Command in NATO After the Cold War


Book Description

The publication of this compendium could not be more timely as a contribution to the debate which continues in NATO capitals. NATO is an alliance based on consensus. It is also the most effective military alliance in history; this is largely due to the existence of its integrated and multinational command structure. That command structure, the cement of the Alliance as it were, derives from the mutual obligations contained in Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty. This contractual obligation, which does not exist for the other missions which have arisen since 1990, means that the defence of NATO territory must be the basis of any restructuring. If we were to move away from this and thus weaken the command structure, even with the best intentions, then it is my firm conviction that we would do serious harm to the Alliance and its future. On the other hand, a modified command structure, still based on the Article V contractual obligation, provides a firm basis, as well as flexibility, versatility, and availability for any non- contractual, namely out-of-area, requirement. Command structures do not exist of their own accord. They come into being, change, and develop, to permit commanders at the appropriate level, from top to bottom, to orchestrate the application of military force at sea, in the air, and on land. There is, however, a limit to which one can impose responsibilities on commanders, who after all are personally responsible for the conduct of operations, and a limit to the amount of specialisation and detail with which they can cope. This is why we have hierarchical command structures with each commander dealing with the appropriate level of competence. It is why at certain levels command should be joint and at others purely functional. How many levels of command are needed will be dictated by the operations factors of time, forces, and space.




Reforming NATO's Military Structures


Book Description

The contemporary debate over the expansion of NATO to include Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary has largely overshadowed an important effort on the part of the Alliance to achieve .internal adaptation. through the work of the Long-Term Study. Part of this process has been a tortuous attempt to reform and reorganize the Alliance's integrated command structure. Often taken for granted, this structure provides the basis for NATO.s collective defense, and increasingly, as seen in Bosnia, its ability to undertake peace support operations. However, the very value by which nations hold the structure has resulted in a difficult and time-consuming reorganization process which has produced only limited reforms. It is indeed surprising that the reorganization of the bedrock of the Alliance's military structure has garnered only limited attention outside of NATO cognoscenti. This can be explained, in part, by the fact that until recently the Long-Term Study has been cloaked in secrecy. Most key aspects of the reform process are now out in the public and require debate: a task in which the Strategic Studies Institute is keen to assist. And, let there be no mistake that the proposed reforms outlined by Long-Term Study have major implications for land forces in the Alliance. As argued in this essay, there are a number of proposed reforms which could have fundamental negative implications for command of these forces.







Command in NATO after the Cold War: Alliance, National, and Multinational Considerations


Book Description

That the end of the Cold War has resulted in a massive sea change in Europe's security environment is a fact. Notwithstanding the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) appears to be as politically active and institutionally viable, if not more so, than it was before autumn 1989. Since 1990, the NATO Alliance has undertaken major reform initiatives that prepared it for the emerging European security landscape. For instance, at the London Summit of July 1990, the Alliance declared an end of the Cold War. At the Rome Summit (November 1991), NATO released the "Alliance's New Strategic Concept" to be implemented by the Alliance. More recently, at the January 1994 Brussels Summit, the heads of government and state announced, inter alia, the creation of the Partnership for Peace program and approved the concept for the subsequent creation of Alliance Combined Joint Task Forces (CJTFs). Hence, contrary to the views of some critics, the Alliance has clearly demonstrated its intent to reform itself to meet the challenges of the new European security system.




Allied command structures in the new NATO


Book Description

After extremely promising efforts to strengthen NATO's military structure, progress has been slowed by demands to convert the AFSOUTH command at Naples from a U.S.-led to a European-led position. AFSOUTH consists of Spain, Italy, Greece, Turkey, the Black Sea, and the Mediterranean Sea. The role of NATO's regional commanders has been enhanced significantly since the end of the Cold War. As NATO broadens it focus, adding crisis management operations to its core mission of collective defense, it is the theater commander who has been called upon to deal with conflict at the regional level. The United States has but one major subordinate commander in Europe, at AFSOUTH. Therefore, the proposal to make AFSOUTH a European-led command would weaken the Alliance by weakening the U.S. leadership role in regional affairs at a time when that command is becoming increasingly important. The AFSOUTH issue has become difficult to manage for at least three reasons. As a result, a high-level effort may be required to break the deadlock. Setting aside the AFSOUTH issue, there has been significant progress in the area of NATO adaptation - that is, in strengthening of ESDI in NATO. However, U.S. military strength remains crucial. The military assets and capabilities that the United States makes available to AFSOUTH warrant a U.S.-led command. U.S. leadership will be essential at least until there is evidence that European leadership would be backed by European capabilities and resources commensurate with the importance of the region. Given the recent and projected trends in European defense investments, it cannot be foreseen when adequate capabilities and commitment of resources would become a reality. A review of recent history in the Balkans, the Aegean area, the Persian Gulf, and the Middle East indicates the indispensable nature of both U.S. diplomacy and U.S. military engagement in the key regions surrounding the AFSOUTH area of operation.




NATO Command Structure Considerations for the Future


Book Description

This paper explores potential future reforms of the NATO command structure. The intent is to stimulate thought on the current structure's fit to oversee the forces and operations of a growing array of NATO missions. From capacity building with partners to peace operations, humanitarian assistance, and combat operations, Alliance forces are continuously engaged in multiple theaters. These challenges demand a command structure with organizational flexibility, an agile and competent international staff, highly integrated information systems, and deployable elements to accompany mobile forces for sustained periods of time. The command structure and the interoperable communications and information systems that support it are the sinews that tie together the national and multinational forces of NATO and its partners. They also serve to link those forces to the political direction and decisions of the North Atlantic Council (NAC).




Future NATO


Book Description

Future NATO looks at the challenges facing NATO in the 21st century and examines how the Alliance can adapt to ensure its continued success For more than 70 years, the North Atlantic Alliance has helped to preserve peace and stability in the Euro-Atlantic area. It has been able to adjust to varying political and strategic challenges. We must ensure that NATO continues to be effective in the future. This requires looking ahead, challenging habitual approaches, exchanging ideas, and advancing new thinking. I highly recommend Future NATO to policymakers, military professionals and scholars alike, as it offers necessary critical and constructive analysis of current and future challenges posed to our security and defence.Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, Minister of Defence, Germany Since 1949, NATO has successfully upheld common principles and adapted to new realities. As Future NATO examines, the Alliance is facing a new set of external and internal challenges in the decades to come. The Alliance and its partners need to remain committed to future changes. I recommend this excellent study to all, but especially to the younger generation of scholars and future policymakers. Trine Bramsen, Minister of Defence, Denmark Over the last 70 years, Europe has lived in peace and prosperity because of NATO, with unity as our most important weapon. We may have our differences, but we will continue to work on our common cause to promote peace, security and stability. To effectively do so, NATO needs to continuously adapt to changing security situations. An important current challenge is to ensure European Allies take more responsibility for their security. But we also need to look at future challenges and find innovative solutions for them. Future NATO offers a useful analysis that can help us prepare for what is to come for the Alliance. Ank Bijleveld, Minister of Defence, The Netherlands




NATO Command Structure


Book Description

This paper explores potential future reforms of the NATO command structure. The intent is to stimulate thought on the current structure's fit to oversee the forces and operations of a growing array of NATO missions. From capacity building with partners to peace operations, humanitarian assistance, and combat operations, Alliance forces are continuously engaged in multiple theaters. These challenges demand a command structure with organizational flexibility, an agile and competent international staff, highly integrated information systems, and deployable elements to accompany mobile forces for sustained periods of time. The context of the next reform of the command structure is a combination of its history, including earlier reforms, and its current and anticipated future operations. This paper discusses how to think about command structure reform in all its facets. It is a mission-based analysis that assesses the roles of component and joint commands, of ACO and ACT. It offers illustrative options for the future and indicates which of these might better meet NATO's future requirement in terms of being minimally viable and capable of carrying out core missions.