NATO with Its Homework Done

In a world in which presidents and prime ministers, particularly around Europe, meet as much as three times a week, only to come to no conclusions and to only solve the issue of a press photo, it’s a nice surprise to witness international events that respect the old and true rule: First you do your homework, very well, and only then do you go out into the world with ideas and statements. That is, if the race to get “political publicity” hasn’t brain-washed you entirely, and if you respect both yourself as a statesman and the role that you were invested in!

The Chicago NATO summit has been the exception! Three texts, well-organized, substantial and elegant, have been produced: the common declaration issued by NATO and Afghanistan concerning the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), the event’s official declaration, and the “Summit Declaration on Defense Capabilities: Toward NATO Forces 2020.”

What do they say about international policy, about security and defense, about future NATO development, and especially about how the events that impact Romania and concern us directly will be organized?

The future of the ISAF, the direct expression of NATO’s involvement in its role against terrorism in Afghanistan, ends in 2014. The chapters of the document, which was signed by NATO leaders and representatives of the government in Kabul, clearly show that with the withdrawal of NATO combat forces, Afghanistan remains an area of conflict. The hope is that it can and will be won by the governmental authorities, still massively supported by the international community, not just by NATO member states. Nobody can say for certain, at the moment, whether this solution is just the start of a future similar to the Vietnam War, with the American withdrawal, or whether it will be different.

What the document unequivocally reveals is the fact that political and military responsibility for the evolution of events in Afghanistan was entirely on the shoulders of Hamid Karzai. The future of Afghanistan has not been the sole problem of NATO for some time now, and post-ISAF solutions must unite the positive effects of the different international initiatives with the capabilities of authorities to keep Afghanistan on the side of anti-terrorism forces. Success is far from guaranteed, and the virulent Taliban attacks on the current regime in Kabul, especially on the authorities attempting to organize the local system of government, are rising. Nevertheless, the Chicago document is a “monument of realism.” It is a step in the right direction, away from the triumphant or merely “mobilizing” slogans that have until recently occupied the space of official NATO statements concerning Afghanistan.

The reunion’s final document has no less than 65 paragraphs, and is, with the exception of the “strategic concept,” the most complete text to illustrate the state of the alliance and the directions it will be heading towards. Here, there are reevaluations and significant political repositioning, even if we only looked at the fact that there’s been a return to origin, with the main focus not on the war against terrorism, but on common defense, common crisis management and on ensuring security! Of particular interest for Romania are a few very consistent paragraphs: those concerning the future of NATO expansion in the former Yugoslav territory, the reaching out to Serbia, and the restatement of commitment towards the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Bosnia, and Herzegovina. A second significant focus is on the Caucasus region, where there is the restatement of commitment toward Georgia and its territorial integrity. In short, the document asks Russia to go back on the unilateral recognition of independence for South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

Overall, however – and this might be a significant step in a direction that could open up very interesting “futures” – the relationship with Russia is placed as a strategic partnership that is useful and necessary for both NATO and Russian security. The idea for the security partnership with Russia has gained, in this way, a more solid political formula and a more engaging one on NATO’s side. Obviously, it takes two to tango!

Finally, let us signal the direct and substantial references to the Republic of Moldova and to the commitments taken at the NATO summit in Bucharest, to which the document explicitly refers. NATO is completely rejecting the solutions of the Transnistrian crisis. This might affect the territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova as it is internationally recognized (including by Russia). Furthermore, the “five-plus-one” [the five permanent member countries of the UN Security Council plus Germany] negotiation mechanism is brought once again to focus, as it further benefits Romania’s positive involvement in the management of this agenda critical to our security.

The 13 paragraphs of the declaration concerning common defense capabilities and the creation of the NATO 2020 force are truly examples of elegance. Clear, precise and engaging language, exactly what is needed from a document that has been, and will be, the source of very concrete decisions concerning the training of NATO forces, their equipment, and in particular the division of responsibilities between the alliance’s integrated structures and national forces. The concept that makes this sort of approach possible, and at the same time precise and elastic, is that of “intelligent defense.”

Whether the political deciders will rise up to the concept or not remains, however, to be seen! The experts that have prepared and negotiated the NATO documents have at least done their homework! The reality of the willingness and the power of politicians to make them work, on the hot grounds of international confrontation, remains unconfirmed.