Interview

1.       What are you celebrating today?

The NATO Science for Peace and Security Program is celebrating its 60^th anniversary. This is a very successful program, which symbolizes the non-military face of NATO. Over the last few decades, the science program has fostered a significant network of scientists around the world, and strengthened security through joint practical cooperation between Allies and Partners.

Like NATO itself, the science program reinvented itself in the nineties and broadened security well beyond the Alliance reaching out to Partner countries at the end of the Cold War. The geographical scope of the Science Program went from an “intra-Alliance” focus to an “Alliance-Partner” focus. It is now a NATO Partnership branded program. Beyond its geographical focus, it has adjusted functionally, focusing on key priority areas, thereby mirroring NATO’s political agenda, for instance with projects in cyber-defence, counter terrorism, hybrid warfare and building capacities and resilience with our partners.

We are celebrating all these achievements with our Ukraine and other partner countries today. Ambassador Vadym Prystailko by my side is representing Ukraine as a most active NATO-SPS partner and largest beneficiary of the program.

2.       How does SPS cooperation relate to the war in Eastern Ukraine?

Ukraine’s engagement with SPS dates back to 1991. It has deepened ever since, but the 2014 illegal annexation of Crimea and the security situation in eastern Ukraine was a turning point and marked a significant increase in our scientific cooperation with Ukraine. As decided by NATO Heads of State and Government, cooperation with Ukraine has since then been intensified and resources were redirected accordingly.

The SPS Program proved once more its flexibility by responding quickly to this crisis, further enhancing the number of SPS projects with Ukraine and adapting the areas of scientific cooperation accordingly.

The security situation in eastern Ukraine remains unstable with regular ceasefire violations. Civilians continue to suffer, including from restricted access to medical care and from unacceptable risks from mines and unexploded ordnance. It is not a coincidence that the SPS Program has launched two top-down multi-year capacity building projects in Ukraine, directly focused on equipment and training for Ukrainian experts to respond to crises, namely on humanitarian demining projects and a major telemedicine project.

3.       What have been the main NATO-Ukraine scientific achievements to date?

We have had up to 43 Science for Peace and Security Program (SPS) activities with Ukraine in the course of the year. Leading areas of cooperation include defence against chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) agents, security-related advanced technology, counter-terrorism, mine detection and clearance, environmental security, and Women Peace and Security projects. Between 2014 and mid-2017, more than 750 international experts participated in SPS projects with Ukraine and over 280 young scientists had the opportunity to pursue research in their field of interest in the leading scientific research Institutes under the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences.

In the context of the Comprehensive Assistance Package (CAP) for Ukraine, SPS activities figure prominently with some flagship projects such as the multinational Telemedicine System mentioned, and support to Humanitarian Demining, following the Balaklia arms depot explosion in March 2017. We should also mention the 3D landmine detection radar project, which led to the production of a first prototype in July 2017, or the project which resulted in a system launched in 2018 to detect explosives in real time through a microwave imaging curtain.

There is also the work of the Joint Working Group on Scientific and Environmental Cooperation, expected to meet on a yearly basis (the 16^th meeting will take place in Brussels in early 2019). These meetings at high political level are always an opportunity to highlight achievements and set future priority areas, following the NATO-Ukraine political agenda.

4.       In what way is this cooperation a two-way street?

 SPS cooperation with Ukraine is a win-win collaboration for all parties. For Ukraine, SPS projects provide funding for training and equipment, and help build capacity in Ukraine. The SPS Program is also an excellent vehicle to promote young scientists by providing opportunities to kick-start their careers. Many young Ukrainian scientists have benefitted from the opportunity to work with leading international experts in their fields, and publish their work widely, and many also received stipends to conduct their research.

For Allies and other partner countries, SPS activities have allowed internationally renowned experts to work in Ukrainian research institutes and universities, providing unique opportunities for international research collaboration. Given the high standards of Ukrainian science and know-how, working with Ukrainian researchers and scientists has also been an invaluable occasion for their counterparts in NATO countries to study specific areas of research, for instance in Hybrid Warfare.

SPS cooperation with Ukraine is of mutual benefit. As we look to the future, lessons-learned from hybrid warfare, be it in terms of improving early warning and intelligence gathering, enhancing resilience, developing strategies and enhancing cyber defenses will offer numerous avenues for further projects. Indeed Ukraine can share significant experience from facing hybrid methods that can benefit the Alliance.

I was recently in Kyiv for an International Conference on Lessons-Learned from Hybrid Warfare, which was yet another testimony of the role of Ukraine in this field, and the potential for doing more. As ASG for Emerging Security Challenges, and in connection with Hybrid Warfare, I should also mention the importance of cyber defence in our cooperation with Ukraine.

5.       What are the main remaining challenges and what could be done better?

Perhaps I could point to the fact that some of the areas of cooperation with considerable Ukrainian expertise, such as environmental security, are less of a political priority for Allies, so we have seen recently a decline in these SPS activities. At the same time, the SPS key priorities are constantly evolving according to political priorities and thereby allow for a diversified list of new initiatives.

Some may also argue that we could do even better in communicating our level of cooperation to our publics, giving greater visibility to the non-military aspects of cooperation with NATO. We could also give greater visibility to special projects of particular interest to our public opinions.

The Information Days offer such opportunities and we are considering a new Info Days event in Ukraine in 2019, following a very successful one in late 2016, which led to considerable media coverage promoting the concrete deliverables to the public at large.

6.       What does the future hold?

NATO stands by Ukraine on its reform path. There will continue to be a large number of SPS activities with Ukraine. In my capacity as the Chairman of the SPS Program, I will ensure and oversee personally from the Emerging Security Challenges Division their successful implementation.

Given the current political and security context, the level of practical cooperation in the framework of the SPS Program with Ukraine will endure. At the same time, the political agenda will continue to inform the direction of the program, and activities will mirror the priority areas of cooperation decided at the political level.