Belgrade, Serbia

i

AN

ALY

SIS

REPO

RT

Strategic Military Partner Conference 2011

ii

ANALYSIS REPORT

Belgrade, Serbia

iii

2011 Strategic Military Partner Conference

Belgrade, Serbia

Prepared by:

Strategic Analysis Branch

Strategic Plans and Policy DivisionHeadquarters Supreme Allied

Command Transformation

North Atlantic Treaty Organisation

16 June 2011

Foreword

I am pleased to present the 2011 Strategic Military Partner Conference analysis report. It was produced by the diligent efforts of the Analysis Team listed below. I thank them for their dedicated service.

Director of Analysis

COL János Szőnyegi HUN ABranch Head, Strategic Analysis

Data Collection and Analysis Team

CAPT Eric Schneider USA NCDR Michael McMillan USA NCDR Maureen Magnan USA N

CDR Marcia Melvin USA NLTC Philippe Roget FRA A

CDR J. William Smith USA NLT Blair Milo USA N

MR Jeffrey Reynolds CAN CMS Louise Romet FRA C

MGEN Mark BarrettDeputy Chief of Staff, Strategic Plans & Policy

HQ Supreme Allied Commander TransformationNorth Atlantic Treaty Organisation

Norfolk, VA USA

Belgrade, Serbia

1

I: INTRODUCTION

The theme for the 2011 Strategic Military Partner Conference was “Post Lisbon: Delivering Transformation.” The event was held in Belgrade, Serbia, from 13-15 June 2011, and consisted of 150 attendees representing 55 nations from NATO, Partnership for Peace (PfP), Mediterranean Dialogue (MD), Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI), and other global partners.

The conference commenced with a series of plenary sessions that introduced the key issues, followed by syndicate sessions where participants discussed three main topics: Assured Access to the Global Commons, Building Capability through Multinational and Innovative Approaches, and Future Development of Partnerships and Outreach.

II: PLENARY SESSIONS AND PANEL DISCUSSIONSII-a: “A Serbian Perspective on the Outcome of the Lisbon Summit” -- Serbian Minister of Defence, Mr. Dragan Šutanovac, and Chief of the General Staff, General Miloje Miletić

Both delivered a clear message in their respective remarks that Serbia is committed to adhering to international norms, acting as a constructive participant in the global system, and supporting NATO Partnership for Peace (PfP), European Union (EU), United Nations (UN) and other multinational initiatives. Serbia recognises that partnerships are the core to new relations, and while they are aware of the past, they are dedicated to the future. Security concerns surrounding the conference were a reminder that although challenges exist, a combined approach to addressing those challenges can yield successful results. In addition, while partnerships and transformation are complex, they are a positive force in strengthening the core functions of the Alliance. Serbia desires to enhance its partnerships with others, focusing on efficiency and interoperability.

One of Serbia’s recent successes was the transformation of its military from conscription-based to a professional force. Serbia’s defence academies receive at least eight to ten applications for each opening, and next year’s graduates will include its first female pilot candidates. Serbia’s transformed professional military structure

is optimised and ready to contribute to long-term cooperative global security. Rational security challenges of today and tomorrow are both dynamic and global, not regional. Serbia is dedicated to furthering joint interoperability and contributing to the security and defence of the Global Commons.

II-b: “The Lisbon Declaration” -- NATO Supreme Allied Commander Transformation General Stéphane Abrial

SACT welcomed delegates from more than 50 countries and international organisations. He praised the Serbian Government for its significant progress over the past decade. General Abrial noted that during the Lisbon Summit in November 2010, NATO reaffirmed its commitment to transformation and strong partnerships as crucial aspects to the future of the Alliance.

In support of NATO’s transformational goals, the first priority of Allied Command Transformation is to communicate a broad understanding of the current evolution of warfare, and second, how to respond to corresponding challenges. In order to evaluate that evolution and the proper responses, the Alliance must analyse the present security environment, then develop pragmatic and innovative proposals for enhancing its capacity for cooperative security and collective defence. Accordingly, improving stability and security cannot be successful without partners. Partnership with NATO can provide a clear and valued contribution to security of the Alliance and beyond, to international security, as well as to defending and promoting the values of personal freedom, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.

In accordance with the new Strategic Concept and following the Lisbon Summit, the Alliance has worked toward deepening and expanding partnerships, as well as strengthening the efficiency and flexibility of relationships with partner countries. SMPC 2011 provided partners with a forum to exchange national views on the most important strategic issues and offer new ideas, perspectives, and views.

Strategic Military Partner Conference 2011

2

II-c: “Future of NATO Partnerships” -- Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola

Partnerships play a vital role in a security environment characterised by strategic surprise. They must promote mutual understanding and respect to be beneficial. Partners favour differentiated and individualised collaboration, especially in tackling emerging security challenges, and generally approve of the new 28+n format, as it improves flexibility. Prioritisation of resources will allow increased efficiency in the management of partnerships, but further emphasis has to be put on practical cooperation.

Partnership is more than military and operational cooperation. It is about building relationships, trust, and creating a security network of cooperation that can prevent conflict and assist during crisis management. The security challenges faced by the Alliance and its partners require a change of mind set towards a cooperative and forward-looking approach. Partners must look at the world in a comprehensive and global way using all the tools at their disposal (social, diplomatic, military, political and educational power), especially when tackling emerging security challenges. Working together gives NATO and its partners a legitimacy that no other nation working alone can have.

II-d: “Building Capability through Multinational and Innovative Approaches” -- Assistant Chief of Staff Programme and Planning Management, Major General Kjell-Ove Skare

It is well accepted that new collaborative approaches are needed to better navigate the challenges of complex threats in an era of financial austerity. At the same time, such approaches need to be feasible and acceptable in the NATO context and practical – to provide greater security with fewer resources, but provide more coordination and coherence. This is a clear challenge for NATO and the underlining requirement for Secretary General Rasmussen’s Smart Defence Concept and itsMultinational and Innovative Approaches to Capability Development Task Force (MNATF). More broadly, capability building with partners is becoming increasingly important for NATO and is identified as a priority area for dialogue, consultation and cooperation in NATO’s new partnership policy.

Closer association with partners regarding smart capability development initiatives needs to be considered both in terms of the overarching NATO Defence Planning Process (NDPP), on‐going partner interaction and shorter‐term initiatives like the MNATF. Priority Shortfall Areas (PSA) that are identified in the NDPP could provide the basis for partners’ assessment of how to best develop and align their capabilities with identified NATO shortfalls. PSA provide an excellent focus for working together to develop collaborative and efficient solutions. Throughout NATO’s other mechanisms for engagement and exchange of information with partners, the identification of opportunities for collaboration could also be identified and facilitated through a clearinghouse function, in which potential opportunities and potential collaborators are matched. The ongoing work of the MNATF will eventually be part of such a function.

II-f: Assistant Secretary General for Defence Policy and Planning, Ambassador H�seyin Diri�z

The Alliance must encourage partners to participate in projects that build on Smart Defence and multinational approaches. The Assistant Secretary General for Defence Policy and Planning is committed to encouraging new forms of cooperation and asserts that ‘Smart Defence’ must become a long lasting feature of how NATO thinks, acts, and develops capabilities. NATO must equate the advantages of multinational cooperation up front with a collective sense of ownership.

II-g: “Assured Access to the Global Commons” -- Deputy Chief of Staff Strategic Plans and Policy, Major General Mark Barrett

The evolving globalised economic and security systems of the modern world depend on unrestricted and secure access to the Commons. Disruptions to the global supply chain of goods, energy resources, and information will have serious, even catastrophic effects on the economies of nations and the security of our citizens. If there is a “key to the Commons,” then it lies in applying a holistic approach that draws on the knowledge and abilities of all stakeholders to help solve the problems of access, use, and security across the four domains.

Belgrade, Serbia

3

III: SYNDICATE SUMMARIES(Refer to Annexes for detailed analysis)

III-a: Assured Access to the Global Commons

The domains of high seas, airspace, outer space and cyber space are linked to the core tasks of collective defence, crisis management, and cooperative security. Partnership and collaboration can be the means to understand the challenges the Alliances faces to ensure that access to these Global Commons are secure for use by all. Cooperation amongst partners for addressing the challenges of assuring access is crucial, and the task ahead is to outline the ways and means necessary for the mutual security and prosperity of the Alliance and its partners.

III-b: Building Capability through Multinational and Innovative Approaches

The Alliance is focused on fielding the tools that bolster partnership with non‐NATO nations and actors. Capability development supports NATO’s ‘Smart Defence’ concept – a concept that emphasises the importance of multilateral collaboration to bolster international security in an efficient manner. Key issues within the dialogue of multinational capability development including partners are: information, mechanisms, incentives, interoperability, and time.

III-c: Future Development of Partnerships and Outreach

The Alliance is affected by political and security developments beyond its borders, which require deeper and wider partnerships to reach its goals. Key focus areas in any partnership discussion are the issues of cooperative security, implications of the new partnership policy, the involvement of partners in NATO-led operations and the future of NATO partnerships. NATO faces numerous challenges in the current expansion of its partnership policy, such as the limitation of resources, need to conciliate values and interests, and the requirement to engage partners on emerging security challenges.

IV: CONCLUSION

General Abrial thanked the participating Chiefs of Defence (CHOD) and CHOD representatives for their hard work. He then charged the remaining participants to capitalise on the opportunity to delve deeper into the world of partnerships, building capability through innovative approaches, and assuring access to the Global Commons. He encouraged the follow-on syndicate participants to carry forward the torch lit in Lisbon of the spirit of flexibility, mutual respect and mutual benefits; detailing how such concepts fuelled the new ground of not only the intensity of NATO’s interest in its partnerships, but of the spirit that animates those partnerships.

Overall Recommendations/Action Items:

• Engage the UN and other relevant international organisations involved in establishing basic rules for assuring access to the Global Commons.• Facilitate a Comprehensive Approach to address the Global Commons issues by the involvement of academia, think tanks, and military and civilian organisations.• Encourage feedback from partners to understand the political context in which capability development decisions are made.• Address the challenges associated with increased multinational approaches to capability development and corresponding perceptions of diminished sovereignty.• Generate an architecture to address the engagement with partners in emerging security challenges and develop a road map to develop these mechanisms.

Strategic Military Partner Conference 2011

4

“The need for a comprehensive approach to crisis management is a necessary response to the globalisation of threats – and the contribution of many players is required, from international organisations to NGOs or private sector parties. But at the heart of it all are the bonds between NATO Allies and the nations that share their sense of international responsibility.”

General Stéphane AbrialSupreme Allied Commander Transformation

Belgrade, Serbia

5

ANNEXES

ANNEX A – Assured Access to the Global CommonsSession Presenter: Major General Mark Barrett

Key IssuesThe domains of the Global Commons - international waters, airspace, outer space, and cyber space - are closely interlinked, vital for our daily lives and critical to the prosperity and security of the international community.

The loss of free access to any single facet of the global commons would affect NATO’s ability to fulfil its essential core tasks of collective defence, crisis management, and cooperative security. The syndicate discussed the following key issues:

• Future cooperation between NATO and its partners and the challenges nations will face with regard to assured access to the Commons.• Working with partners to advocate best practices based on adherence to international norms, standards, and codes of conduct.• Applying a comprehensive approach with partners over the four domains to assure access to the Global Commons.• Developing a comprehensive civil-military approach as well as versatile and flexible responses to ensure the Alliance has the policy, direction, and capability required to secure its vital interests in respect to accessing the Global Commons.

DiscussionNations require responsible and comprehensive strategies, policies, and capabilities to respond to, and defend against, emerging threats in the Global Commons. While the Alliance aims to assure freedom of access to the Global Commons, it cannot do so single-handedly. It must work together with partners in more engaged, effective, and efficient ways. Keeping the Global Commons accessible for all responsible actors to use and benefit from is something that requires cooperation and burden sharing.

While NATO remains a regional alliance and may not be the most appropriate entity to lead the effort to assure access to the Global Commons, it will always have a leadership role to promote understanding. NATO and its partners can be key enablers to advocate for the development of best practices based on adherence to

international norms, standards, and codes of conduct. The United Nations was recognised by the syndicate as the organisation best suited to lead the development of rules and guidelines in the Global Commons with the support of the Alliance.

Building resilience against threats to access and use of the four domains will require the improvement of capabilities and tools. The military cannot provide the only response to these challenges – a comprehensive civil-military approach is required as civilian actors and the commercial sector play an important role in the Global Commons. Common interests and the tenets of a Comprehensive Approach also suggest a need for strong cooperation between nations and organisations. This includes the United Nations, the Arab League, the European Union, Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, and the African Union.

Globalisation and improvements in technology have further inter-linked the four Commons domains by squeezing time and space. The space and cyber domains represent the greatest challenges; they affect virtually all aspects of daily life. These two domains raise questions of privacy, regulation, and attribution. Advancements in technology may provide operational advantages, however, forces still need to train for traditional denial of access scenarios.

There are strong appetites and expectations from the partners to be more involved in discussions on a regular basis. There are also expectations in training, education, and in the exchange of information concerning capabilities. Consultation and information-sharing mechanisms between NATO and its partners must be strengthened.

Recommendations/Action Items• Engage the UN and other relevant international organisations involved in establishing basic rules and guidelines for defining and promoting mechanisms that secure access to the Global Commons for all.• Facilitate a Comprehensive Approach to address the Global Commons issues by the involvement of academia, think tanks and all military and civilian organisations.• Improve resilience in all domains as part of deterrence to any attempt by adversaries to deny access to the Global Commons.• Recognise the strong involvement of the civilian

Strategic Military Partner Conference 2011

6

corporations and industry concerning the space and cyber domains.• Require a joint interoperability and adaptability for addressing security challenges in the Global Commons.• Promote best practices, good behavior and the development of a legal framework for the cyber domain.

ANNEX B – Building Capability through Multinational and Innovative ApproachesSession Presenter: Major General Kjell-Ove Skare

Key IssuesThe syndicate focused on building context around NATO’s Multinational and Innovative Approaches Task Force (MNATF) and existing mechanisms for partnership interaction. A short discussion on the NATO Defence Planning Process (NDPP), which is the overarching process for Alliance capability development, and its linkages with partnership mechanisms were used to help set the context.

There is a renewed emphasis in the Alliance and a call for more collaborative approaches to defence planning to support capability development efforts. This collaboration is needed to better navigate the challenges of complex threats in an era of financial austerity. Multinational approaches are intended to foster innovation and allow nations to satisfy critical requirements that they could not meet acting alone or secure greater effectiveness and savings for nations that would otherwise act on their own.

DiscussionThe syndicate discussion focused on multinational approaches in general terms and included an EU perspective. Multinational approaches in capability development were stated more than ever as a necessity for all nations to pool resources and share benefits and risks. Fundamentally, it was commonly agreed that international organisations like NATO and EU should be non‐competing facilitators, based on their specific expertise and added value, to help identify opportunities for nations to collaborate in capability development efforts. The need for a strong linkage between smart capability development and partnerships emerged as a theme.

Partners expressed their interest in the MNATF

objectives and they asked for information campaigns on existing and new multinational approaches, in different contexts, on short and long term goals to make it easier for them to find synergies and avoid competition or duplicative efforts in bilateral, multilateral, regional, NATO or EU initiatives. Such an approach like MNATF should facilitate coherency between “islands” of cooperation that often exist regionally (Balkan Air Defence, Baltic Defence College, Baltic Battalion, Nordic cooperation …) and provide a menu of opportunities. The idea that this could be a concerted NATO‐EU effort was raised. Information to be continuously collected and shared should not only describe projects, but also their political, industrial, military dimensions, lessons learned, and mechanisms for conducting such proposals outside and inside NATO.

In particular, it appeared necessary to clarify and better describe how the MNATF, the NATO Defence Planning Process, and partnership mechanisms such as the Planning and Review Process (PARP), Partnership for Peace Planning and Review Process Individual Partnership Action Plans (IPAP), and Membership Action Plan (MAP) are linked. The new NATO partnership policy was seen as an opportunity to review some of those mechanisms to ensure timeliness and coherency, taking into account different scales of cooperation. The NATO role as clearinghouse and facilitator on a wide DOTMLPFI capability development spectrum was clearly accepted.

That facilitator role should highlight and articulate incentives for nations to engage or join a particular project in order to demonstrate complementary and added value in multinational solutions compared to national ones. Incentives are often economical, cost‐savings in a life cycle perspective being one of major expectations. Multinational approaches may be a way to increase national competencies and skills, to share risks, facilitate access to technology and facilitate complementary solutions to national, regional and NATO requirements. Incentives should also point out political and operational benefits, such as interoperability.

Interoperability is essential to nations, not only on a technical perspective, but also in procedures, standards and human aspects (including language issues). In that perspective, importance of multinational training and exercises was underlined. Interoperability runs as a ‘red line’ through all capability development and the

Belgrade, Serbia

7

DOTMLPFI focus of the MNATF and its proposals was assumed to be the relevant way to consider that dimension.

Incentives must be assessed in balance with constraints in order to determine the potential value of a multinational proposal, which is generally more complex than a national one. This leads to the necessity to be pragmatic and to distinguish short‐term proposals, with low risks and costs and mainly focused on the human dimension, from longer‐term proposals, more complex and costly, with “hard” deliverables. In this regard, the MNATF approach, which is initially focused on the easier to implement proposals, was understood by syndicate participants as a means to build momentum that will create favourable conditions for longer‐term proposals.

Recommendations/Action Items• To optimise amongst NATO and its partners, the gathering and sharing of information on existing and envisaged multinational, regional, and NATO capability development proposals.• To clarify and better describe linkages between the NATO Defence Planning Process, partnership mechanisms in the new NATO partnership policy, and a clearing‐house function such as the MNATF.• To further develop the clearing‐house function over the long‐term, with a necessary linkage to NATO’s partnership goals.

Annex C – Future Development of Partnerships and OutreachSession Presenter: Major General Carlos Branco

Key IssuesThe Alliance is affected by political and security developments beyond its borders. This requires deeper and wider partnerships to reach Alliance goals. The new Strategic Concept outlines Collective Defence, Crisis Management and Cooperative Security as the core tasks of the Alliance. The syndicate sought to explore the following key issues:

• Cooperative security to enhance international security through partnerships• A new policy to enhance partnerships through flexible formats• Partner involvement in NATO-led operation and the design future of partnerships at NATO’s doorstep

DiscussionPartners are key contributors to Euro-Atlantic security. Partners in the syndicate suggested that Emerging Security Challenges (ESC) provide new areas where NATO can engage with partners. Specifically, Cyber Defence and Energy Security are issues that require niche expertise that may be well suited for smaller nations. NATO will need to determine the most appropriate architecture to address ESC and propose capabilities that are required to best fit into this architecture. The clearer this is made to the partners, the easier it will be for partners to engage. This can also apply to crisis prevention and early warning. NATO should consider including partners at some level in the NATO Defence Planning Process (NDPP).

Several partners have expressed concern about the new partnership policy and the 28+n format, also known as 28+s (stakeholders), and how it would change their individual relationship with NATO. The syndicate chairman was able to assure them that the 28+n format will be used on a case-by-case basis to enhance consultation on security issues of common concern. Consultation would not detract from the specificity of existing frameworks. The purpose is not to overshadow the other frameworks, but to complement the formats used in the past.

At the 2010 Lisbon Summit, NATO Heads of States and Government placed great value on the contributions made by partner countries to NATO-led operations. NATO should not view partners as two-speed (distinction between operational and non-operational partners), but consider partners in the context of a wide spectrum that is multi-speed, depending on the level of ambition expressed by each individual partner. This flexibility allows more partners to engage at different levels. For the sake of clarity and transparency, the terms operational and non-operational partners need to be stated and defined. NATO should also determine the degree to which geography will be a criterion for partnership in a globalised security environment.

With the advent of its new partnership policy and current operations in Libya, NATO is perceived by some partners as aspiring toward global expansion. While expanding its partnership scope, NATO remains a regional alliance with global security interests. The Alliance should cultivate new partnerships as well as

Strategic Military Partner Conference 2011

8

rejuvenate current relationships to tackle emerging challenges. At the same time, the Alliance needs to manage the expanding partnerships to reduce the risk of overstretching resources and diminishing current important relationships. NATO’s doorstep cooperation, i.e., Middle East and North Africa [MENA] countries as well as the Black Sea region is agreed to be significant. In particular, the Arab Spring may provide an opportunity to explore and deepen the relationship with MENA countries. NATO needs to be patient, however, as further cooperation may not be possible until the region starts to stabilise and new governments form.

Limited financial resources require that NATO to be selective with the allocation of scarce resources. Efficiency and quality should be the guiding principles for the management of partnerships. The syndicate chairman emphasised that the wider availability of activities for partners through the single partnership cooperation menu can fit the needs and ambition of partners. Fiscal restrictions will require that NATO consider and build on joint ventures found in the Nordic cooperation, Visegrád Group, and the Franco-UK Defence Agreement.

Historically, NATO has been Europe specific. Its aspiration to expand partnerships will now require dealing with different cultures and religions. People in the developing world often have different priorities from those in the West, and this can lead to differences of opinion. NATO has to be careful not to be seen as the global guarantor, imposing its Western ideals on others. To build partnerships, there must be trust and mutual respect. This can be achieved through cooperation and increased intelligence sharing.

Recommendations/Action Items• Create partnerships which are flexible and adaptable, tailored to each partner’s level of ambition and built on trust and mutual benefit.• Generate an architecture to address engagement with partners in emerging security challenges and develop a road map to develop these mechanisms.• Manage the expanding partnerships to reduce the risk of over-stretching resources and diminishing current important relationships.• Build on the current partnership tools available as well as leverage those new mechanisms developed in the Berlin Policy.

• Determine the degree to which geography will be a partnership criterion in the globalised security environment.• Develop and enhance relationships with International Organisations.

Belgrade, Serbia

9

Strategic Military Partner Conference 2011Belgrade, Serbia - Београд Србија