LANGUAGE
Due to translations, the other language editions of NATO Review go online approximately two weeks after the English version.
About NATO Review
Submission policy
COPYRIGHT INFO
Editorial team
 RSS
SEND THIS ARTICLE TO A FRIEND
SUBSCRIBE TO THE NATO REVIEW
  

NATO's New Strategic Concept: a successful balancing act? (Nov 2010)

NATO's first Strategic Concept for eleven years was often portrayed as a balancing act. For instance, how to balance new threats with old ones? How to accommodate the interests of small countries and big ones? Now that it has been signed, how was the Concept seen?

 Subtitles: On / Off

NATO's first strategic concept

for eleven years

was often portrayed

as a balancing act.

For example, how to balance

new threats with old ones,

how to accommodate the interests

of small and big countries.

So, now that it's been signed,

how is the concept seen?

In my country's point of view,

all sensitivities have been

taken into account and approached.

And practically we are satisfied

with the Strategic Concept.

The way the Strategic Concept

has been worked out and prepared

under the lead

of the Secretary-General,

in this work,

the remarks, the proposals,

the approach of our authorities,

has been taken into account.

And how does

the concept approach new threats,

ranging from cyber security

to a rising number of failed states.

About new threats,

it's about taking them seriously.

Especially new ones.

This is realised in the concept.

You can't repair failed states

by staying there militarily.

State building

requires security support,

that's the military element.

But it requires a lot more.

We have to be open to develop

new technologies, new strategies

towards cyber criminality

and new threats.

The decisions made will affect more

than just NATO member countries.

There are many non-NATO

countries fighting in Afghanistan.

How will the decisions made affect

NATO's biggest operation there?

If you listen

to the debate in the media,

it sounds like people are leaving

all over the place. Not the case.

Everyone is keen

to stay in different ways.

I mean, everyone is doing,

we as well,

got to do their transition

from a combat role

to more mentoring,

training and supporting.

In some places things are happening,

which endanger

the security and safety of our citizens

in all NATO states.

You can't sort of stand up an army

in a week. It takes quite some time.

And I would put

greater emphasis on the quality

of the training than the quantity.

NATO's last Strategic Concept

was agreed by just 19 countries.

This time there were

28 around the table.

How did that affect

the decision-making process?

I'm not so convinced

that it was more difficult.

I'd like to underline the willingness

of the new member states of NATO,

the 12 new member states of NATO,

to really take part in the process.

It was very much concentrated,

focused and perfectly performed.

That's in the new concept for NATO

to be able to plug and play...

with the European Union,

with the UN,

with regional security organisations,

with financial institutions.

I think they go together rather well.

And finally,

the Lisbon summit was billed

as the most important summit

ever for the NATO alliance.

So, now that it is finished, was it?

Each time we have

important summits.

This one was very important,

the next can even be more important.

NATO's first strategic concept

for eleven years

was often portrayed

as a balancing act.

For example, how to balance

new threats with old ones,

how to accommodate the interests

of small and big countries.

So, now that it's been signed,

how is the concept seen?

In my country's point of view,

all sensitivities have been

taken into account and approached.

And practically we are satisfied

with the Strategic Concept.

The way the Strategic Concept

has been worked out and prepared

under the lead

of the Secretary-General,

in this work,

the remarks, the proposals,

the approach of our authorities,

has been taken into account.

And how does

the concept approach new threats,

ranging from cyber security

to a rising number of failed states.

About new threats,

it's about taking them seriously.

Especially new ones.

This is realised in the concept.

You can't repair failed states

by staying there militarily.

State building

requires security support,

that's the military element.

But it requires a lot more.

We have to be open to develop

new technologies, new strategies

towards cyber criminality

and new threats.

The decisions made will affect more

than just NATO member countries.

There are many non-NATO

countries fighting in Afghanistan.

How will the decisions made affect

NATO's biggest operation there?

If you listen

to the debate in the media,

it sounds like people are leaving

all over the place. Not the case.

Everyone is keen

to stay in different ways.

I mean, everyone is doing,

we as well,

got to do their transition

from a combat role

to more mentoring,

training and supporting.

In some places things are happening,

which endanger

the security and safety of our citizens

in all NATO states.

You can't sort of stand up an army

in a week. It takes quite some time.

And I would put

greater emphasis on the quality

of the training than the quantity.

NATO's last Strategic Concept

was agreed by just 19 countries.

This time there were

28 around the table.

How did that affect

the decision-making process?

I'm not so convinced

that it was more difficult.

I'd like to underline the willingness

of the new member states of NATO,

the 12 new member states of NATO,

to really take part in the process.

It was very much concentrated,

focused and perfectly performed.

That's in the new concept for NATO

to be able to plug and play...

with the European Union,

with the UN,

with regional security organisations,

with financial institutions.

I think they go together rather well.

And finally,

the Lisbon summit was billed

as the most important summit

ever for the NATO alliance.

So, now that it is finished, was it?

Each time we have

important summits.

This one was very important,

the next can even be more important.

Share this    DiggIt   MySpace   Facebook   Delicious   Permalink