NATO’s transformation
Dear Visitors,
Thanks again for your continuing participation!
As you know, our online discussions follow the themes of the Seminars held by NATO’s Group of Experts on the developing Strategic Concept. The fourth such Seminar will take place on 23 February, in Washington, DC. Hosted by Supreme Allied Command Transformation and the US National Defense University, the subject of the Seminar will be the Alliance’s transformation of its structure, forces, and capabilities.
Accordingly, our next topic for discussions is, “What changes in structures, forces and capabilities are required for NATO’s transformation into an Alliance that can deal successfully with 21st century challenges?”
Please share your thoughts, concerns or questions. We will try to respond to your ideas and summarize the discussion with another live video session.
As background, please consider reading the most recent two-part edition of NATO Review, available at www.nato.int/review. The edition examined issues related to the new Strategic Concept, the Comprehensive Approach and NATO’s transformation.
Let us know what you think!
The Moderating Team
comments
-
Dear All,
What is NATO position about Iran’s nuclear program? Couldn’t we avoid this situation if preventive measures were taken on time and there was better communication, cohesion and coordination between the countries? Do you think that the New Strategic Concept will include such mechanism for acting instead of re-acting?
Thank you!
Best regards,
Iliana Panayotova, Bulgaria -
Gentlemen
With the cold war over and the new powers rising, United states of America and Europe must to reposition the key of Institutions and mechanisms through priority strategies, economic structures, full range of international security and reinvigorate transatlantic efforts conducent to stabilization a free and peaceful in Europe. By the other hand, NATO needs a new priority strategy to Afghanistan and Pakistan and better relations with Russia. Also, NATO must to analyse new missions at home and away, through a public debate, better synergies and cooperation between civil society and Military Authorities.My question: What NATO think to do about Deterrance, Defense and Transatlantic Resilience priorities?
Thnak you.
My Respects and Best Regards
Luis -
Qu’en est t-il de la coopération de l’OTAN avec les structures militaires de l’Union Européenne?
La redéfinition d’un concept stratégique ne devrait-elle pas prendre en compte les rapports de coordination et de partenariat avec d’autres organisations de défense et de sécurité ?
Après Berlin +, ne peux t-on pas réfléchir à une sorte de Bruxelles + dans lequel les moyens civils de la PESD/PESD seraient mis à disposition de l’Alliance ?
Cela permettrait à l’OTAN d’adopter une comprehensive approach, de gagner en légitimité au près des populations et de sortir de cette vision d’outillage militariste géré par Washington (vision peut-être erronée mais malheureusement majoritaire).
Enfin, quid d’un pilier européen fort au sein de l’OTAN ? Peux t-on imaginer la constitution de plusieurs noyaux au sein même de l’Alliance ? Je pense par exemple à la rationalisation et à l’incorporation d’unités multinationales européennes, comme l’Eurocorps ou la brigade franco-allemande au sein de l’OTAN.
Merci d’avance pour les précisions que vous apporterez à ces interrogations.
-
As Russia begins to reemerge as a strong regional power, how will NATO balance its tenuous political relationship with the Russian Federation with its goal of regional stability, and potential NATO expansion, in Eastern Europe?
Looking forward to the discussion.
-
Dear Panel members,
I have a question about the future of the NATO and its concept.
When will NATO transform itself into a truly global alliance by inviting counties like Australia, India, Japan, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, South Africa and perhaps even Israel, Egypt and Jordan, if Middle East peace plan comes to life? I live in Croatia and I understand how important global security is, specially when unfortunately UN does not have a serious potential to guarantee peace on international level.
Darko Krcum
-
Can you confirm or deny that:
1) NATO is considering having a seperate, permanent standing military with member countries donating troops and equipment?
2) NATO will be officially requesting Missile Shield coverage from the USA and supporting this with costs and installation of required components on memeber states territory. -
Bonjour,
Je voudrais bien savoir si, dans le cadre de sa stratégie de défense, l’OTAN a déjà envisagé de prendre des mesures préventives pour faire face, à moyen et long terme, à l’accroissement de la puissance militaire de pays émergents tels que la Chine.
Avec tous mes remerciements
-
Dear Panel members,
My two questions go in the same direction as addressed earlier by Francesca Cook.
In theory, in view of the multidimensional security challenges the Alliance members (and its Partners) are commonly facing, NATO is already committed to a “comprehensive approach” and aims at promoting transformation of its structures, forces and capabilities according a “Comprehensive Political Guidance”.
First question, however, would a more visionary approach not require to basically rethink NATO’s decision-making structures in order to adequately reflect the involvement of national Ministries beyond the MFAs and MoDs? I am thinking about those national ministries/agencies that deal with specific security-relevant capabilities such as Police, Gendarmerie, Civil Defence/disaster relief, humanitarian aid)?
This would be justified since it is common sense now in most countries that there is no clear distinction anymore between “external” and “internal” security – and since NATO sees itself as not just as a “military alliance”.Second question: Would such a shift not be facilitated if in the new Strategic Concept the term “security” would explicitly used instead of “defence”, where ever possible?
Following such a truly “comprehensive” approach, NATO would not only ensure its relevance for the most likely security challenges of the future, but would also become a conduit for its individual member states (and Partner countries) for day-to-day inter-agency interaction and harmonisation in all aspects of security-related policy development, planning and capability development.
Looking forward to today’s discussion,
Horst
-
How NATO is to evolve in the coming years in terms of defense strategy, military policies and security forces reflects the complexity of the new environment. The efforts made toward forging a New Strategic Concept should be backed up by debates on adequate Intelligence capabilities – as a prerequisite for mission accomplishment. Early Warning, situation assessment and strategic planning cannot be carried out appropriately without timely and comprehensive Intelligence.
I’d like to know how do you envision the possible impact of the New Strategic Concept on NATO’s Intelligence Capabilities (HUMINT, SIGINT, IMINT, MASINT, OSINT).
Is there a strategy for reconsidering, reshaping, reinforcing or creating different or new intelligence capabilities?
Which are best suited for the new missions? Is R&D prepared to face new challenges?
What should we expect regarding possible changes in doctrine?
What specific structures will be involved?I think this is very important as knowledge and resources must shape the entire intelligence culture to promote the convergence needed for integrated products of actionable intelligence.
I’m looking forward to receiving a competent and comprehensive response.
Best regards -
Please visit the link bellow: NATO’s outreach & communication strategy
(2010 – 2030) by Dr. Solomon Passy.A Sketch for Brainstorming NATO’s New Strategic Concept, Presented at the Prague PSSI Conference on NATO’s Strategic Concept, January 12, 2010 (Addressed to: Secretary Madeleine K. Albright, Chair, NATO’s Group of Experts)http://www.atlantic-club.org/content/pdf/publications_NATOs_Future.pdf