Military

SHAPE News Summary & Analysis

30 January 2004

NATO

• In a contribution to the International Herald Tribune, NATO Secretary General de Hoop Scheffer stresses that “it is time for (NATO) to go back to business” after a “bruising year.” Under the title, “A bruised alliance marches on,” he writes: “First and foremost, we must get Afghanistan right. If we want to win the war on terrorism, we must win the peace in Afghanistan. That is why (NATO) is leading (ISAF) in Kabul and is expanding to other parts of the country. An overall operational plan is currently being defined, and I will be pushing hard for that plan to be approved in time for the June elections. NATO’s member states are well aware that having decided on such an expansion, they must now provide the military assets needed to carry it out.” Stressing that NATO must also develop the modern, effective military capabilities necessary to meet the challenges of a changing world, Mr. de Hoop Scheffer continues: “The new NATO Response Force is a big step in the right direction. It will give us a fast-moving force that will ensure that all the allies can engage together at the sharp end of military operations. And military reforms in many of our member states will result in an increased pool of deployable forces. My job is to ensure that the momentum of NATO’s military transformation is maintained. Because capability equals credibility.” Regarding Iraq, Mr. de Hoop Scheffer remarks: “Today, the Alliance is supporting the Polish-led multinational division in Iraq. NATO is providing planning, intelligence, communications and logistical assistance. If the allies were to decide that they wish for NATO to do more, it can and it will. My job … is to ensure that if and when the decision is made, NATO is ready to do the job.” Referring to the forthcoming accession of seven new NATO members, the dialogues with Russia and Ukraine, the PFP program, the Mediterranean dialogue, Mr. de Hoop Scheffer concludes: “Our goal is for NATO to make us all safer by exporting security using a range of tools, including partnership. The need for outreach and engagement is a common theme in NATO’s strategic concept, the European security strategy, and the U.S. national security strategy. Can NATO cope with this ambitious agenda? It can on the foundation of a pragmatic, realistic and trusting transatlantic relationship. As President Bush said in his State of the Union address, the United States must never forget the vital contribution of its international partners, or dismiss their sacrifices. I couldn’t agree more. I also see the clear need for an effective multilateral response to security threats. We need to work together. We need multilateralism with teeth in a still dangerous world.”

On the occasion of Mr. de Hoop Scheffer’s first official trip to the United States, the Wall Street Journal stresses that he brings a message worth listening to: “The trans-Atlantic Alliance can help protect the West’s democracies, but only if they’re serious about security.”
“The new year offers a change to mend fences within the Alliance and make better use of NATO’s considerable capabilities, particularly in Afghanistan. With long experience in managing pooled military resources, the Alliance is ideal for nation-building…. Mr. de Hoop Scheffer wisely made Afghanistan the litmus test for the 21st century NATO,” the daily comments.

• According to the Washington Times, Secretary of State Powell said Thursday NATO’s mission in Afghanistan must remain the Alliance’s “first priority,” even as the Bush administration pushes for a NATO deployment to Iraq later this year. The newspaper notes he made the remarks after a meeting with NATO Secretary General de Hoop Scheffer.

A commentary in The Times urges NATO to deal swiftly with the Taliban challenge.
The targeting of western troops with ISAF is the latest escalation of the growing threat from the regrouped Taliban, working with warlords, drug cartels and Pashtun nationalist to challenge President Karzai and overturn the western-backed government in Kabul, the newspaper says and adds: “(In Afghanistan), security is deteriorating, tension is high, reconstruction has slowed, foreign aid workers are under threat and international efforts to rescue the country from chaos and destitution have come to a standstill…. The preoccupation with Iraq has deflected attention from the worsening situation for foreigners in Kabul. Troops and money, promised as a guarantee that Afghanistan would not be abandoned again, have been diverted…. NATO has now assumed the command of ISAF, and more than 20 nations have sent troops to Kabul. So far, however, the overall force remains small—some 5,500 in all—and confined to the capital. The Karzai government has pleaded with the West to expand the force and deploy it also in other important regional centers. But despite agreement in principle to give this essential backing to central authority, nothing has yet happened…. It is not only NATO’s credibility that is now challenged; unless ISAF is strengthened and deployed beyond Kabul, the Taliban will be emboldened. The aim, clearly, is to create in Afghanistan the kind of insecurity that is proving so devastating to Iraq’s recovery. The Taliban and their allies are regrouping and have a clear plan of escalation; if they can convince Afghans that they are a force again, swaths of the country could again rally behind them in a new jihad against the West. Money and aid, though needed, are of little use without security. Afghanistan may seem further away than Iraq; it is no less central to the campaign against terrorism. The war there must still be won.”