of the NATO Afghan First Policy that seeks to reduce the risk of corruption in the contracting for goods and services in support of economic development and security in Afghanistan. Secondly, DSE, in partnership with international organisations and NGOs, is engaged in building the capacity of the government of Afghanistan to reduce corruption in defence and security establishments in Afghanistan. This includes the application of Building Integrity tools (a NATO initiative first developed in 2007) to support NATO ISAF in developing anti-corruption training for the Afghan National Army and the national Police. Thirdly, DSE interacts with the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in assessing those economic and financial issues that are critical to Afghanistan’s medium- and long-term economic development and security. International economic security The challenges confronting the Alliance in the wake of the global economic recession in 2008 have been felt in the pressure imposed on national defence budgets at a time of economic and fiscal austerity. In an increasingly complex financial and economic world, international economic collaboration is a fundamental condition for stability and security, together with measures to ensure that NATO members continue to devote the necessary budgetary resources to defence and security capabilities. DSE organises workshops and interacts with other divisions within the International Staff (the Emerging Security Challenges and the Defence Policy and Planning Divisions) in focusing upon the affordability and sustainability of defence spending within the Alliance set against the backcloth of the changing distribution of international economic power. Increasingly, budgetary and financial constraints make it essential that Allies implement “Smart Defence” arrangements, as proposed and emphasised by NATO’s Secretary General, Anders Fogh Rasmussen. Partnerships In coordination with other entities within the International Staff, DSE contributes to the monitoring and assessment of the economic performance of partners in the framework of their Annual national Plans and Membership Action Plans. Additionally, discussions with partners can focus on assessing developments in economic security, as well as supporting their efforts to manage the socio-economic consequences of defence sector restructuring and downsizing (in support of vital defence reform and defence conversion) and to promote better management of scarce defence and security sector financial resources. Economic Intelligence DSE retains access to a network of defence economic experts from Allied capitals who previously contributed to the analytical work of the Economic Committee. With the reform of NATO intelligence structures and processes, DSE remains able to support this work with contributions on economic intelligence. Working mechanisms The Defence and Security Economics (DSE) section of the Political Affairs and Security Policy Division in the NATO International deals with defence and security economics.  DSE was reorganised in 2010 after the dissolution of the NATO Economic Committee and provides expert advice and inputs to the Political and Partnerships Committee and the Operations Policy Committee. It also contributes to the work conducted by other divisions in support of NATO’s operations and partnerships. The Head of DSE is also NATO’s Senior Defence Economist and is responsible for internal liaison with NATO committees, agencies and other bodies. He is also responsible for external liaison with pivotal international economic organisations such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and other major international economic organisations. DSE also maintains an extensive network of contacts with experts on defence and security economics in prominent international think tanks.
  • Education and training
    Education and training NATO conducts education and training to ensure that forces from member countries are effective and interoperable, and as part of its cooperation with non-member countries. The three main purposes are to increase the interoperability and effectiveness of NATO-led multinational forces, assist partner countries in their reform efforts, and help bring peace and stability to crisis-hit areas. Education and training are key agents for transformation. They are complementary activities which reinforce each other. Education focuses on the function of explaining concepts, doctrines and practices and teaching procedures, for instance English language classes and history. Training focuses on practising and applying that knowledge, which helps to assimilate the subject matter completely. Exercises take training a step further by testing acquired knowledge during real-life or computer-assisted exercises with a scenario involving large numbers of participants from a broad range of countries. Historically, NATO education and training has been focused on ensuring that military forces from member countries can work together effectively in operations and missions. Today, NATO education and training functions have expanded significantly both geographically and institutionally. Geographically, NATO is working with a larger number of countries through its cooperation with partner countries and through the creation of NATO training missions as far away as Afghanistan and Africa. Institutionally, education and training have been reinforced through the creation, in 2002, of Allied Command Transformation, entirely dedicated to leading the ongoing transformation of NATO’s military structure, forces, capabilities and doctrine. Subsequently, the introduction of new bodies and initiatives has also demonstrated the resolve to reinforce education and training activities for the Organization. At the Chicago Summit in 2012, NATO leaders stressed the importance of expanding education and training, especially within the context of the Connected Forces Initiative (CFI). CFI aims to ensure the ability of forces to communicate and work with each other. At the most basic level, this implies individuals understanding each other and, at a higher level, the use of common doctrines, concepts and procedures, as well as interoperable equipment. Forces also need to increasingly practise working together through joint and combined training and exercising, after which they need to standardize skills and make better use of technology. 1 CFI seeks to make greater use of education, training and exercises to reinforce links between the forces of NATO member countries and maintain the level of interoperability needed for future operations. 1 Joint training means forces from two or more military departments working under a single command and combined forces are forces from different countries working under a single command. Purpose and practical implementation As explained above, the three main purposes of NATO’s education and training programmes are to increase the interoperability and effectiveness of NATO-led multinational forces, assist partner countries in their reform efforts, and help bring peace and stability to crisis-hit areas. Enhancing interoperability Troops for NATO operations are drawn from many different countries: the forces of NATO member and partner countries, as well as from countries which are not NATO member or partner countries. Ensuring that these multinational forces can work together effectively despite differences in tactics, doctrine, training, structures, and language is a priority for NATO. This “interoperability” is built in a number of ways. Courses and seminars NATO’s network of educational institutions offers a broad range of courses on both strategic and operational issues. While courses differ, they tend to focus on knowledge and skills required by individuals who will occupy senior or specialised positions within the structure of the Alliance, or who hold NATO-related posts in their own countries. The NATO Defense College in Rome, Italy is NATO’s primary strategic-level educational facility and includes areas of study such as trends in the international security environment and their potential effects on NATO countries. It provides training for senior commanders. The NATO School in Oberammergau, Germany is the primary operational-level training centre for students. Operational-level training focuses on joint planning of NATO operations, logistics, communications, civil emergency planning, or civil-military cooperation.   Courses are being offered in an increasing number of locations to ensure all available expertise is being utilised, for instance, civil-military training at the Civil-Military Cooperation (CIMIC) Centre of Excellence, the Netherlands. Courses vary in duration (from a day to several months) and are open to personnel from NATO member countries and some to personnel from countries participating in NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme, Mediterranean Dialogue and Istanbul Cooperation Initiative, as well as selected “partners across the globe” (countries which are neither NATO members nor partner countries, also referred to as “global partners”). Some are also open to civilian participants. Experimentation and development NATO is constantly trying to improve the way its forces operate. In line with its transformation agenda, the Alliance is continuing to focus on the development of new concepts and capabilities to ensure future NATO forces are trained and equipped to the highest possible standard. NATO countries conduct their own experimentation. The Alliance provides a forum for members to engage in knowledge-sharing regarding concepts and capabilities. It does this through Allied Command Transformation (ACT), which leads the transformation of NATO’s military structure, forces, capabilities and doctrine. ACT enhances training, particularly of commanders and staff, conducts experiments to assess new concepts and promotes interoperability throughout the Alliance. Exercises Exercises provide opportunities to test and validate all aspects of NATO operations, including procedures, concepts, systems, and tactics. Exercises also build and reinforce interoperability by focusing on practical training for personnel from NATO countries and partners with which the Alliance cooperates. Working with NATO partners on defence reform NATO members have reduced levels of military personnel, equipment and bases from Cold War levels and transformed their forces to meet today’s needs. Many partner countries are still going through this process, often with scarce resources and limited expertise. In 2005, NATO started developing an “Education and Training for Defence Reform” (EfR) initiative that provides a framework for cooperation for both military and civilian personnel.  EfR helps educators incorporate principles linked to defence institution building into their curricula. Since the courses are aimed at civil servants and other persons participating in defence institution building, they contribute indirectly to improving defence reform. Education is effectively a key agent of transformation and NATO is using it to support institutional reform in partner countries.  The Alliance’s education and training programmes initially focused on increasing interoperability between NATO and partner forces. They have since been expanded to provide a means for members and partners to collaborate on how to build, develop and reform educational institutions in the security, defence and military domain. Tailor-made defence education Through the Defence Education Enhancement Programme (DEEP), the Alliance advises partners on how to build, develop and reform educational institutions in the defence and military domain. This effort is embedded in partners' individual programmes (Individual Partnership Action Plans, Annual National Programmes and Individual Partnership Cooperation Programmes), and is a key part of the Enduring Partnership with Afghanistan. There are currently 13 individual country DEEP programmes, with different focuses and at different stages of development, engaging Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mauritania, Republic of Moldova, Mongolia, Serbia, Ukraine and Uzbekistan. They are run with the support of the PfP Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes (see “Additional training institutions and organisations” for explanations), the Partnership Training and Education Centres and Allied as well as partner defence institutions. Each partner country participating in defence reform agrees on an individualised programme with NATO that varies in depth and breadth, depending on its interests and level of commitment and cooperation. This can include tailor-made education programmes such as on-the-job training, language training, and resettlement and retraining of redundant military personnel. Aside from helping individual countries to develop their educational institutions, NATO is also helping develop teaching curricula (”what to teach”), available to all Allies and partners. Six years of committed effort by prominent experts from Allied and partner countries have produced three unique products: the Reference Curricula on defence institution building, on the professional military education for officers and – the most recent one – on professional military education for non-commissioned officers. Work continues on a reference curriculum on the Comprehensive Approach, and the development of curricula related to emerging security challenges is being considered. Faculty development (“how to teach”) is the third pillar of DEEP. NATO helps maintain an international professional network which brings together defence and military educators from Allied and partner countries to exchange experience in teaching methodologies and help those interested in advice and assistance. To do all that, the Alliance has developed and relies upon a vast transatlantic web of institutions and individuals who support these projects on a voluntary basis. A large number of Allied and partner institutions have engaged in DEEP: the US Army War College, the Canadian Defence Academy, the National Defence University of Poland, the National Defence University of Romania, the Czech University of Defence, the Slovak Armed Forces Academy, the Geneva Centre for Security Policy, the George C. Marshall Center in Garmisch-Partenkirchen, to name just a few. The NATO Defense College and the NATO School Oberammergau also support the programme. The Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes - an Austrian-German-Swiss-US initiative - is instrumental in helping NATO to manage the network and the DEEP projects. The functional Educational Clearing House, led by the Czech Republic, Italy, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Switzerland and the United States, and supported by the PfP Consortium, plays a critical role in coordinating NATO and national efforts in support of DEEP projects. Of note, the Alliance is also the hub for a growing network of Partnership Training and Education Centres (PTECs), which currently brings together 26 civilian and military institutions from Allied and partner countries. While originally developed in the framework of Partnership for Peace, the network already includes Egyptian, Jordanian and Mongolian centres. The PTECs, while national institutions, conduct education and training activities related to NATO partnership programmes and policies and contribute substantially to the Partnership Cooperation Menu (PCM). Courses, seminars and workshops Partner countries which work with NATO are able to participate in an array of NATO education activities – courses, roundtables, seminars, and workshops. Advice and expertise NATO countries are among the most advanced in the world in terms of defence capabilities. Countries cooperating with the Alliance on defence reform are able to take advantage of this expertise. For most countries, this is done through the Partnership for Peace Planning and Review Process (PARP), a mechanism that helps to identify partner forces and capabilities that could be available to the Alliance for multinational training, exercises and operations. Countries with special relationships with NATO can have additional mechanisms for exchanging advice and expertise. For instance, the NATO-Ukraine Joint Working Group on Defence Reform provides a forum through which consultation can take place on initiatives as diverse as civil-military relations, democratic oversight and civilian management of the armed forces and other security sector agencies, defence planning, policy, strategy and national security concepts. Moreover, NATO-led multinational teams of experts can visit partner countries to address the education and training requirements listed in the individual action plans of the countries concerned. This has been the case, for instance, for the South Caucasus countries and Moldova, as well as Mauritania. An initiative for the Mediterranean and the Middle East A dedicated Middle East faculty has been established at the NATO Defense College in Rome as part of the NATO Regional Cooperation Course. Education and training in NATO-led operations NATO’s efforts to bring stability to crisis areas go beyond deploying troops. Through education and training programmes, NATO is helping countries such as Afghanistan develop its own security institutions and provide for its own security. Afghanistan An important aspect of NATO’s engagement in Afghanistan is assisting the country in developing its security structures and forces. NATO’s Training Mission in Afghanistan (NTM-A) was established in November 2009, bringing together NATO and national efforts under one umbrella and working closely with Afghan authorities. Its key tasks include the training and mentoring of the Afghan National Security Forces, support to the Afghan National Army’s institutional training base, and the reform of the Afghan National Police at the district level and below. The Alliance also deployed Operational Mentoring and Liaison Teams to Afghan National Army units at various levels of command. These gradually evolved into Military Advisory Teams and Police Advisory Teams, more generally known as Security Force Assistance Teams. In 2006, NATO signed a declaration with Afghanistan, establishing a substantial programme of long-term cooperation. This Afghan Cooperation Programme provides for further training assistance, including opening NATO courses and partnership activities to Afghan participation, providing advice and expertise on defence reform and the development of security institutions, as well as specific assistance such as language training. Subsequently, on 20 November 2010, NATO and the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan signed a Declaration on an Enduring Partnership at the NATO Summit in Lisbon. The Enduring Partnership is intended to provide long-term political and practical support to Afghanistan as it rebuilds its security institutions and assumes full responsibility for its own security through the transition process. It includes a series of agreed programmes and activities undertaken as part of the ongoing cooperation between NATO and Afghanistan. This includes the Professional Military Education Programme for Afghanistan, which aims to further develop Afghan institutions, as well as other initiatives such as a counter-narcotics training pilot project. The African Union At the request of the African Union (AU), NATO assisted the AU (June 2005-end December 2007) in strengthening its peacekeeping force in Darfur in a bid to halt the continuing violence. Initially, NATO’s support consisted in training AU troops in strategic-level planning and operational procedures. It provided support to a UN-led map exercise and later, in summer 2006, provided training assistance in the fields of pre-deployment certification and “lessons learned”, as well as information management. Additionally, NATO has been providing subject-matter experts to the AU Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) since 2007, offering expertise in areas such as maritime planning, air movement coordination and logistics. NATO also provides expert and training support to the African Standby Force (ASF), at the AU’s request. The ASF is part of the AU’s efforts to develop long-term peacekeeping capabilities. Iraq From 2004 to end 2011, NATO helped Iraq provide for its own security by training Iraqi personnel and supporting the development of the country’s security institutions. NATO trained and mentored middle- and senior-level personnel from the Iraqi security forces in Iraq and outside of Iraq, at NATO schools and training centres. The Alliance also played a role in coordinating offers of equipment and training from individual NATO member and partner countries. The training bodies and institutions There are a number of main bodies through which education and training is organised and run. Some operate under the direction of the Alliance and others are external, but complementary to Alliance structures. Allied Command Transformation Allied Command Transformation (ACT) was created as part of the reorganisation of NATO’s Command Structure in 2002. It holds lead responsibility for NATO and Partnership for Peace (PfP) joint education, individual training, and associated policy and doctrine development as well as for directing NATO schools. Since July 2012, ACT has also been given the responsibility of managing collective training and exercises based on Allied Command Operations’ requirements.   All of the entities attached to ACT fulfil an education and training function. For detailed information, please refer to the “Allied Command Transformation” A to Z page. Additional training institutions and organisations These are entities that have a relationship with NATO, but are typically administered by sponsor countries, national authorities or civil organisations. They are open to participation by personnel from NATO member and partner countries. Centres of Excellence These are centres that have been accredited by NATO. One of their roles is to provide high-quality education and training to the Euro-Atlantic community. They are funded nationally or multinationally and their relationship with NATO is formalised through memoranda of understanding. The first Centres of Excellence to be fully accredited by NATO were the Joint Air Power Competence Centre in Germany and the Defence Against Terrorism Centre of Excellence in Turkey. Many more have been established since then. Partnership Training and Education Centres Partnership Training and Education Centres focus on the operational and tactical levels of a military operation. Each one has a different area of expertise and provides enhanced training and facilities for personnel from all partner countries. There are currently 24 Partnership Training and Education Centres, which now go beyond the original Euro-Atlantic borders to include Egypt and Jordan. Education and training activities conducted within these centres are related to NATO partnership programmes and policies. The NATO School in Oberammergau and ACT co-chair the annual conference of the Commandants of the Partnership Training and Education Centres. This community has been opened to the Mediterranean Dialogue (MD) and to the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI). In April 2011, NATO adopted a concept for Partnership Training and Education Centres. It is based on the “Policy for a More Efficient and Flexible Partnership”, which states that “all partners will be offered deeper political and practical engagement with the Alliance, including through support for defence education, training and capacity building, within existing resources.” With this initiative, NATO has committed itself to supporting interested partners in developing their defence education and training capacities even further. Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes The PfP Consortium was established in 1999 to help promote education in security-related topics. It does this by facilitating cooperation between both civilian and military institutions in NATO and PfP countries in support of NATO priorities such as defence institution building and defence reform. In 2008 for instance, the PfP Consortium produced what is called a reference curriculum on the Partnership Action Plan on Defence Institution Building (PAP-DIB). This document aims to provide partner countries with in-depth learning objectives and curriculum support for academic courses focused on reforming or building defence institutions. In 2011, a similar reference curriculum was produced on professional military education for officers and, more recently, one has been developed for non-commissioned officers. The PfP Consortium is also running an Educators’ Programme to familiarise partners with modern teaching methodologies and is supporting Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan in education-related aspects of their Individual Partnership Action Plans (IPAPs). The PfP Consortium establishes working groups where experts, policy-makers, and defence and security practitioners pool information and develop products such as educational tools or scholarly publications.  Participating organisations include universities, research institutions and training centres. The George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies, Germany forms the Secretariat. Education and training: a key activity since 1949 Collective education and training has been ongoing since the inception of the Alliance in 1949. Over time, it has expanded dramatically and has become an integral aspect of the Alliance’s ability to provide security. Interoperability In the early years of the Alliance, NATO forces conducted joint training to strengthen their ability to practise collective defence. In other words, education and training was conducted to ensure that forces were prepared in the case of an attack. An integrated force under centralised command An integrated force under centralised command was called for as early as September 1950, following the outbreak of the Korean War in June 1950. The first Supreme Allied Commander Europe, US General Dwight D. Eisenhower, was appointed in December 1950. Following this appointment, national forces were put under centralised command. The Alliance’s first exercises The Alliance’s first exercises were held in the autumn of 1951. During 1953, there were approximately 100 exercises of various kinds conducted by NATO. From this point on, NATO forces began to gain cohesion. Education for individuals Individual education soon followed. The need for a specialised setting to explore issues unique to the Alliance was first recognised by General Eisenhower in April 1951. The NATO Defense College was inaugurated later that year, on 19 November, and was transferred from Paris to Rome, Italy in 1966, where it is still located. The NATO Communications and Information Systems School in Latina, Italy was established in 1959, when a civil contractor began to train a small number of NATO personnel on what would become NATO's ‘ACE HIGH Communications System.’ On 2 May of the same year, the NATO Undersea Research Centre in La Spezia, Italy was commissioned.  During the 2002 reform process, this Undersea Research Centre was moved to the agency structure of the Alliance as an organisational element linked to research. In 1971, the Military Committee established the NATO Training Group. The NATO Training Group met for many years in joint session with the Euro-training sub-group, which was set up to improve multinational training arrangements between European countries (its responsibilities were passed on to NATO in 1993). The NATO Training Group was formally transferred from the Military Committee to Allied Command Transformation in 2004. Its principal aim is to improve interoperability among Allies and, additionally, between the forces of partner countries. In 1975, the NATO School in Oberammergau, Germany, received its charter and present name. For almost 25 years, its principal focus was on issues relating to collective defence. More recently in 2003, the NATO Maritime Interdiction Operational Training Centre was established at Souda Bay, Greece to conduct training for NATO forces in surface, sub-surface, aerial surveillance and special operations activities. It does this through theoretical and practical training programmes, as well as through simulations. NATO training opens to partners Since the end of the Cold War, the Alliance has increased its political engagement with non-member countries and opened its education and training to these countries. Partnership for Peace countries When NATO invited former Warsaw Pact countries, former Soviet Republics and non-member western European countries to join the Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme in 1994, participating countries committed to increase interoperability with NATO forces. This opened the way for joint training and marked the beginning of NATO’s support for defence reform. NATO training institutions soon followed suit. The first officers’ course for partner countries was conducted in October 1994 at the NATO Communications and Information Systems School. Similarly, the NATO Defense College integrated PfP issues into its Senior Course. Mediterranean Dialogue countries The Mediterranean Dialogue was likewise created in 1994, initially as a forum for political dialogue. In 1997, at a meeting in Sintra, Portugal, the Alliance decided to open selected military training activities to countries participating in this initiative (currently seven countries: Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia). Increasing cooperation with all partners In 1998, the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council approved the creation of the Partnership for Peace Consortium and at the 1999 Washington Summit NATO leaders approved plans for an “Enhanced and More Operational Partnership”. In addition, with the revision of the NATO Strategic Concept in 1999, the role of the NATO School was fundamentally altered to include cooperation and dialogue with civilian personnel from non-NATO countries.  In May 2002, the Joint Analysis & Lessons Learned Centre in Monsanto, Portugal was established. This facility’s mission is to perform joint analysis and experimentation of operations, training and exercises, also with partners. In February 2005, the North Atlantic Council noted the Education and Training for Defence Reform (EfR). EfR helps EAPC educators incorporate principles linked to defence institution building into their curricula. Since the courses are aimed at civil servants and other persons participating in defence institution building, they contribute indirectly to improving defence reform. Transformation through training With the creation of the two new strategic commands in 2002, the coordination and coherence of NATO education and training activities was greatly increased. This led to the creation of additional training institutions and initiatives. New training centres A Joint Warfare Centre in Stavanger, Norway was inaugurated on 23 October 2003. The Joint Force Training Centre in Bydgoszcz, Poland, inaugurated on 31 March 2004, supports training for both NATO and partner forces to improve joint and combined tactical interoperability. Stepping up training and partnerships At the 2004 Istanbul Summit, Alliance leaders elevated the Mediterranean Dialogue initiative to a genuine partnership, to include increased participation in exercises and individual training at NATO institutions. Provision was also made for cooperation on defence reform. At the same time, the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI) was introduced, which paved the way for cooperation between NATO and countries from the broader Middle East (Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates) in areas such as education and training. This Summit also made provision for partners to engage in joint training to combat terrorism and to train jointly with the NATO Response Force. NATO’s efforts on defence reform gained added momentum with the creation of the Partnership Action Plan on Defence Institution Building, which outlines what NATO and partners want to achieve in this area. The Chicago Summit in 2012 reiterated the importance of education and training for the future of the Alliance, a statement which was reinforced by the introduction of the Connected Forces Initiative.  
  • Electronic warfare
    Electronic warfare Electronic warfare (EW) capabilities are a key factor in the protection of military forces and in monitoring compliance with international agreements. They are essential for the full spectrum of operations and other tasks undertaken by the Alliance. The purpose of EW is to deny the opponent the advantage of, and ensure friendly unimpeded access to the electromagnetic spectrum. EW can be applied from air, sea, land and space, and target communication and radar systems. It involves the use of the electromagnetic energy to provide improved understanding of the operational environment as well as to achieve specific effects on the modern battlefield. The need for military forces to have unimpeded access to and use of the electromagnetic environment creates challenges and opportunities for EW in support of military operations. Structure The NATO Electronic Warfare Advisory Committee (NEWAC) is responsible for overseeing the development of NATO’s EW policy, doctrine, and command and control concepts as well as monitoring EW support to NATO operations. It also assists in introducing NATO’s EW concepts to partner countries within the framework of the Partnership for Peace programme. The NEWAC is composed of representatives of each NATO country and of the Strategic Commands. Members are senior officials in national electronic warfare organisations. The Chairman and the Secretary of the committee are permanently assigned to the International Military Staff at NATO Headquarters, Brussels. There are a number of subordinate groups dealing with electronic warfare database support, training and doctrine. Evolution The NEWAC and is subgroups were introduced in 1966 to support the Military Committee, the NATO Strategic Commanders and the member countries in this sphere and to promote effective NATO EW capability. The NEWAC has met on an annual or semi-annual basis in plenary conferences, to bring together national subjecty matter experts in the field, since this time. EW policy is covered under MC 0064, the NATO Policy for EW. This policy has been revised a total of 10 times in order to keep pace with changes in the electromagnetic and operational environment, the NATO Command Structure, and the threats facing the Alliance. This policy is agreed to by all Allies and provides the overarching guidance required to formulate common doctrine and interoperability standards.
  • Energy security
    Energy security Allies recognise that the disruption of energy supply could affect the security of their societies and have an impact on NATO's military operations. While these issues are primarily the responsibility of national governments, NATO continues to consult on energy security and further develops the capacity to contribute to energy security, concentrating on areas where NATO can add value. To this end, NATO seeks to enhance its strategic awareness of energy developments with security implications; develop its competence in supporting the protection of critical energy infrastructure; and work towards significantly improving the energy efficiency of the military. NATO’s energy security activities Enhancing strategic awareness of the security implications of energy developments While NATO is not an energy institution, energy developments, such as supply disruptions, affect the international security environment and can have far-reaching security implications for some Allies. As a result, NATO closely follows relevant energy trends and developments and seeks to raise its strategic awareness in this area. This includes consultations on energy security among Allies and partner countries, intelligence-sharing, as well as specific events, such as workshops, table-top exercises, and briefings by external experts. An important event in this regard was the North Atlantic Council’s seminar on global energy developments in January 2014, which underscored the security implications of recent energy trends. NATO also seeks to ensure that its military is well aware of the role energy developments can play in the NATO’s strategic environment, and has started to organise training courses in this regard. Supporting the protection of critical energy infrastructure All countries are increasingly reliant on vital energy infrastructure, including in the maritime domain, on which energy security and prosperity depend. Energy infrastructure is also one of the most vulnerable assets, especially in areas of conflict. Since infrastructure networks extend beyond borders, attacks on complex energy infrastructure by hostile states, terrorists or hacktivists can have repercussions across regions. For this reason, NATO seeks to increase its competence in supporting the protection of critical energy infrastructure, mainly through training and exercises. Protecting energy infrastructure is, however, primarily a national responsibility. Hence, NATO's contribution focuses on areas where it can add value, notably the exchange of best practices with partner countries, many of which are important energy producers or transit countries, and with other international institutions and the private sector. By protecting important sea lanes, NATO's counter-piracy operations also make an indirect contribution to energy security. Enhancing energy efficiency in the military Enhancing energy efficiency in the military focuses on reducing the energy consumption of military vehicles and camps, as well as minimising the environmental footprint. Work in this area concentrates on bringing together experts to examine existing national endeavours and proposing multinational projects. It also includes studying the behavioural aspects of saving energy in exercises and operations, as well as developing common energy efficiency standards and procedures. A significant step forward in this area is the adoption of NATO’s “Green Defence” framework in February 2014. It seeks to make NATO more operationally effective through changes in the use of energy, while saving resources and enhancing environmental sustainability. NATO also continues to implement the Smart Energy Team (SENT) project, supported by the NATO Science for Peace and Security (SPS) Programme, with the goal to find Smart Energy solutions for the military. Evolution At the Bucharest Summit in 2008 , Allies noted a report on “NATO’s Role in Energy Security”, which identified guiding principles and outlined options and recommendations for further activities. These were reiterated at subsequent summits, while at the same time giving NATO's role clearer focus and direction. The 2010 Strategic Concept, the setting up of an Energy Security Section in the Emerging Security Challenges Division at NATO Headquarters, and the accreditation of the NATO Energy Security Centre of Excellence in Lithuania in 2012 were major milestones in this process. The decision of NATO Heads of State and Government to “integrate … energy security considerations in NATO’s policies and activities” (2010 Lisbon Summit Declaration) also meant the need for NATO to reflect energy security in its education and training efforts, as well as in its exercise scenarios. Work is under way in this regard. In the years to come , NATO will seek to further enhance the strategic dialogue, both among Allies and with partner countries, offer more education and training opportunities, and deepen its ties with other international organisations, (such as the International Energy Agency), academia, and the private sector. With increased awareness of energy risks, enhanced competence to support infrastructure protection, and enhanced energy efficiency in the military, NATO will be better prepared to respond to the emerging security challenges of the 21st century.
  • Enlargement, NATO
    NATO enlargement The foreign ministers of four aspirant countries – Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Montenegro and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia¹ – meet NATO foreign ministers at the Chicago Summit in May 2012. NATO’s door remains open to any European country in a position to undertake the commitments and obligations of membership, and contribute to security in the Euro-Atlantic area. Since 1949, NATO’s membership has increased from 12 to 28 countries through six rounds of enlargement. Albania and Croatia were invited to join NATO at the Bucharest Summit in April 2008 and formally became members when the accession process was completed on 1 April 2009. Currently there are four partner countries that aspire for NATO membership: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia¹ and Montenegro. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia¹ has, like Albania and Croatia, been participating in the Membership Action Plan (MAP) for a number of years to prepare for possible membership. At Bucharest, Allied leaders agreed to invite the country to become a member as soon as a mutually acceptable solution to the issue over the country’s name has been reached with Greece. They also invited Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro to start Intensified Dialogues on their membership aspirations and related reforms. Furthermore, Allied leaders agreed that Georgia and Ukraine – which were already engaged in an Intensified Dialogue with NATO – will become members of NATO. In December 2008, Georgia and Ukraine were invited to develop Annual National Programmes (ANPs). Georgia did so under the auspices of the NATO-Georgia Commission (NGC), which was established in September 2008 to oversee NATO’s assistance to Georgia following the conflict with Russia and to play a central role in supervising the process set in hand at the Bucharest Summit. Georgia and Ukraine both submitted their first ANPs in 2009. In terms of Ukraine, while no longer pursuing NATO membership since 2010, Ukraine has maintained the existing level of cooperation with the Alliance and has fulfilled the existing agreements. Ukraine has continued to participate actively in the ANP process which plays a key role in determining Allied support for Ukraine’s domestic reform process. In December 2009, Montenegro was invited to join the MAP, as was Bosnia and Herzegovina in April 2010.  However,  the latter’s first Annual National Programme will only be accepted by the North Atlantic Council, NATO’s principal decision-making body, when the immovable property issue has been resolved. NATO’s “open door policy” is based on Article 10 of its founding treaty. Any decision to invite a country to join the Alliance is taken by the North Atlantic Council on the basis of consensus among all Allies. No third country has a say in such deliberations. NATO’s ongoing enlargement process poses no threat to any country. It is aimed at promoting stability and cooperation, at building a Europe whole and free, united in peace, democracy and common values. Aspirant countries Countries that have declared an interest in joining the Alliance are initially invited to engage in an Intensified Dialogue with NATO about their membership aspirations and related reforms. Aspirant countries may then be invited to participate in the MAP to prepare for potential membership and demonstrate their ability to meet the obligations and commitments of possible future membership. Participation in the MAP does not guarantee membership, but it constitutes a key preparation mechanism. Countries aspiring to join NATO have to demonstrate that they are in a position to further the principles of the 1949 Washington Treaty and contribute to security in the Euro-Atlantic area. They are also expected to meet certain political, economic and military criteria, which are laid out in the 1995 Study on NATO Enlargement. 1995 Study on Enlargement In 1995, the Alliance published the results of a Study on NATO Enlargement that considered the merits of admitting new members and how they should be brought in. It concluded that the end of the Cold War provided a unique opportunity to build improved security in the entire Euro-Atlantic area and that NATO enlargement would contribute to enhanced stability and security for all. It would do so, the Study further concluded, by encouraging and supporting democratic reforms, including the establishment of civilian and democratic control over military forces; fostering patterns and habits of cooperation, consultation and consensus-building characteristic of relations among members of the Alliance; and promoting good-neighbourly relations. It would increase transparency in defence planning and military budgets, thereby reinforcing confidence among states, and would reinforce the overall tendency toward closer integration and cooperation in Europe. The Study also concluded that enlargement would strengthen the Alliance’s ability to contribute to European and international security and strengthen and broaden the transatlantic partnership. According to the Study, countries seeking NATO membership would have to be able to demonstrate that they have fulfilled certain requirements. These include: a functioning democratic political system based on a market economy; the fair treatment of minority populations; a commitment to the peaceful resolution of conflicts; the ability and willingness to make a military contribution to NATO operations; and a commitment to democratic civil-military relations and institutional structures. Once admitted, new members would enjoy all the rights and assume all the obligations of membership. This would include acceptance at the time that they join of all the principles, policies and procedures previously adopted by Alliance members. Accession process Once the Allies have decided to invite a country to become a member of NATO, they officially invite the country to begin accession talks with the Alliance. This is the first step in the accession process on the way to formal membership. The major steps in the process are: 1. Accession talks with a NATO team These talks take place at NATO Headquarters in Brussels and bring together teams of NATO experts and representatives of the individual invitees. Their aim is to obtain formal confirmation from the invitees of their willingness and ability to meet the political, legal and military obligations and commitments of NATO membership, as laid out in the Washington Treaty and in the Study on NATO Enlargement. The talks take place in two sessions with each invitee. In the first session, political and defence or military issues are discussed, essentially providing the opportunity to establish that the preconditions for membership have been met. The second session is more technical and includes discussion of resources, security, and legal issues as well as the contribution of each new member country to NATO’s common budget. This is determined on a proportional basis, according to the size of their economies in relation to those of other Alliance member countries. Invitees are also required to implement measures to ensure the protection of NATO classified information, and prepare their security and intelligence services to work with the NATO Office of Security. The end product of these discussions is a timetable to be submitted by each invitee for the completion of necessary reforms, which may continue even after these countries have become NATO members. 2. Invitees send letters of intent to NATO, along with timetables for completion of reforms In the second step of the accession process, each invitee country provides confirmation of its acceptance of the obligations and commitments of membership in the form of a letter of intent from each foreign minister addressed to the NATO Secretary General. Together with this letter they also formally submit their individual reform timetables. 3. Accession protocols are signed by NATO countries NATO then prepares Accession Protocols to the Washington Treaty for each invitee. These protocols are in effect amendments or additions to the Treaty, which once signed and ratified by Allies, become an integral part of the Treaty itself and permit the invited countries to become parties to the Treaty. 4. Accession protocols are ratified by NATO countries The governments of NATO member states ratify the protocols, according to their national requirements and procedures. The ratification procedure varies from country to country. For example, the United States requires a two-thirds majority to pass the required legislation in the Senate. Elsewhere, for example in the United Kingdom, no formal parliamentary vote is required. 5. The Secretary General invites the potential new members to accede to the North Atlantic Treaty Once all NATO member countries notify the Government of the United States of America, the depository of the Washington Treaty, of their acceptance of the protocols to the North Atlantic Treaty on the accession of the potential new members, the Secretary General invites the new countries to accede to the Treaty. 6. Invitees accede to the North Atlantic Treaty in accordance with their national procedures 7. Upon depositing their instruments of accession with the US State Department, invitees formally become NATO members Evolution of NATO’s “open door policy” NATO’s “open door policy” is based upon Article 10 of the Washington Treaty, which states that membership is open to any “European State in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area”. The enlargement of the Alliance is an ongoing and dynamic process.  Since the Alliance was created in 1949, its membership has grown from the 12 founding members to today’s 28 members through six rounds of enlargement in 1952, 1955, 1982, 1999, 2004 and 2009. The first three rounds of enlargement – which brought in Greece and Turkey (1952), West Germany (1955) and Spain (1982) – took place during the Cold War, when strategic considerations were at the forefront of decision-making. The fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989 signalled the end of the Cold War and was followed by the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and the breakup of the Soviet Union. The reunification of Germany in October 1990 brought the territory of the former East Germany into the Alliance. The new democracies of Central and Eastern Europe were eager to guarantee their freedom by becoming integrated into Euro-Atlantic institutions. NATO enlargement was the subject of lively debate in the early 1990s. Many political analysts were unsure of the benefits that enlargement would bring. Some were concerned about the possible impact on Alliance cohesion and solidarity, as well as on relations with other states, notably Russia. It is in this context that the Alliance carried out a Study on NATO Enlargement in 1995 (see above). Post-Cold War enlargement Based on the findings of the Study on Enlargement, the Alliance invited the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland to begin accession talks at the Alliance’s Madrid Summit in 1997. These three countries became the first former members of the Warsaw Pact to join NATO in 1999. At the 1999 Washington Summit, the Membership Action Plan was launched to help other aspirant countries prepare for possible membership. Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia were invited to begin accession talks at the Alliance’s Prague Summit in 2002 and joined NATO in 2004. All seven countries had participated in the MAP. Bucharest Summit decision s At the Bucharest Summit in April 2008, Allied leaders took a number of steps related to the future enlargement of the Alliance. Several decisions concerned countries in the Western Balkans. The Allies see the closer integration of Western Balkan countries into Euro-Atlantic institutions as essential to ensuring long-term self-sustaining stability in this region, where NATO has been heavily engaged in peace-support operations since the mid 1990s. Albania and Croatia were invited to start accession talks to join the Alliance and joined NATO in April 2009. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 1 was assured that it will also be invited to join the Alliance as soon as a solution to the issue of the country’s name has been reached with Greece. Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro were invited to start Intensified Dialogues on their membership aspirations and related reforms (Montenegro was invited to join MAP in December 2009 and Bosnia and Herzegovina in April 2010; MAP will be fully activated for the latter once the Tallinn condition on the registration of immovable defence property has been met). Allied leaders also agreed at Bucharest that Georgia and Ukraine, which were already engaged in Intensified Dialogues with NATO, will one day become members. In December 2008, Allied foreign ministers decided to enhance opportunities for assisting the two countries in efforts to meet membership requirements by making use of the framework of the existing NATO-Ukraine Commission and NATO-Georgia Commission – without prejudice to further decisions which may be taken about their applications to join the MAP. 4 April 1949 Signature of the North Atlantic Treaty by 12 founding members: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom and the United States. Article 10 of the Treaty provides the basis for NATO’s “open door policy”. 18 February 1952 Accession of Greece and Turkey. 6 May 1955 Accession of the Federal Republic of Germany. 30 May 1982 Spain joins the Alliance (and the integrated military structure in 1998). October 1990 With the reunification of Germany, the new German Länder in the East become part of NATO. January 1994 At the Brussels Summit, Allied leaders reaffirm that NATO remains open to the membership of other European countries. 28 September 1995 Publication of NATO Study on Enlargement. 8-9 July 1997 At the Madrid Summit, three partner countries – the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland – are invited to start accession talks. 12 March 1999 Accession of the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland, bringing the Alliance to 19 members. 23-25 April 1999 Launch of the Membership Action Plan (MAP) at the Washington Summit. (Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia join the MAP.) 14 May 2002 NATO Foreign Ministers officially announce the participation of Croatia in the MAP at their meeting in Reykjavik, Iceland. May 2002 President Leonid Kuchma announces Ukraine’s goal of eventual NATO membership. 21-22 November 2002 At the Prague Summit, seven partner countries – Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia – are invited to start accession talks. 26 March 2003 Signing ceremony of the Accession Protocols of the seven invitees. 29 March 2004 Accession of Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. 21 April 2005 Launch of the Intensified Dialogue on Ukraine’s aspirations to NATO membership and related reforms, at an informal meeting of foreign ministers in Vilnius, Lithuania. 21 September 2006 NATO Foreign Ministers in New York announce the decision to offer an Intensified Dialogue to Georgia. 28-29 November 2006 At the Riga Summit, Allied leaders state that invitations will be extended to MAP countries that fulfil certain conditions. 2-4 April 2008 At the Bucharest Summit, Allied leaders invite Albania and Croatia to start accession talks; assure the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia¹ that it will be invited once a solution to the issue of the country’s name has been reached with Greece; invite Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro to start Intensified Dialogues; and agree that Georgia and Ukraine will become members in future. 9 July 2008 December 2008 Accession Protocols for Albania and Croatia are signed. Allied Foreign Ministers agree that Georgia should develop an Annual National Programme under the auspices of the NATO-Georgia Commission. 1 April 2009 Accession of Albania and Croatia. 4 December 2009 NATO Foreign Ministers invite Montenegro to join the MAP. 22 April 2010 NATO Foreign Ministers invite Bosnia and Herzegovina to join the MAP, authorising the North Atlantic Council to accept the country’s first Annual National Programme only when the immovable property issue has been resolved. 1. Turkey recognises the Republic of Macedonia with its constitutional name.
  • Environment, NATO and the -
    NATO and the environment NATO recognises that it faces many environmental challenges. In particular, the Alliance is working to reduce the environmental effects of military activities and to respond to security challenges emanating from the environment. Over the years various groups have been established within NATO aimed at addressing environmental challenges from various angles. Today the Alliance’s activities fall under two key areas: Environmental protection Part of NATO’s responsibility is to protect the physical and natural environments where operations and training take place. Damage to the environment from these activities can threaten livelihoods and habitats, and thus breed instability. More on environmental protection Environmental security Based on a broad definition of security that recognises the importance of political, economic, social and environmental factors, NATO is addressing security challenges emanating from the environment. The Alliance is looking closely at how to best address environmental risks to security in general as well as those that directly impact military activities. For example, environmental factors can affect energy supplies to both populations and military operations, making energy security a major topic of concern. Helping partner countries clean up ageing and dangerous stockpiles of weapons, ammunition and unexploded remnants of war that pose a risk to people and the environment is another area of work. More on environmental security
  • Environmental protection
    Environmental protection Military activities often have an adverse effect on the environments in which they occur. Damage to the environment from these activities can threaten livelihoods and habitats, and thus breed instability. Part of NATO’s responsibility is to protect the physical and natural environments where operations and training take place. Military training grounds can hold a wide range of biodiversity, from plant life, birds and insects on land, to marine life and mammals in the sea. Through research and implementation of new technology, alongside standardization of procedures and training, the Alliance has been working to improve its protection of the natural environments where it operates.   While fulfilling their military missions, NATO forces are committed to taking all reasonably achievable measures to protect the environment. These range from safeguarding hazardous materials (including fuel and oil), treating waste water, managing waste and reducing fossil fuel energy consumption, to putting environmental management systems in place during NATO-led activities. To achieve this, commanders must know how NATO-led military activities affect and are affected by the environment. Strict ruleshave been adopted by many NATO countries, reflecting the growing awareness of protecting the environment. In line with these developments, NATO is facilitating the integration of environmental protection standards into all NATO-led military activities. Components of the policy Policy and standards The ‘NATO Military Principles and Policies for Environmental Protection,’ adopted in June 2003, and revised and reinforced in October 2011, sets out the principles of environmental protection from a military point of view. It details the responsibilities of military commanders with regard to protecting the environment during the preparation and execution of military activities. The policy instructs NATO commanders to apply “best practicable and feasible environmental protection measures,” to areas including pollution prevention, waste management, conservation, heritage protection and protection of flora and fauna. The implementation of this policy is supported by a variety of NATO Standardization Agreements (STANAGs) and Allied publications, each addressing the various aspects of environmental protection. These policies are constantly updated. While some environmental damage may be an inevitable consequence of operations, standards can be put in place to reduce the effects without compromising operational or training requirements. Particular emphasis is placed identifying environmental issues that can be resolved during the planning process, rather than after the damage is done. Early consideration of potential environmental impacts can lead to commanders having a better understanding of the environmental effects of the mission. The clean-up of any environmental impacts resulting from NATO-led military activities is also a key aspect of the STANAG policies. Once ratified and promulgated, these agreements are implemented by Allied Command Operations (ACO) and Allied Command Transformation (ACT). Force contributing nations, however, must first transpose the STANAGs and guidelines into their national military directives before they become binding for their forces. Training Training of military personnel is a national responsibility. However, NATO has designated staff officers for the implementation of environmental protection on strategic, operational and tactical levels. In 2004, ACO established an environmental manager position at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE). This officer is responsible for providing environmental advice and expertise to commanders and staff officers involved in NATO-led military activities, and advising the JEPMG on policy development. In addition to national training, the NATO School in Oberammergau, Germany, provides common environmental protection training on an operational level, while the Military Engineering Centre of Excellence includes environmental protection in their courses on tactical level. Research and development The NATO Undersea Research Centre (NURC) in La Spezia, Italy, conducts research into new technologies that impact the environment for naval operations. In particular, NURC scientists are working with the private sector to develop autonomous vehicles – small, unmanned submarines – to monitor the seabed. This new type of monitoring vehicle could help private companies prevent leaks from oil pipelines, and help militaries detect mines. The NURC is also conducting extensive studies to understand what affect acoustic transmissions have on marine mammals, following the use of high-powered sonar transmissions between naval, manned submarines in 2003. This research is ongoing, but it has already resulted in the adoption by the Military Committee of a ‘Code of Conduct for Use of Active Sonar to Ensure the Protection of Marine Mammals within the Framework of Alliance Maritime Activities’. NATO’s Science for Peace and Security Programme established its Defence and Environment Expert Group (DEEG) in 2008. This group is comprised of subject matter experts (nominated by nations) who promote and support the development of cooperative workshops and projects with partner nations. The DEEG also consolidates knowledge, practices and procedures in critical military environmental areas. Mechanisms and evolution NATO started to develop its environmental protection policy in the late 1970s with the establishment of expert groups made up of governmental representatives. Over the next two decades, these groups developed guidelines, best practices and standard agreements on environmental protection. When NATO launched its first operation in Kosovo in 1994, these environmental protection guidelines were used within an international context, where each country has its own law, legislation and rules. A number of environmental protection lessons were learnt, which helped to shape an overarching NATO policy on environmental protection adopted by the Military Committee in June 2003. Two panels support the JEPMG: the Environmental Protection Technology (EPT) panel and the Operational Environmental Protection (OEP) panel. Both of these promote cooperation and standardization among NATO and partner countries, as well as among the various NATO bodies, and are comprised of national experts from NATO and partner nations. The EPT panel focuses on the technical aspects of environmental protection. It aims to integrate environmental protection criteria and regulations into the technical requirements and specifications for armaments, equipment and materials. The OEP focuses on the operational aspects of environmental protection. It aims to reduce the negative impact of military activities on the environment through standardization of doctrines, planning, procedures, training and environmental management.
  • Environmental security
    Environmental security Based on a broad definition of security that recognizes the importance of political, economic, social and environmental factors, NATO is addressing security challenges emanating from the environment. This includes extreme weather conditions, depletion of natural resources, pollution and so on – factors that can ultimately lead to disasters, regional tensions and violence. The Alliance is looking closely at how to best address environmental risks to security in general as well as those that directly impact military activities. For example, environmental factors can affect energy supplies to both populations and military operations, making energy security a major topic of concern. Helping partner countries clean up ageing and dangerous stockpiles of weapons, ammunition and unexploded remnants of war that pose a risk to people and the environment is yet another area of work. NATO is currently conducting these initiatives via its science programme, the Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre (EADRCC) and Partnership for Peace Trust Fund projects. It is considering enhancing its efforts in this area, with a focus on civil emergencies, energy efficiency and renewable power, and on helping member and partner countries address the impact of climate change in vulnerable regions. Building international cooperation Since 1969, NATO’s Science for Peace and Security (SPS) Programme has supported cooperative activities that tackle environmental issues, including those that are related to defence, in NATO countries. Since the SPS Programme opened up to partner countries in the 1990s, environmental security became the most active topic supported by the Programme. For example in April 2010, a NATO Science workshop in Moscow addressed environmental security and “eco-terrorism”, while a workshop in Cairo looked at food security and safety against terrorist threats and natural disasters. The first international answer to environmental security challenges, however, came in 2004, when NATO joined five other international agencies to form the Environment and Security (ENVSEC) Initiative 1 to address environmental issues that threaten security in vulnerable regions. The five other agencies are: the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) and the Regional Environment Center for Central and Eastern Europe (REC). In Central Asia, NATO is leading ENVSEC projects to address uranium waste in the Ferghana Valley (Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan) and water resources management for wetlands restoration in the Aral Sea basin (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan), among others. Boosting emergency response The Alliance is also actively engaged in coordinating civil emergency planning and response to environmental disasters. It does this principally through the Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre (EARDCC) that was launched following the earthquake disaster in Turkey and Greece at the end of the 1990s. Talking at the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, NATO’s Secretary General highlighted that, with the growing impact of climate change, the demand upon the military as “first responder to natural disasters” was likely to grow. He urged Allies to consider how to optimize the Alliance’s contribution in that area. Addressing defence-related environmental issues In October 2009, the Science for Peace and Security Committee established the Defence and the Environment Experts Group (DEEG). The group’s overarching objective is to develop an environmental agenda to promote the identification, development and dissemination of cost-effective and innovative approaches to environmental and sustainability issues that affect military activities. Meeting twice yearly, the DEEG examines and approves project proposals from individuals or groups from NATO member and partner. The projects focus on areas such as infrastructure and property issues arising from the management of defence estates, and the impact on soldiers of climatic and biological threats. In practice, the emphasis has been on projects and initiatives that affect deployed operations, such as streamlining the environmental footprint of military compounds to maximise cost savings and tactical advantage, while minimising negative impacts on the environment. Energy security With increasingly unpredictable natural disasters, such as earthquakes, severe floods and storms that causes disruptions to infrastructure, environmental factors have a growing potential to affect energy security, a challenge NATO is becoming more and more concerned with. Most NATO members and partners rely on energy supplies from abroad, sent through pipelines and cables that cross many borders. Allies and partners, therefore, need to work together to develop ways of reducing the threat of disruptions, including those caused by environmental events. At the Strasbourg/Kehl Summit in April 2009, Allies said they will “consult on the most immediate risks in the field of energy security”. They said they would continue to implement the recommendations proposed at the 2008 Bucharest Summit, namely to share information, advance international and regional cooperation, develop consequence management, and help protect critical infrastructure. Helping partners reduce environmental hazards through disarmament Through NATO’s Partnership for Peace Trust Fund projects, the Alliance helps partner countries reduce their aging weapon stockpiles, clean up deteriorating rocket fuel, clear land contaminated by unexploded remnants of war and safely store ammunition. While the central aim is to help post-Soviet countries disarm and reform their militaries, these projects also reduce the risks posed by these dangerous materials to the environment and the people in surrounding areas. Raising awareness and information-sharing Communicating the security implications of environmental issues to political leaders and decision-makers is another area where the Alliance plays a major role. For instance, it makes sure that members and partners alike have the knowledge and skills needed to mitigate climate change and adapt to its effects. 1. The ENVSEC Initiative was established in 2003 by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) , the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) , and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) . NATO became an associate member in 2004, through its Public Diplomacy Division. Recently, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) and the Regional Environment Center for Central and Eastern Europe (REC) joined.
  • EU-NATO: a strategic partnership
    NATO-EU: a strategic partnership Sharing strategic interests, NATO and the European Union cooperate on issues of common interest and are working side by side in crisis management, capability development and political consultations. The European Union is a unique and essential partner for NATO. The two organisations share a majority of members (22), and all members of both organisations share common values. Institutionalised relations between NATO and the European Union (EU) were launched in 2001, building on steps taken during the 1990s to promote greater European responsibility in defence matters (NATO-Western European Union cooperation 1 ). The political principles underlying the relationship were set out in the December 2002 NATO-EU Declaration on a European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). The declaration also reaffirmed EU assured access to NATO’s planning capabilities for the EU’s own military operations. Later, the so-called “Berlin Plus” arrangements set the basis for the Alliance to support EU-led operations in which NATO as a whole is not engaged. With the enlargement of both organisations in 2004 followed by the accession of Bulgaria, Romania and Croatia to the EU, NATO and the European Union now have 22 member countries in common. 2 At the Lisbon Summit in November 2010, the Allies underlined their determination to improve the NATO-EU strategic partnership. This was reinforced by NATO’s 2010 Strategic Concept which commits the Alliance to prevent crises, manage conflicts and stabilise post-conflict situations, including by working more closely with NATO’s international partners, most importantly the United Nations and its strategic partner - the EU. NATO’s Strategic Concept clearly states that an active and effective EU contributes to the overall security of the Euro-Atlantic area. The European Union’s Lisbon Treaty (in force end 2009) provides a framework for strengthening the EU’s capacities to address common security challenges. Non-EU European Allies make a significant contribution to these efforts. For the strategic partnership between NATO and the EU, their fullest involvement in these efforts is essential. NATO and the EU can and should play complementary and mutually reinforcing roles in supporting international peace and security. The Allies are determined to make their contribution to create more favourable circumstances through which they will: fully strengthen the strategic partnership with the EU, in the spirit of full mutual openness, transparency, complementarity and respect for the autonomy and institutional integrity of both organisations; enhance practical cooperation in operations throughout the crisis spectrum, from coordinated planning to mutual support in the field; broaden political consultations to include all issues of common concern, in order to share assessments and perspectives; cooperate more fully in capability development, to minimise duplication and maximise cost-effectiveness. Close cooperation between NATO and the EU is an important element in the development of an international “Comprehensive Approach” to crisis management and operations, which requires the effective application of both military and civilian means. The Chicago Summit in May 2012 reiterated these principles by underlining that NATO and the EU share common values and strategic interests. Fully strengthening this strategic partnership is particularly important in the current environment of austerity. In this context, the NATO Secretary General engages actively with his EU counterparts and has addressed the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee in joint session with the sub-committee on Security and Defence on numerous occasions. 1. At that time, the Western European Union (WEU) was acting for the European Union in the area of security and defence (1992 Maastricht Treaty). The WEU's crisis-management role was transferred to the European Union in 1999. 2. 28 NATO member countries: Albania, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States. 28 EU member countries: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom. Framework for cooperation An exchange of letters between the NATO Secretary General and the EU Presidency in January 2001 defined the scope of cooperation and modalities of consultation on security issues between the two organisations. Cooperation further developed with the signing of the NATO-EU Declaration on ESDP in December 2002 and the agreement, in March 2003, of a framework for cooperation. NATO-EU Declaration on ESDP: The NATO-EU Declaration on ESDP, agreed on 16 December 2002, reaffirmed the EU assured access to NATO’s planning capabilities for its own military operations and reiterated the political principles of the strategic partnership: effective mutual consultation; equality and due regard for the decision-making autonomy of the European Union and NATO; respect for the interests of EU and NATO members states; respect for the principles of the Charter of the United Nations; and coherent, transparent and mutually reinforcing development of the military capability requirements common to the two organisations. The “Berlin Plus” arrangements : As part of the framework for cooperation adopted on 17 March 2003, the so-called “Berlin Plus” arrangements provide the basis for NATO-EU cooperation in crisis management in the context of EU-led operations that make use of NATO's collective assets and capabilities, including command arrangements and assistance in operational planning. In effect, they allow the Alliance to support EU-led operations in which NATO as a whole is not engaged. NATO and the EU meet on a regular basis to discuss issues of common interest. Meetings take place at different levels including at the level of foreign ministers, ambassadors, military representatives and defence advisors. There are regular staff-to-staff talks at all levels between NATO’s International Staff and International Military Staff, and their respective EU interlocutors (the European External Action Service, the European Defence Agency, the Commission and the European Parliament). Permanent military liaison arrangements have been established to facilitate cooperation at the operational level. A NATO Permanent Liaison Team has been operating at the EU Military Staff since November 2005 and an EU Cell was set up at SHAPE (NATO’s strategic command for operations in Mons, Belgium) in March 2006. Cooperation in the field The Western Balkans In July 2003, the EU and NATO published a ″Concerted Approach for the Western Balkans″. Jointly drafted, it outlines core areas of cooperation and emphasises the common vision and determination both organisations share to bring stability to the region. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 3 On 31 March 2003, the EU-led Operation Concordia took over the responsibilities of the NATO-led mission, Operation Allied Harmony, in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. This mission, which ended in December 2003, was the first “Berlin Plus” operation in which NATO assets were made available to the European Union. Bosnia and Herzegovina Building on the results of Concordia and following the conclusion of the NATO-led Stabilisation Force (SFOR) in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the European Union deployed a new mission called Operation Althea on 2 December 2004. The EU Force (EUFOR) operates under the “Berlin Plus” arrangements, drawing on NATO planning expertise and on other Alliance’s assets and capabilities. The NATO Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe is the Commander of Operation Althea. The EU Operation Headquarters (OHQ) is located at SHAPE. Kosovo NATO has been leading a peacekeeping force in Kosovo (KFOR) since 1999. The European Union has contributed civil assets to the UN Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) for years and agreed to take over the police component of the UN Mission. The European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX), which deployed in December 2008, is the largest civilian mission ever launched under the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). The central aim is to assist and support the Kosovo authorities in the rule of law area, specifically in the police, judiciary and customs areas. EULEX works closely with KFOR in the field. Cooperation in other regions Afghanistan NATO and the EU are playing key roles in bringing peace and stability to Afghanistan, within the international community’s broader efforts to implement a comprehensive approach in their efforts to assist the country. The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force helps create a stable and secure environment in which the Afghan government as well as other international actors can build democratic institutions, extend the rule of law and reconstruct the country. NATO welcomed the EU’s launch of a CSDP Rule of Law Mission (EUPOL) in June 2007. The European Union has also initiated a programme for justice reform and is helping to fund civilian projects in NATO-run Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) that are led by an EU member country. Darfur Both NATO and the EU supported the African Union’s mission in Darfur, Sudan, in particular with regard to airlift rotations. Piracy Since September 2008, NATO and EU naval forces are deployed side by side (respectively Ocean Shield and EUNAVFOR Atalanta), with other actors, off the coast of Somalia for anti-piracy missions. 3. Turkey recognises the Republic of Macedonia with its constitutional name. Other areas of cooperation Political consultation The range of subjects discussed between NATO and the EU has expanded considerably over the past two years, particularly on security issues within the European space or its immediate vicinity. Since the crisis in Ukraine, both organisations have regularly exchanged views on their respective decisions, especially with regard to Russia, to ensure that their messages and actions complement each other. Consultations have also covered developments in the Western Balkans, Libya and the Middle East. Capabilities Together with operations, capability development is an area where cooperation is essential and where there is potential for further growth. The NATO-EU Capability Group was established in May 2003 to ensure the coherence and mutual reinforcement of NATO and EU capability development efforts. Following the creation, in July 2004, of the European Defence Agency (EDA) to coordinate work within the European Union on the development of defence capabilities, armaments cooperation, acquisition and research, EDA experts contribute to the work of the Capability Group. Among other issues, the Capability Group has addressed common capability shortfalls in areas such as countering improvised explosive devices and medical support. The Group is also playing an important role in ensuring transparency and complementarity between NATO’s work on “Smart Defence” and the EU’s Pooling and Sharing initiative. Terrorism and WMD proliferation Both NATO and the European Union are committed to combat terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). They have exchanged information on their activities in the field of protection of civilian populations against chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) attacks. The two organisations also cooperate in the field of civil emergency planning by exchanging inventories of measures taken in this area. New areas of cooperation Since the adoption of NATO’s new Strategic Concept at the Lisbon Summit in November 2010, which identifies the need for the Alliance to address emerging security challenges, several new areas of cooperation with the EU are taking place, in particular energy security issues and cyber defence. In this context, NATO and EU staffs have been holding consultations in order to identify the specific areas in which the two organisations could enhance their cooperation in these fields. Participation The organisations have 22 member countries in common. Albania, Canada, Iceland, Norway, Turkey, and the United States, which are members of NATO but not of the EU, participate in all NATO-EU meetings. So do Austria, Finland, Ireland, Sweden, and since 2008, Malta, which are members of the EU and of NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme. However, Cyprus which is not a PfP member and does not have a security agreement with NATO on the exchange of classified documents, cannot participate in official NATO-EU meetings. This is a consequence of decisions taken by NATO in December 2002. Informal meetings including Cyprus take place occasionally at different levels. Key milestones Feb 1992 The EU adopts the Maastricht Treaty, which envisages an intergovernmental Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and the eventual framing of a common defence policy (ESDP), with the WEU as the EU's defence component.   Close cooperation established between NATO and the WEU. June 1992 In Oslo, NATO Foreign Ministers support the objective of developing the WEU as a means of strengthening the European pillar of the Alliance and as the defence component of the EU, that would also cover the “Petersberg tasks” (humanitarian search and rescue tasks, peacekeeping tasks, crisis-management tasks including peace enforcement and environmental protection). Jan 1994 Allied leaders agree to make collective assets of the Alliance available, on the basis of consultations in the North Atlantic Council, for WEU operations undertaken by the European Allies in pursuit of their Common Foreign and Security Policy. NATO endorses the concept of Combined Joint Task Forces, which provides for “separable but not separate” deployable headquarters that could be used for European-led operations and is the conceptual basis for future operations involving NATO and other non-NATO countries. June 1996 In Berlin, NATO Foreign Ministers agree for the first time to build up a European Security and Defence Identity (ESDI) within NATO, with the aim of rebalancing roles and responsibilities between Europe and North America. An essential part of this initiative was to improve European capabilities. They also decide to make Alliance assets available for WEU-led crisis-management operations. These decisions lead to the introduction of the term "Berlin Plus". Dec 1998 At a summit in St Malo, France and the United Kingdom make a joint statement affirming the EU's determination to establish a European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). April 1999 At the Washington Summit, Heads of State and Government decide to develop the “Berlin Plus” arrangements. June 1999 European Council meeting in Cologne decides "to give the European Union the necessary means and capabilities to assume its responsibilities regarding a common European policy on security and defence". Dec 1999 At the Helsinki Council meeting, EU members establish military "headline goals" to allow the EU, by 2003, to deploy up to 60,000 troops for ‘Petersberg tasks'. EU members also create political and military structures including a Political and Security Committee, a Military Committee and a Military Staff. The crisis-management role of the WEU is transferred to the EU. The WEU retains residual tasks. Sep 2000 The North Atlantic Council and the interim Political and Security Committee of the European Union meet for the first time to take stock of progress in NATO-EU relations. Dec 2000 Signature of the EU's Treaty of Nice containing amendments reflecting the operative developments of the ESDP as an independent EU policy (entry into force February 2003). Jan 2001 Beginning of institutionalised relations between NATO and the EU with the establishment of joint meetings, including at the level of foreign ministers and ambassadors. Exchange of letters between the NATO Secretary General and the EU Presidency on the scope of cooperation and modalities for consultation. May 2001 First formal NATO-EU meeting at the level of foreign ministers in Budapest. The NATO Secretary General and the EU Presidency issue a joint statement on the Western Balkans. Nov 2002 At the Prague Summit, NATO members declare their readiness to give the EU access to NATO assets and capabilities for operations in which the Alliance is not engaged militarily. Dec 2002 EU-NATO Declaration on ESDP. March 2003 Agreement on the framework for cooperation. Entry into force of a NATO-EU security of information agreement. Transition from the NATO-led Operation Allied Harmony to the EU-led Operation Concordia in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 3 May 2003 First meeting of the NATO-EU Capability Group. July 2003 Development of a common strategy for the Western Balkans. Nov 2003 First joint NATO-EU crisis-management exercise. Feb 2004 France, Germany and the United Kingdom launch the idea of EU rapid-reaction units composed of joint battle groups. Dec 2004 Beginning of the EU-led Operation Althea in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Sep 2005 Transatlantic (NATO-EU) informal ministerial dinner (New York). Oct 2005 Agreement on Military Permanent Arrangements establishing a NATO Permanent Liaison Team at EUMS and an EU cell at SHAPE. Nov 2005 NATO Permanent Liaison Team set up at the EU Military Staff. March 2006 EU cell set up at SHAPE. April 2006 Transatlantic informal ministerial dinner gathering NATO and EU Foreign Affairs ministers (Sofia) Sep 2006 Transatlantic informal ministerial dinner gathering NATO and EU Foreign Affairs ministers (New York) Jan 2007 Transatlantic informal ministerial dinner gathering NATO and EU Foreign Affairs ministers (Brussels) April 2007 Transatlantic informal ministerial dinner gathering NATO and EU Foreign Affairs ministers (Oslo) Sep 2007 Transatlantic informal ministerial dinner gathering NATO and EU Foreign Affairs ministers (New York) Dec 2007 Transatlantic informal ministerial dinner gathering NATO and EU Foreign Affairs ministers (Brussels) Sep 2008 Transatlantic informal ministerial dinner gathering NATO and EU Foreign Affairs ministers (New York) Dec 2008 Transatlantic informal ministerial dinner gathering NATO and EU Foreign Affairs ministers (Brussels) March 2009 Transatlantic informal ministerial dinner gathering NATO and EU Foreign Affairs ministers (Brussels) Sep 2010 Transatlantic informal ministerial dinner gathering NATO and EU Foreign Affairs ministers (New York) Dec 2010 At the Lisbon Summit in November 2010, the Allies underline their determination to improve the NATO-EU strategic partnership and welcome recent initiatives from several Allies and ideas proposed by the Secretary General to enhance the NATO-EU cooperation. Sep 2011 Transatlantic informal ministerial dinner gathering NATO and EU Foreign Affairs ministers (New York) Sep 2012 Transatlantic informal ministerial dinner gathering NATO and EU Foreign Affairs ministers (New York) Feb 2013 On 11 February, the President of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, visits NATO Headquarters. May 2013 The NATO Secretary General addresses the European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs and Subcommittee on Security and Defence. June 2013 The NATO Secretary General participates in an informal meeting of EU Foreign Ministers. Dec 2013 The Secretary General addresses the European Council in Brussels. March 2014 On 5 March, NATO and EU Political and Security Committee (PSC) Ambassadors hold informal talks on Ukraine. June 2014 On 10 June, NATO and EU PSC Ambassadors hold more informal talks on Ukraine. 3. Turkey recognises the Republic of Macedonia with its constitutional name.
  • Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre (EADRCC), The -
    The Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre The Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre (EADRCC) is NATO’s principal civil emergency response mechanism in the Euro-Atlantic area. It is active all year round, operational on a 24/7 basis, and involves NATO’s 28 allies plus 22 partner countries. The Centre functions as a clearing-house system for coordinating both requests and offers of assistance mainly in case of natural and man-made disasters. Main tasks In its coordinating functions for the response of NATO and Partner countries, EADRCC not only guides consequence management efforts, but it also serves as an information-sharing tool on disaster assistance through the organisation of seminars to discuss lessons learnt from NATO-coordinated disaster response operations and exercises. In addition to its day-to-day activities and the immediate response to emergencies, EADRCC conducts annual large-scale field exercises with realistic scenarios to improve interaction between NATO, Partnership for Peace (PfP) and other partner countries. Regular major disaster exercises have been organised in different participating countries to practice procedures, provide training for local and international participants, build up interoperability skills and capabilities of the non-standing Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Unit (EADRU), and harness the experience and lessons learnt for future operations. To this date, EADRCC has conducted thirteen exercises in Ukraine, Croatia, the Russian Federation, Uzbekistan, Romania, Italy, Finland, Kazakhstan, Armenia, Turkey, and Moldova. The next exercise will be held in Tbilisi, Georgia, in September 2012. In 2009, the countries of the Mediterranean Dialogue (MD)¹ and those of the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI)² were given direct access to the Centre, followed by other partners across the globe³ in December 2011. All EADRCC’s tasks are performed in close cooperation with the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UN OCHA), which , retains the primary role in the coordination of international disaster relief operations. EADRCC has, been designed as a regional coordination mechanism, supporting and complementing the UN efforts. Furthermore, EADRCC’s principal function is coordination rather than direction. In the case of a disaster requiring international assistance, it is up to individual NATO allies and partners to decide whether to provide assistance, based on information received from EADRCC. Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia. Six countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council were initially invited to participate. To date, four of these -- Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates -- have joined. Saudia Arabia and Oman have also shown an interest in the Initiative. Based on the principle of inclusiveness, the Initiative is, however, open to all interested countries of the broader Middle East region who subscribe to its aims and content. Afghanistan, Australia, Iraq, Japan, Mongolia, New Zealand, Pakistan, South Korea (as of March 2012). Support for national authorities in civil emergencies EADRCC forwards assistance requests to NATO and partner countries which, in turn, respond by communicating their offers of assistance to EADRCC and/or the affected country. The Centre uses AIDMATRIX to keep a record of the assistance offered (including assistance from other international organisations and actors), assistance accepted by the stricken country, delivery dates, assistance still required (or updates to the assistance requested), as well as the situation on the ground. This information circulates to NATO and partner countries in the form of daily situation reports, but it is also published on the NATO website. A multinational team of experts The Centre is part of the International Staff, Operations Division located at NATO Headquarters in Brussels, Belgium. It is staffed by up to five secondees from NATO and partner countries and three members of the International Staff. The Centre liaises closely with UN OCHA, NATO Military Authorities (NMAs) and other relevant international organisations. During an actual disaster, EADRCC can temporarily be augmented with additional personnel from the EAPC delegations to NATO, or NATO’s international civilian and military staff. In addition, EADRCC has access to national civil experts that can be called to provide the Centre with expert advice in specific areas in the event of a major disaster. Historical background EADRCC was established in 1998 by the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) as a partnership tool of NATO’s civil emergency planning and as one of the two basic elements of the EAPC policy on cooperation in the field of international disaster relief. The other, complementary element is the EADRU, a non-standing, multi-national force of civil and military elements, deployable in the event of major natural or man-made disasters in an EAPC country. Initially, EADRCC was extensively involved in coordinating the humanitarian assistance effort from the EAPC countries supporting the refugees during the Kosovo war in the late 1990s. Since then, however, the Centre has responded to more than 60 requests of assistance, mainly concerning natural disaster-stricken states. Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, EADRCC has also been tasked with the coordination of international assistance from EAPC countries to help deal with the consequences of chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear (CBRN) incidents, which includes terrorist attacks. In January 2004, the North Atlantic Council, NATO's principal political decision-making body, widened EADRCC’s mandate to respond to assistance requests from the Afghan Government in the case of natural disasters.  Three years later, that mandate was extended to all areas where the Organization has been involved militarily, with the same provisions as Afghanistan. In 2005, the Centre contributed to the United States’ response to Hurricane Katrina by coordinating the donations of NATO and partner countries. The same year, the Centre played a central role in the relief effort in Pakistan after the country was hit by a devastating earthquake and, later in 2010, when it was hit by massive floods.
  • Euro-Atlantic Partnership
    The Euro-Atlantic Partnership The Alliance seeks to foster security, stability and democratic transformation across the Euro-Atlantic area by engaging in partnership through dialogue and cooperation with non-member countries in Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia. The Euro-Atlantic Partnership is underpinned by two key mechanisms: the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) and the Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme. The 50-nation EAPC brings together the 28 Allies and 22 Partner countries in a multilateral forum for dialogue and consultation, and provides the overall political framework for NATO’s cooperation with Partner countries. The PfP programme facilitates practical bilateral cooperation between individual Partner countries and NATO, tailored according to the specific ambitions, needs and abilities of each Partner. NATO’s new Strategic Concept, which was approved at the Lisbon Summit in November 2010, states that the EAPC and the PfP programme are central to the Allies vision of a Europe whole, free and at peace. At Lisbon, Allied leaders reiterated their commitment to further develop the EAPC/PfP as the essential framework for substantive political dialogue and practical cooperation, including enhanced military interoperability, and that they would continue to develop policy intiatives within this framework. Three priorities underpin cooperation with Partners: Dialogue and consultations; Building capabilities and strengthening interoperability; and Supporting reform. Activities under the EAPC and PfP are set out in the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Work Plan. This is a catalogue of around 1600 activities covering over 30 areas of cooperation, ranging from arms control, through language training, foreign and security policy, and military geography. The EAPC and the PfP programme have steadily developed their own dynamic, as successive steps have been taken by NATO and its Partner countries to extend security cooperation, building on the partnership arrangements they have created. As NATO has transformed over the years to meet the new challenges of the evolving security environment, partnership has developed along with it. Today, Partner countries are engaged with NATO in tackling 21st century security challenges, including terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The ways and means of cooperation developed under NATO’s Euro-Atlantic Partnership have proven to be of mutual benefit to Allies and Partners, and have helped promote stability. The mechanisms and programmes for cooperation developed under EAPC/PfP are also being used as the basis to extend cooperation to other non-member countries beyond the Euro-Atlantic area. Partners are expected to fund their own participation in cooperation programmes. However, NATO supports the cost of individual participation of some nations in specific events, and may also support the hosting of events in some Partner countries. Highlights The Euro-Atlantic Partnership brings together Allies and partner countries from Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia for dialogue and consultation. The EAPC totals 50 countries: 28 NATO members and 22 PfP countries. The PfP facilitates practical bilateral cooperation between individual partner countries and NATO, and the EAPC provides a framework for dialogue and consultation. NATO’s 2010 Strategic Concept identifies the EAPC and PfP as central to the Allies’ vision of a Europe whole, free and at peace. As early as 1991, NATO had set up a forum to institutionalise relations with countries from the former Soviet Union, called the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC). The PfP was created in 1994 and the EAPC replaced the NACC in 1997. Values and commitments The Euro-Atlantic Partnership is about more than practical cooperation – it is also about values. Each partner country signs the PfP Framework Document. In doing so, partners commit to: respect international law, the United Nations Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Helsinki Final Act, and international disarmament and arms control agreements; refrain from the threat or use of force against other states; settle disputes peacefully. The Framework Document also enshrines a commitment by the Allies to consult with any partner country that perceives a direct threat to its territorial integrity, political independence or security – a mechanism which, for example, Albania and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia¹ made use of during the Kosovo crisis. The diversity of partners Over the years, 34 countries joined the Euro-Atlantic Partnership. A number of these have since become NATO member states, through three rounds of NATO enlargement. This has changed the balance between Allies and partners in the EAPC/PfP: since March 2004, there have been more Allies than partners. The remaining partners are a very diverse group, with different goals and ambitions with regard to their cooperation with NATO. They include Eastern and Southeastern European countries, the countries of the South Caucasus and Central Asia, and Western European states. Some partners are in the process of reforming their defence structures and capabilities. Others are able to contribute significant forces to NATO-led operations and wish to further strengthen interoperability, and can also offer fellow partner countries advice, training and assistance in various areas. Other partners are interested in using their cooperation with NATO in order to prepare for membership in the Alliance. Facilitating dialogue and consultation The Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council meets at various levels and many partner countries have established diplomatic representation and liaison arrangements at NATO Headquarters and NATO Commands. Dialogue and consultation is also facilitated by various other means. Representatives of partner countries may take up assignments as PfP interns in NATO’s International Staff and various agencies. Military staff from partner countries may also take up posts in military commands, as so-called PfP Staff Elements. NATO has also established Contact Point Embassies in partner countries to facilitate liaison and support public diplomacy efforts. The Secretary General has appointed a Special Representative for the Caucasus and Central Asia and a Senior Civilian Representative has been appointed for Afghanistan. NATO has also opened liaison and information offices in Georgia, Russia, Ukraine and Uzbekistan. Evolution of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership November 1989 saw the fall of the Berlin Wall, signalling the end of the Cold War. Within a short period, the remarkable pace of change in Central and Eastern Europe left NATO faced with a new and very different set of security challenges. Allied leaders responded at their summit meeting in London, in July 1990, by extending a “hand of friendship” across the old East-West divide and proposing a new cooperative relationship with all the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. This sea-change in attitudes was enshrined in a new strategic concept for the Alliance, issued in November 1991, which adopted a broader approach to security. Dialogue and cooperation would be essential parts of the approach required to manage the diversity of challenges facing the Alliance. The key goals were now to reduce the risk of conflict arising out of misunderstanding or design and to better manage crises affecting the security of the Allies; to increase mutual understanding and confidence among all European states; and to expand the opportunities for genuine partnership in dealing with common security problems. The scene was set for the establishment in December 1991 of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC), a forum to bring together NATO and its new partner countries to discuss issues of common concern. NACC consultations focused on residual Cold War security concerns such as the withdrawal of Russian troops from the Baltic States. Political cooperation was also launched on a number of security and defence-related issues. The NACC broke new ground in many ways. However, it focused on multilateral, political dialogue and lacked the possibility of each partner country developing individual cooperative relations with NATO. Deepening partnership This changed in 1994 with the launch of the Partnership for Peace (PfP), a major programme of practical bilateral cooperation between NATO and individual partner countries, which represented a significant leap forward in the cooperative process. And, in 1997, the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) was created to replace the NACC and to build on its achievements, paving the way for the development of an enhanced and more operational partnership. The EAPC and the PfP programme have steadily developed their own dynamic, as successive steps have been taken by NATO and its partner countries to extend security cooperation, building on the partnership arrangements they have created. Further initiatives have been taken to deepen cooperation between Allies and partners at successive summit meetings in Madrid (1997), Washington (1999), Prague (2002), Istanbul (2004), Riga (2006), Bucharest (2008) and Lisbon (2010). The 2010 Strategic Concept, adopted at Lisbon, stresses that cooperative security constitutes one of the Alliance’s core tasks, together with collective defence and crisis management. It states that “The Alliance will engage actively to enhance international security, through partnership with relevant countries and other international organisations (…)”. It also refers specifically to the EAPC and PfP as “central to our vision of Europe whole, free and in peace.” In 2011, when NATO Foreign Ministers met in Berlin, they approved a more efficient and flexible partnership policy, designed to streamline NATO’s partnership tools in order to open all cooperative activities and exercises to all partners and to harmonise NATO’s partnership programmes. Because of this, PfP activities have been opened up to other partnership frameworks and -- vice-versa - PfP partners have been able to participate in activities hosted by the other cooperative frameworks. Milestones 1990 (July) Allies extend a “hand of friendship” across the old East-West divide and propose a new cooperative relationship with all the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. 1991 (November) The Alliance issues a new strategic concept for NATO, which adopts a broader approach to security, emphasising partnership, dialogue and cooperation.   (December) The North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) is established as a forum for security dialogue between NATO and its new partners. 1994 The Partnership for Peace (PfP), a major programme of practical bilateral cooperation between NATO and individual partner countries, is launched.   Partner missions to NATO are established.   A Partnership Coordination Cell is set up at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) to help coordinate PfP training and exercises. 1995 An International Coordination Cell is established at SHAPE to provide briefing and planning facilities for all non-NATO countries contributing troops to NATO-led peacekeeping operations. 1996 A number of partner countries deploy to Bosnia and Herzegovina as part of a NATO-led peacekeeping force. 1997 The Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) is created to replace the NACC.   The operational role of the PfP is enhanced at the Madrid Summit. 1998 Creation of the Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre and Disaster Response Unit. 1999 Three partners – the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland – join NATO.   Dialogue and cooperation are included as fundamental security tasks in the Alliance’s new Strategic Concept.   (April, Washington Summit) The PfP is further enhanced and its operational role strengthened, including introduction of: the Operational Capabilities Concept to improve the ability of Alliance and partner forces to operate together in NATO-led operations; the Political-Military Framework for partner involvement in political consultations and decision-making, in operational planning and in command arrangements; a Training and Education Enhancement Programme to help reinforce the operational capabilities of partner countries.   Several partner countries deploy peacekeepers as part of the NATO-led peacekeeping force in Kosovo. 2001 (September) The EAPC meets the day after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States and pledges to combat the scourge of terrorism. 2002 The Partnership Trust Fund policy is launched to assist partner countries in the safe destruction of stockpiled anti-personnel mines and other munitions.   (November, Prague Summit) Further enhancement of partnership, including: a Comprehensive Review to strengthen political dialogue with partners and enhance their involvement in the planning, conduct and oversight of activities in which they participate; a Partnership Action Plan against Terrorism (PAP-T); Individual Partnership Action Plans, allowing the Alliance to tailor its assistance to interested partners seeking more structured support for domestic reforms, particularly in the defence and security sector. 2003 Some partner countries contribute troops to the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. 2004 Seven partners – Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia – join NATO.   (June, Istanbul Summit) Further steps are taken to strengthen partnership, including: a Partnership Action Plan for Defence Institution Building (PAP-DIB) to encourage and support partners in building effective and democratically responsible defence institutions; an enhanced Operational Capabilities Concept and partners are offered representation at Allied Command Transformation to help promote greater military interoperability between NATO and partner country forces; a special focus on the Caucasus and Central Asia. 2006 Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia become partners. 2008 (April, Bucharest Summit) Malta returns to the Partnership for Peace (PfP) and joins the EAPC (Malta first joined the PfP programme in April 1995 but suspended its participation in October 1996). Priority is given to building integrity in defence institutions and the important role of women in conflict resolution (as outlined in UN Security Council Resolution 1325). 2009 Two partners – Albania and Croatia – become members of NATO. 2010 (November, Lisbon Summit) Allies reiterate their commitment to the EAPC and the PfP programme, described in NATO’s new Strategic Concept as being central to the Allies’ vision of a Europe whole, free and at peace. Allies agree to streamline NATO’s partnership tools in order to open all cooperative activities and exercises to all partners and to harmonise partnership. Allies decide to review the Political-Military Framework for NATO-led PfP operations in order to update the way NATO works together with partner countries and shapes decisions on the operations and missions to which they contribute. 2011 (April) Following up on the Lisbon Summit decisions, Allied Foreign Ministers meeting in Berlin approve a new, more efficient and flexible partnership policy. The revised Political-Military Framework for partner involvement in NATO-led operations is also noted by ministers. 2014 January 2014 marks the 20th anniversary of the PfP programme.
  • Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC), The -
    The Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council The 50-nation Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) is a multilateral forum for dialogue and consultation on political and security-related issues among Allies and partner countries. It provides the overall political framework for NATO’s cooperation with partner countries in the Euro-Atlantic area, and for the bilateral relationships developed between NATO and individual partner countries under the Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme. EAPC members regularly exchange views on current political and security-related issues, including the evolving security situations in Kosovo and Afghanistan, where peacekeepers from Allied and partner countries are deployed together. Longer-term consultation and cooperation also takes place in a wide range of areas. Established in 1997, the EAPC succeeded the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC), which was set up in 1991 just after the end of the Cold War. This decision reflected NATO’s desire to build a security forum better suited for a more enhanced and operational partnership, matching the increasingly sophisticated relationships being developed with partner countries. Participation The EAPC brings together the 28 Allies and 22 partner countries . Meetings of the EAPC are held monthly at the level of ambassadors, annually at the level of foreign or defence ministers and chiefs of defence, as well as occasionally at summit level. The work of the EAPC Longer-term consultation and cooperation takes place in a wide range of areas within the framework of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Work Programme (EAPWP). These areas include crisis-management and peace-support operations; regional issues; arms control and issues related to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; international terrorism; defence issues such as planning, budgeting, policy and strategy; civil emergency planning and disaster preparedness; armaments cooperation; nuclear safety; civil-military coordination of air traffic management; and scientific cooperation. The EAPC has also taken initiatives to promote and coordinate practical cooperation and the exchange of expertise in key areas. These include combating terrorism, border security, and other issues related to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and small arms and light weapons. NATO/EAPC policies have also been agreed to support international efforts in support of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security, as well as to combat trafficking in human beings.
  • Exercises
    Exercises Exercises are important tools through which the Alliance tests and validates its concepts, procedures, systems and tactics. More broadly, they enable militaries and civilian organisations deployed in theatres of operation to practice working together. Exercises have many other functions, not least helping to identify “best practices” (what works) and “lessons learnt” (what needs improving). NATO has been conducting military exercises since 1951 and individual NATO countries conduct their own exercises as a routine part of their national preparation for operations. Holding frequent exercises that test many different capabilities helps forces operate more effectively and efficiently together in demanding crisis situations. Exercises vary in scope, duration and form – ranging between live exercises in the field to computer-assisted exercises that take place in a classroom. They are planned in advance by NATO’s two strategic commands – Allied Command Operations and Allied Command Transformation – taking into account strategic priorities and objectives, operational requirements and specific exercise objectives.  They have been open to all formal partner countries since 2010 and while a majority of them are military exercises, the Alliance also organises political exercises too. Highlights Exercises allow NATO to test and validate concepts, procedures, systems and tactics. They enable military and civilian organisations deployed on the ground to work together to identify "best practices" (what works) and "lessons learnt" (what needs improving). Exercises contribute to improved interoperability and defence reform. NATO exercises are open to all formal partner countries, in addition to member countries. The Alliance has been conducting exercises since 1951. The aim of NATO exercises Exercises serve a number of specific purposes: Training and experience Exercises allow forces to build on previous training in a practical way, thereby heightening forces’ level of proficiency in a given area. Exercises have varying levels of complexity but most assume that basic training is complete and that a sufficient number of trained personnel are available. Testing and validating structures Exercises are designed to practice the efficiency of structures as well as personnel. This is particularly true when periodically the NATO military command structure is reformed and new headquarters need to test their ability to fulfill new responsibilities. A structure consists of many components – concepts, doctrine, procedures, systems and tactics – that must function together. Supply structures, for instance, require specialised training, equipment and operating procedures, which must be combined to effectively support a mission’s objectives. Putting these structures into practice allows them to be tested and, if need be, refined. Interoperability NATO-led forces must be able to work together effectively despite differences in doctrine, language, structures, tactics and training. Interoperability is built, in part, through routine inter-forces training between NATO member states and through practical cooperation between personnel from Allied and partner countries. Exercises are open to all formal partners, either as observers or as participants, or as hosts of an exercise. The type of participation is determined by NATO and the partner’s level of ambition in cooperating (whether, for instance, it intends to provide forces to current or future NATO -led operations). Defence Reform Participation in NATO exercises is one of the options available to help with defence reform. They provide the possibility for NATO member countries to test reforms implemented nationally and give partner countries the opportunity to be involved in and observe the structures and mechanisms that Alliance members have in place. The making of an exercise Exercise scenarios During an exercise, forces are asked to respond to a fictional scenario that resembles what might occur in real life. Exercises cover the full range of military operations, from combat to humanitarian relief and from stabilisation to reconstruction. They can last from a day to several weeks and can vary in scope from a few officers working on an isolated problem, to full-scale combat scenarios involving aircraft, navy ships, artillery pieces, armoured vehicles and thousands of troops. Alliance exercises are supported by NATO countries and, as appropriate, by partner countries, which provide national commitments in the form of troops, equipment or other forms of support. The participating countries are normally responsible for funding any form of national contribution. Each exercise has pre-specified training objectives which drive the selection of activities. Objectives may be to build skills and knowledge, practice coordination mechanisms, or validate procedures. At the conclusion of an exercise, commanders and, in many cases, troops collectively review their performance. This process allows them to identify areas that work well (“best practices”) and areas that can be improved (“lessons learnt”). In this way, exercises facilitate continuous improvement of interoperability, efficiency and performance. The Military Training and Exercise Programme Events and activities related to NATO training and exercises are developed by both Allied Command Operations (ACO) and Allied Command Transformation (ACT). This process culminates with the publication of the annual Military Training and Exercise Programme (MTEP). Since July 2012, ACO is responsible for setting the training requirements and conducting NATO’s evaluations, while ACT is responsible for managing the MTEP and executing the exercise programme. The MTEP provides detailed information on training, exercises and related activities scheduled for the first two calendar years, and outlines information on training and exercise activities scheduled for the following three calendar years. The document is based on the priorities and intent of the strategic commanders. The areas typically included are current and future operations, the NATO Response Force, transformational experimentation and NATO’s military cooperation programmes. NATO exercise requirements are coordinated during MTEP Programming Board Meetings (which are open to representatives from partner countries) starting at least eighteen months before the beginning of the next cycle.  Preliminary planning culminates in the NATO Training and Exercise Conference, where NATO Commands, NATO and partner countries, and other invitees conduct final exercise coordination and provide support to the annual MTEP. Political exercises Exercises are organised in both the military and civilian structures of the Alliance. NATO holds exercises based on its political arrangements, concepts and procedures so as to refine consultations and decision-making architecture and capabilities. Political exercises also aim to ensure that primary advisers – non-elected senior political officials and military commanders in capitals and within the NATO structures – are provided with opportunities to maintain their awareness of how complex, multinational organisations such as NATO work. In some instances, partners engaged in NATO-led operations are able to participate in certain aspects of these exercises. What is in an exercise name? At the present time, NATO exercises are identified by two words. The first letter of the first word denotes the NATO command responsible for scheduling the exercise. S Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe T Allied Command Transformation B Allied Joint Forces Command Brunssum N Allied Joint Forces Command Naples The first letter of the second word denotes the element(s) concerned. A Air L Land M Maritime J Joint The strategic commands in the lead ACO and ACT work closely together on NATO military exercises. Both are assisted by the Alliance’s network of education, training, and assessment institutions, as well as national structures. Since July 2012, ACO has been given the main responsibility for setting collective training requirements and conducting the evaluation of headquarters and formations. ACT has been given the responsibility of managing collective training and exercises, based on ACO’s requirements. ACT also holds lead responsibility for NATO and Partnership for Peace (PfP) joint education, individual training and associated policy and doctrine development, as well as for directing NATO schools. Exercises through time NATO has been conducting Alliance-level exercises since 1951. In the early years of the Alliance, NATO forces conducted exercises to strengthen their ability to practice collective defence. In other words, they were conducted to ensure that forces were prepared in the case of an attack. An integrated force under centralised command was called for in September 1950. By December 1950, the first Supreme Allied Commander Europe, U.S. General Dwight D. Eisenhower, was appointed. Following this appointment, national forces were put under centralised command. The Alliance’s first exercises were held in the autumn of 1951. During 1953, there were approximately 100 exercises of various kinds conducted by NATO commanders. From this point on, NATO forces were no longer a collection of national units, but were beginning to gain cohesion. A year after Allied Command Europe became operational, General Eisenhower reported that “the combat readiness of our troops has improved markedly.” In 1994, the Alliance launched the Partnership for Peace (PfP) initiative. One of the initiative’s objectives is to promote closer military cooperation and interoperability. From that time on, PfP members were able to participate in peacekeeping field exercises. In 2002, the NATO Response Force (NRF) was created. The original NRF concept was revised in 2009 and since then, the emphasis has been placed on exercises conducted in support of the NRF. This training is intended to ensure that the NRF is able to deploy quickly and operate effectively in a variety of situations. At the 2004 Istanbul Summit, Alliance leaders elevated the Mediterranean Dialogue initiative to a genuine partnership to include increased participation in exercises and individual training at NATO institutions. At the same time, the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative was introduced, paving the way for cooperation between NATO and countries from the broader Middle East in areas such as education and training, and made provision for partners to engage in joint training for terrorism. Since the Lisbon Summit in November 2010 and the introduction of the 2010 Strategic Concept and the new partnerships policy, NATO exercises have been open to all partners.