Military

Partnership for Peace

CSC 1997

Subject Area - General

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Title:  Partnership for Peace

 

Author:  Major Patrick Kanewske, United States Marine Corps

 

Thesis:  As a NATO program, the Partnership for Peace (PfP) will continue to be a major contributor to the improved economic and security climate in Europe.

 

Discussion:  With the increased emphasis on multi-national operations for the United States military and its allies into the 21st Century, NATO is starting its fourth year of comprehensive operational and communications exercises with the PfP nations.  The number of PfP nations grows as NATO takes a more comprehensive look at the former Warsaw Pact nations and other non-aligned countries and their impact upon Eastern Europe and stability within NATO.  With PfP at the beginning of its development, its full potential not yet achieved, and its continuing importance not affected by the overall goal of NATO enlargement, the PfP program will continue to be an effective force in Eastern European stabilization through interaction and cooperation with member states.  Additionally, as the United States continues to participate in PfP exercises and operations, command, control, communications, and computers (C4) interoperability with PfP nations will become incrementally less difficult. 

 

Conclusion:  The Partnership for Peace has come a long way in a short time and has already provided concrete evidence of its potential.  PfP is not just about military cooperation, nor is it simply a framework for preparing Partner countries for further membership in NATO.  Its ambitious objectives offer a broader and deeper relationship with all Partners and NATO. What began as a series of exploratory partnerships between NATO and non-NATO countries is now becoming an intricate web of Partnership activities.  These activities, while adding to the peace process in NATO, are increasingly responding to the individual needs of Partner countries and bringing real benefits to them and to the security and economic stability of Europe as a whole.  NATO countries are continuing to build and strengthen this framework by firmly establishing cooperative security approaches and C4 interoperability systems between the Alliance and its Partner countries.  These approaches will become a permanent feature of the security structure which will take Europe beyond the start of the next century and provide the stability needed for its future development.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

INTRODUCTION     1

     AREA OF RESEARCH     1

     DISCUSSION     2

 

PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE (PFP)     4

     MISSION OF PFP     4

     SCOPE OF PFP     5

     PFP’S BIRTH IN NATO     7

     NACC: BUILDING BLOCK TO PFP     10

     PFP MEMBERSHIP PROCEDURES     12

     PFP RELATIONS WITH THE UNITED STATES     14

     PFP GROWTH THROUGH MULTI-NATIONAL EXERCISES     18

          PfP Exercises in 1994     19

          PfP Exercises in 1995     20

          PfP Exercises in 1996/1997     22

     PFP EXERCISES IN THE FUTURE     23

 

PFP CONTRIBUTIONS TO PEACE IN EUROPE     25

     MEASURES OF EFFECTIVENESS (MOEs)     25

     C4 INTEROPERABILITY WITH OTHER NATIONS     26

     EUROPEAN PEACE IN THE FUTURE     28

     CONCLUSION      31

BIBLIOGRAPHY     33

         

 

 

PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE

INTRODUCTION

 

AREA OF RESEARCH

     This paper examines a new organization involved in current North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) operations, the Partnership for Peace (PfP) program.  This paper will explore: the mission and scope of the PfP; the relation of PfP to NATO, the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC), and the United States; where the PfP has been in the recent past and where it may go in the future; and PfP contributions to realizing a lasting peace in NATO.

     A history of the PfP from January 1994 to the present is given.  Future NATO exercises and operations are explored to determine an appropriate PfP role.  The United States’ role in these multi-national exercises and operations in the past and in the future is explored to determine interoperability capabilities with the PfP nations.  Finally, an analysis of the effectiveness of the PfP in NATO economic and military affairs will determine if it is a benefit to NATO.

     The European Union (EU) and, its security apparatus, the Western European Union (WEU) are other organizations attempting to solve the security problem in Europe.  A study of the EU and WEU and their role in PfP and NATO affairs is beyond the scope of this paper and, therefore, will not be discussed. 

DISCUSSION

     With the increased emphasis on multi-national operations for the United States military and its allies into the 21st Century, NATO is starting its fourth year of comprehensive operational and communications exercises with the PfP nations.  The number of PfP nations grows as NATO takes a more comprehensive look at the former Warsaw Pact nations and other non-aligned countries and their impact upon Eastern Europe and stability within NATO. 

     The PfP has become a key element in NATO’s political and military cooperation programs with non-NATO Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) countries.  The OSCE, whose membership comprises all European as well as North American countries and is the most inclusive European security institution, deepens interaction, cooperation, and stability in Europe and contributes to the overall goal of

 

transparency among European countries.^[1]

     With PfP at the beginning of its development, its full potential not yet achieved, and its continuing importance not affected by the overall goal of NATO enlargement, the PfP program will continue to be a major contributor to the improved economic and security climate in Europe and an effective force in Eastern European stabilization. Additionally, as the United States continues to participate in PfP exercises and operations, command, control, communications, and computers (C4) interoperability with PfP nations will become incrementally less difficult. 

PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE (PFP)

 

MISSION OF PFP

     Partnership for Peace is a major initiative by NATO directed at increasing confidence and cooperative efforts to reinforce security in Europe.  It engages NATO and participating partners in concrete cooperative activities.       Objectives of the Partnership include: facilitation of transparency in national defense planning and budgeting processes; ensuring democratic control of defense forces; maintenance of the capability and readiness to contribute, subject to constitutional considerations, to operations under the authority of the UN and/or the responsibility of the OSCE; the development of cooperative military relations with NATO, for the purpose of joint planning, training, and exercises in order to strengthen the ability of PfP participants to undertake missions in the fields of peacekeeping, search and rescue, humanitarian operations, and others as may subsequently be agreed; and the development, over the long term, of forces that are better able to operate with those of the members of the NATO Alliance.^[2]

        PfP cooperation will be further developed in order to:

     •     help partners to further develop democratic control of their armed forces and transparency in defense planning and the budgeting process;

 

     •     enhance the network of military and defense-related cooperation to provide effective support to partners in adapting their defense arrangements to the new security environment;

 

     •     develop the cooperative features of PfP through enhancing partners’ involvement in developing, planning, and implementing PfP activities, in particular by increasing their capability/readiness to contribute with others in peacekeeping, humanitarian, search and rescue, and other activities;

 

     •     strengthen the confidence-building and transparent character of defense-related and military cooperation, both with Allies and other partners; and

 

     •     compliment the development of interoperable forces by adequate mechanisms to duly involve partners in planning and carrying out joint peacekeeping operations.^[3]

SCOPE OF PFP

     Nations that apply for PfP membership can individually determine the pace and scope of desired cooperation.  They can assign permanent liaison officers to NATO Headquarters in Brussels, Belgium and to the Partnership Coordination Cell (PCC) in Mons, Belgium.  They may participate in PfP exercises and in relevant discussions with allies at NATO.  A Political Military Steering Committee has been established to manage day-to-day activities. 

     Each nation must inform NATO of the resources it will contribute to PfP activities and the steps it will take toward meeting PfP’s political goals, including democratic control of the respective nation’s military and transparency of defense budgets.  The NATO members can consult with any state actively participating in PfP in the event of a direct threat to the security of that state.  These consultations would not involve extension of nations to NATO’s security guarantee under Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty. 

     To date, 27 countries have joined the PfP program:  Albania, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Poland, Romania, Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, the former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.  Of the countries of the former Soviet Union, only Tadjikistan has not joined the Partnership.^[4]  These include not just countries of the former Warsaw Treaty Organization, but also several neutral and non-aligned states.

 

PFP’S BIRTH IN NATO

      In 1994, the NATO Summit in Brussels launched the Partnership for Peace.  NATO is an alliance designed to permit international cooperation between independent sovereign states on a voluntary basis.  There is no central NATO authority which can impose its view or opinion on the member nations.  Decisions are taken with the common consent of all member nations.^[5]  The North Atlantic Treaty was signed in Washington, DC, by the original 12 nations in 1949.  Spain became the last nation to sign the treaty in 1982, rounding out the current 16 member nations of NATO.  With political reform in Central and Eastern Europe on the rise, and the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the NATO Summit in London extended a hand of friendship and proposed cooperation to this region in 1990.  In the same year, Germany was unified.  As the Warsaw Treaty Organizations dissolved in 1991, the NATO Summit in Rome adopted a new Strategic Concept and created the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC).^[6]

     With the end of the Cold War, a unique opportunity has developed to build an improved security architecture in the Euro-Atlantic area.  The aim of the improved security architecture is to provide increased stability and security for all in this area, without recreating dividing lines.  NATO states view security as a broad concept embracing political and economic, as well as defense, components.  The Alliance has played and will play a strong, active ,and essential role as one of the cornerstones of stability and security in Europe.  NATO’s fundamental purpose is to preserve peace in the Euro-Atlantic area and to provide security for its members.

     Enlargement in the form of PfP membership in the NATO Alliance will contribute to enhanced stability and security for all countries in the Euro-Atlantic area by:

     •     encouraging and supporting democratic reforms, including civilian and democratic control over the military;

 

     •     fostering in the new members of the Alliance the patterns and habits of cooperation, consultation, and consensus building which characterize relations among current Allies;

 

     •     promoting good neighborly relations, which would benefit all countries in the Euro-Atlantic area, both members and non-members of NATO;

 

     •     emphasizing common defense and extending its benefits and increasing transparency in defense planning and military budgets, thereby reducing the likelihood of instability that might be engendered by an exclusively national approach to defense policies;

 

     •     reinforcing the tendency toward integration and cooperation in Europe based on shared democratic values and thereby curbing the countervailing tendency towards disintegration along ethnic and territorial lines;

 

     •     strengthening the Alliance’s ability to contribute to European and international security through peacekeeping activities under the responsibility of the OSCE and peacekeeping operations under the authority of the UN Security Council as well as other new missions; and

 

     •     strengthening and broadening the Trans-Atlantic partnership.^[7]

     Confronting concerns about its political relevance in the post-Cold War era, NATO has reaffirmed its place at the core of transatlantic security through its sponsorship of PfP and the NACC.  The NATO international staff works to help Partners develop standard operating procedures, understand the protocols of consultation, and achieve interoperability with NATO forces.

      The true measure of NATO’s commitment to PfP, however, may lie in the ordinary routines of association. NATO has extended to the Partners the right to consultations if a direct threat to territorial integrity or political independence emerges.  In the first months of PfP’s existence in 1994, NATO organized three exercises for Partner nations in Poland, the Netherlands, and the North Sea.  In 1995, NATO sponsored ten PfP exercises, and 150 exercise-related activities.  NATO sponsored 14 exercises in 1996 and has planned for 25 exercises 1997.  It is this type of commitment that is the hallmark of an effective military relationship.^[8]

        As a result of NATO involvement in the PfP planning and review process, many Partners are organizing their armed forces around NATO force planning concepts.  Smaller Partners are learning NATO practices, and in the process proving that they can significantly contribute to European security.  Albania recently hosted a three-day multi-national search and rescue exercise with formations from Italy, Germany, Britain, and the United States.  Bulgaria organized for NATO a maritime exercise to practice embargo techniques.^[9]

NACC: BUILDING BLOCK TO PFP

     Partnership for Peace has been established within the framework of the NACC and builds on the momentum of cooperation created by the NACC.  PfP activities are fully coordinated with other activities undertaken in the NACC framework.  While PfP focuses in particular on practical, defense-related and military cooperation activities, the NACC provides a forum for broad consultations on political and security related issues as well as for practical cooperation on security-related economic questions, information, and scientific and environmental matters.^[10]

     The NACC met for the first time on 20 December 1991, and the Council now meets at the Ministerial level twice a year.  Political consultation and cooperation in the NACC framework occurs on a regular basis and involves a wide range of NATO committees in meetings with NACC Partners.  Areas of consultation and cooperation embrace political and security-related issues including conceptual approaches to arms control; defense conversion; non-proliferation; security aspects of economic development; defense expenditures and their relationship with the economy; scientific and environmental matters; and information programs.  Military and defense-related activities are embodied in the Partnership for Peace.^[11] 

     At the January 1994 NATO Summit in Brussels, summit leaders approved a Framework Document and issued an invitation to the members of the NACC and the OSCE, able and willing to contribute, to join the Partnership.^[12]

        The PfP and NACC can help to ensure that, in accepting new members, the NATO Alliance will contribute to enhanced security and stability in an undivided Europe.  As the enlargement process proceeds, NACC/PfP will continue to provide the fundamental framework for developing relations with partner countries.^[13]

PFP MEMBERSHIP PROCEDURES

     The PfP procedure begins with the signature of the PfP Framework Document by each participant.  The next step is the submission by each Partner of a Presentation Document to NATO, developed with the assistance of NATO authorities if desired, indicating the scope, pace, and level of participation in cooperation activities with NATO sought by the Partner.  The Presentation Document also identifies steps to be taken by the Partner to achieve the political goals of the Partnership and the military and other assets that might be made available by the PfP activities.  It serves as a basis for an Individual Partnership Program, to be agreed upon between the Partner and NATO.^[14]

      Partners will make available personnel, assets, facilities, and capabilities necessary and appropriate for carrying out the agreed Partnership program.  They will fund their own participation in Partnership activities and will endeavor to share the burdens of exercises in which they take part.^[15]

 

     Partners which send permanent liaison officers to the Partnership Coordination Cell (PCC) receive help with the military planning necessary to implement their Partnership programs.  To accomplish this task, the PCC has assumed two functions:  providing liaison and coordination of PfP military activities between NATO and individual partner countries; and helping NATO military authorities and countries implement PfP programs.  These activities may include identification of interoperability requirements in the field of planning and preparation of multi-national exercises, development of specifications for multi-national training and exercises, and contribution of their analysis and evaluation.  Activities are designed to achieve a measure of interoperability for operations for partners with NATO forces and within NATO’s Command and Control (C2) structure.^[16] 

     The PCC consists of a permanent staff, liaison teams from the PfP and NATO states, and a representative from Supreme Allied Commander, Atlantic (SACLANT).  Officers assigned to the PCC are experienced in operations, training, and exercises, and some have background in peacekeeping.  To date, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Russian Federation, Switzerland, the former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia, and Turkmenistan do not participate in the PCC.^[17]  PFP RELATIONS WITH THE UNITED STATES

     In July 1994, President Clinton reaffirmed the United States commitment to Partnership for Peace and the security of Europe and Eurasia when he announced the Warsaw Initiative “to help America’s new democratic Partners work with United States to advance the PfP’s goals.”  The program has significantly increased United States’ funding and resources for PfP.  The Warsaw Initiative reflects the strong belief that the reform movements in Europe must be bolstered by the prospect of security cooperation with the West.  The purpose of the program is to provide to partner nations equipment and training to improve interoperability with NATO and Allies.  The program differentiates among nations based on their various levels of cooperation objectives, defense capability, and needs.  Some countries will receive basic English language and non-commissioned officer training, as well as tactical communications equipment.  The United States will provide others with advanced training and equipment to enhance their already-established expertise.^[18]

        The United States has contributed to, benefited from, and  adopted a balanced approach to the PfP exercise program.  Where appropriate, the United States is moving away from a bilateral to a predominantly multi-national exercise program.  Through multi-national exercises, the United States can provide greater exposure to NATO methods at less cost and with better results with the reduced exercise load.  Exercises with multiple countries reinforces regional ties, increases transparency among governments and militaries, and builds confidence regarding other country capabilities and intentions.^[19]

 

     Just as the United States balances its exercise commitments among Partners, it offers programs to all service branches of these countries.  In previous years, exercises involved primarily land forces.  United States military commands are now planning events for all military services.  PfP navies participate in navigation and salvage operations, and marines employ their skills in amphibious training activities.  In the Fall of 1996, U. S. Marines trained at the company level in Camp Lejeune, NC as part of the ground combat element of a coalition force that included 16 PfP nations.^[20]  U. S. Air Force units have conducted reciprocal base visits and have provided support in materiel management and maintenance techniques.  At the same time, United States planners try to incorporate training for multiple operations into one exercise.  For example, peacekeeping exercises can include a medical training component, or passage exercises may also involve demonstrations of search and rescue capabilities.^[21]

        A particularly unique U. S. National Guard contribution to the U. S. European Command (USEUCOM) Joint Contact Team

 Program, under the guise of the PfP program, is the State Partnership Program.  The United States National Guard Bureau has married United States states with partner countries based on a large population of a partner nationality in a state, or partners and states with similar geography or industry.  The State Partnership Program has been well received and is expanding.^[22]

 

PFP GROWTH THROUGH MULTI-NATIONAL EXERCISES

     The PfP exercise program began in 1994 with exercise COOPERATIVE BRIDGE ‘94, a company level peacekeeping exercise conducted in Poland.  The most recent exercise, COMBINED ENDEAVOR ‘96, dealt with operations at the battalion level conducted in Austria and Germany in September 1996.  To date,  more than two dozen multi-national military training exercises have fostered a common understanding of peacekeeping among NATO military forces and those of former Soviet Bloc or non-aligned states.^[23]  These exercises are also designed to improve the ability of NATO and the PfP forces to operate together in response to crisis situations.  Training focuses on peacekeeping operations and interoperability at the company and platoon levels.  Future exercises will deal with C4 interoperability at the battalion and regimental levels.   

     The PfP military objective is to achieve the varying degrees of interoperability, required by its bilateral arrangements, with its Partner nations.  Against a backdrop of an offer over the longer term of closer structural arrangements between Partner nations and NATO, the objective of the PfP exercise program is to prepare forces for peacekeeping, search and rescue, and humanitarian operations, and to undertake joint planning, training, and exercises with NATO.^[24]

     PfP Exercises in 1994

     The PfP exercise program started in 1994, with exercises conducted in Poland, Norway, and The Netherlands.^[25]  Successes were realized in the areas of familiarity and interoperability, but several problems emerged.  Some Partner Nations wanted to achieve full conventional integration with NATO, while countries such as Austria, Finland, and Sweden, and many of the former Warsaw Pact countries were only interested in low-level low-intensity operations.  There was confusion on the part of several Partner Nations from the former Warsaw Pact on the standards of participation that had to be achieved in order

 for the PfP to reach its goals.  NATO had dissimilar levels of experience in training for and conducting Low Intensity Conflict operations and found itself dealing with a role in which it had not previously had to perform.^[26]  The PfP exercise program had a shaky start in 1994, but the potential for what the PfP could become was always in focus.

     PfP Exercises in 1995