NATO Strategy

It's high time that NATO reviewed its strategy and came up with a revised concept, a logical development given the fact that the alliance now includes 28 member countries with differing interests and military capabilities. Clearly, the former strategy devised in 1999 didn't sufficiently reflect the threat of terrorism nor Russia's geopolitical aspirations.

No one can object to the fact that the main tenet of the strategy remains the member states' commitment to defend each other and that the US remains committed to providing military support for Europe. That was a key concern for many of the former Soviet-bloc countries who are now NATO members but remain wary of Russia's hegemonic ambitions, a fear no longer prevalent in the West.

However, part of the new strategy involves NATO making sure energy supplies are guaranteed, which can only mean that it wants a say in securing gas and oil deliveries from Russia and central Asia, a move likely to be seen as a provocation in Moscow.

Having said that, the alliance quite clearly sets out in its new strategy that it wants to work closely together with Russia to combat the threat of terrorism stemming from failed states. An existing cooperation on missile defense is to be extended to include medium-range missiles, a move that was made possible by the US decision not to build an intercontinental ballistic missile defense shield.

The new strategy also lays out NATO's operations and missions outside its territory such as Afghanistan or the Balkans, however the alliance is not about to become the world's policeman, a role favored by former US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

The European member states managed to put an end to those plans, recognizing that NATO would reach its political, military and financial limits very quickly. The mission in Afghanistan is testament to those concerns.

Defining why, where and when NATO should operate outside its territory is long overdue, however putting that into practise is all the more difficult. There are a number of armies in Europe that have yet to recognize the new threats posed by terrorism and many of them remain inflexible, unprofessional and too expensive.

The German armed forces will also have to face up to those challenges and a first step would be to transform the bundeswehr into a specialized professional army and not rely on badly trained conscripts. In addition the public here in Germany has to be convinced of the necessity to spend money on a missile defense system.

The first such attempt by the US failed, however the system would not have provided adequate protection for Europe anyway. The alliance has little time to waste, as countries like Iran and similarly unpredictable and unstable countries or terrorist groups will not wait for NATO to modernize its armies and weapons.

Interestingly enough the new strategy was devised in a series of open seminars, hosted by by numerous expert groups and NGOs.

For the first time eastern European member states had the opportunity to give their full input, a clear indication that NATO is not merely the military behemoth it's often perceived to be but is a democratic community with shared ideals and purposes.

Bernd Riegert is head of the European desk for Deutsche Welle's German Service (rm)

Editor: Michael Knigge