Military

SHAPE News Summary & Analysis

16 June 2003

GENERAL JONES

• In a series of articles, the Stars and Stripes brings together Gen. Jones’ vision of EUCOM. The newspaper explains that in his capacity as commander of the U.S. European Command, Gen. Jones envisions a three-prong campaign to transform the map of the U.S. military forces in Europe, shifting troops into Eastern Europe and Africa, while relocating some units to the United States. The plan, the article adds, calls for closing dozens of the nearly 500 military installations and consolidating forces on a few remaining bases in western Europe. The articles are based on interviews with Gen. Jones a well as with congressional and military leaders whom he has briefed. It is also based on public comments Gen. Jones has made and on interviews with his top deputies and aides. Under the title, “Mapping out the future of EUCOM,” the June 15 edition of the newspaper claimed that Gen. Jones wants to consolidate old bases in Europe to cut down on maintenance costs while opening forward outposts designed to tap into better training opportunities and to get closer to potential threats. Noting that Gen. Jones is not stopping with U.S. forces, the article added that as SACEUR, he says the Alliance itself must transform and evolve. “Gen. Jones said that by cutting forces and outmoded equipment, he believes the nations within the Alliance would be able to generate enough money to pay for new, much-needed gear and technology upgrades. In short, he said he wants for NATO what he wants for his U.S. forces in Europe—a more Marine Corps-like expeditionary’ force capable of picking up at a moment’s notice and moving into any worldwide hot spot. He points to the ‘instantly usable’ standing force in the Mediterranean as a good example of where he wants to take the Alliance,” the article continued.

SHAPE-RUSSIA

• Moscow’s Agentstvo Voyennykh Novostey, June 16, reports that in a statement following the ministerial session of the Russia-NATO Council in Brussels Friday, Russia suggested forming a military liaison office at SHAPE headquarters. The document says that the proposal is “a move toward the planned objective of implementing the program of exercises and training and other directions of cooperation defined in the Rome declaration.” The statement also expresses intentions to intensify Russia-NATO military cooperation and sign an agreement on the status of forces in the framework of the PFP program. The document speaks of the need for further cooperation in resisting terrorism, adds the report. Elsewhere, Agentstvo Voyennykh Novostey said Russia and NATO are to conduct over 20 joint exercises in 2004.

BELGIUM-UNIVERSAL COMPETENCE LAW

• Media continue to center on Defense Secretary Rumsfeld’s denunciation of Belgium’s universal competence law and his announcement that Washington was suspending its funding for a new NATO headquarters while the law is in effect. De Standaard, June 14, criticized the Belgian defense and foreign ministers’ handling of the issue. “Our ministers have fine arguments to prove that the genocide law has had its sharp edge removed. People do not believe that over in the United States,” said the newspaper, adding: “It is rather laughable to scream blue murder about the incomprehensibly strict U.S. position toward our country at this stage. We should have thought about that a little earlier. Quite simply, we have to work out whether we want to be the host country of international institutions like NATO. The answer to this question is clearly yes…. It cannot be stressed enough that this country has too much to lose if it chooses its diplomatic course with its eyes closed. No matter how you look at it, a measure of realism will always be necessary. It is better to understand that in good time. That will prevent conflicts about secondary questions and humiliating losses of face.” The New York Times, June 14, wrote that the Belgian government reacted angrily Friday to mounting American pressure to rescind the controversial war crimes legislation, arguing that the country had already addressed Washington’s concerns. The newspaper quoted a senior NATO official saying, however, that there was broad support for the American position and that member countries were considering joint action to persuade the Belgian government to act on the American demands.

ESDP

• Le Figaro relates a recent incident near Tetovo, which reportedly required the deployment of EU forces serving in the framework of Operation Concordia as well as the intervention of local police to reestablish order. Recalling that on April 1, the EU took over peacekeeping operations in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the newspaper reports that in “a crisis zone” divided into three sectors, EUFOR’s 22 light patrols and eight armor patrols must assure a visible presence in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to deter trouble makers and help police and the army reestablish their authority. Gen. Maral, EUFOR’s French commander, says success is in sight, notes the newspaper, quoting the general saying: “At this stage, I don’t see a need to extend our mandate beyond the end of this year.” Stressing the smooth coordination with NATO, the article further quotes Gen. Maral saying: “Once a month, I speak with SACEUR…. What matters is that Europe has been present here since the beginning of the tensions with a strategic vision and the intention to handle problems in a global way. The EU brought political solutions, economic aid and military assistance. This model of global crisis management is creating an example for the future.”
  
  
• According to AFP, EU foreign policy chief Solana expressed reservations Monday about a French proposal for a Middle East peacekeeping force, saying it was interesting but premature. “I don’t know if the situation is mature now to do that,” he reportedly said in Luxembourg as he arrived for a two-day meeting of EU foreign ministers. “I think it will be better to start moving things on the security side, and then maybe afterwards we should think about that,” he added.

The Independent observes that as violence threatens to engulf the barely launched roadmap plan for peace in the Middle East, calls are growing for a large-scale international force to be sent in, as the only hope of imposing some sort of a ceasefire between Israelis and Palestinians.
The dispatch of a multinational force is increasingly seen as the only means of security a breathing space, allowing meaningful negotiations to begin, notes the daily.

• In a significant shift toward U.S. thinking, the EU said on Monday the use of force might be necessary where diplomacy failed to address threats from weapons of mass destruction, reports Reuters. According to the dispatch, EU foreign ministers endorsed a strategy to combat the spread of NBC weapons that for the first time included a reference to possible military action against states or terrorist groups that acquired such arms. “When these measures (including political dialogue and diplomatic pressures) have failed, coercive measures under Chapter VII of the UN Charter and international law (sanctions, selective or global, interceptions of shipments and, as appropriate the use of force) could be envisioned,” the ministers reportedly said. Diplomats are quoted saying the move is part of an EU drive to take the weapons of mass destruction threat more seriously and repair transatlantic relations after a severe rift over the war in Iraq.

THE FOLLOWING CLIPPINGS ARE FROM THE 16 June 2003, News Summary and Analysis:

THE NEW YORK TIMES, June 15, 2003

Belgium resists pressure from U.S. to repeal war crimes law

By Craig S. Smith

Belgium's government reacted angrily today to mounting American pressure to rescind controversial war crimes legislation, arguing that the country had already addressed Washington's concerns. Belgian government officials said Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld had only made the issue more difficult to deal with by threatening Thursday to find another venue for NATO meetings if Brussels failed to act on United States demands. "I'd like to once again repeat to Mr. Rumsfeld that Belgium has amended the genocide law," the country's foreign minister, Louis Michel, told the country's state radio on Friday. "We have changed it precisely to meet the fears of our American friends." The law, which allows anyone to bring war crimes charges in Belgian courts, regardless of where the crimes are said to have taken place, was recently amended to allow the government to dismiss politically motivated cases by transferring them to the defendants' home country. This was done with a recent lawsuit brought by a group of Iraqis against Gen. Tommy R. Franks, the commander of allied forces in Iraq. But the United States has said it is not satisfied with case-by-case resolutions and wants Belgium to strike the law altogether. A senior NATO official said there was broad support for the American position and that member countries were considering joint action to persuade the Belgian government to act on the American demands. During a meeting of NATO defense ministers here on Thursday, Mr. Rumsfeld said that the United States would have to "seriously consider" whether it would continue to allow senior American officials to visit Brussels and added that the United States would withhold financing for a new $350 million NATO headquarters in Belgium as long as the law remained on the books. The United States is expected to finance about a quarter of that project. Many Belgian officials said Mr. Rumsfeld's remarks would only complicate efforts to fix what they agree is an ill-conceived law. "This isn't the way to get them to rescind the law," one NATO diplomat said late Thursday, referring to Mr. Rumsfeld's approach. "People will turn this into plucky little Belgium standing up to the bully, America, disguising the issue that this is a bad law that best be disposed of." The Belgian war crimes law was initiated in 1993 and expanded after the 1994 killing of 10 Belgian soldiers in Rwanda. The law allows anyone to file suit in Belgian courts after residing in the country for two years. "What wasn't foreseen, and where we were perhaps naïve, was the potential for abuse in these third party cases," said Peter Moors, head of the policy unit in the Belgian prime minister's office, in an interview today. About 30 such cases have been filed so far, including cases against former President George Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf for their roles in an incident during the 1991 Persian Gulf war in which civilians were killed in an attack on a bunker.

REUTERS NEWS AGENCY, June 16, 2003

EU backs possible use of force against WMD threats

The European Union, in a significant shift towards United States thinking, said on Monday the use of force might be necessary where diplomacy failed to address threats from weapons of mass destruction. EU foreign ministers endorsed a strategy to combat the spread of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons that for the first time included a reference to possible military action against states or terrorist groups that acquired such arms. "When these measures (including political dialogue and diplomatic pressure) have failed, coercive measures under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter and international law (sanctions, selective or global, interceptions of shipments and, as appropriate, the use of force) could be envisioned," it said. The strategy, coupled with an action plan giving the fight against weapons of mass destruction priority in the EU's relations with third countries, was adopted on the day the 15-nation bloc was reviewing ties with Iran in the light of its suspect nuclear programme. Diplomats said the moves were part of an EU drive to take the weapons of mass destruction threat more seriously and repair transatlantic relations after a severe rift over the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. While accepting the possible use of force as a last resort if diplomatic preventive measures and international inspections failed, the EU document insisted that action should be approved by the United Nations. "The U.N. Security Council should play a central role," it said. Diplomats said Germany, which opposed military action in Iraq, had tried initially to have any reference to the use of force removed but had relented partly under persuasion by France, which led international opposition to the war. The United States and Britain gave weapons of mass destruction as the main justification for attacking Iraq. No such weapons have been found more than two months after Baghdad
fell to U.S. troops.

THE INDEPENDENT, June 15, 2003

UN and America say multinational force is only way to end violence

By Rupert Cornwell

As violence threatens to engulf the barely launched roadmap plan for peace in the Middle East, calls are growing for a large-scale international force to be sent in, as the only hope of imposing some sort of a ceasefire between Israelis and Palestinians. The demands came as a team of US monitors arrived in the region, and - after intense pressure from Washington and Arab countries - Palestinian and Israeli security officials agreed to resume contacts. This follows a week of bloodshed during which at least 50 people died. The dispatch of a multinational force is increasingly seen as the only means of securing a breathing space, allowing meaningful negotiations to begin. In an interview with an Israeli newspaper, the United Nations Secretary General, Kofi Annan, described the US monitors as "a beginning". But, he said, only a substantial armed force could halt the fighting. More significant are similar calls from Capitol Hill, long a staunch ally of the Israeli cause. Senator John Warner, the Virginia Republican who heads the powerful Senate armed services committee, says that a robust Nato force should be dispatched, since it was clear that both Israelis and Palestinians had "lost control of events". Martin Indyk, a former US ambassador to Israel, believes the West Bank and Gaza should be made a trusteeship, so that a Palestinian government could take shape as international forces maintained security. Such an idea has long been backed by Palestinians. But Israel, deeply suspicious of entrusting its security to foreigners other than Americans, has always rejected it. For his part, Mr Bush is unwilling to put US troops at risk in so volatile an environment, although he may have little choice if the violence is to be halted and the roadmap plan resumed. The President's hands are also tied by US domestic support for Israel. In a rare rebuke to the Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, he professed himself "deeply troubled" by Israel's attempt to assassinate a leading Hamas politician. But after Hamas retaliated with the Jerusalem suicide bombing that killed 16 people on Wednesday, the White House was again placing the entire blame on the militant group. That, however, only weakens the US-sponsored Palestinian Prime Minister, Mahmoud Abbas, by highlighting his inability to stop terrorist attacks. "The basic problem is the lack of a Palestinian capacity to deal with the terrorists," Mr Indyk says.