Defence and Security
262 DSC 08 E
Original: English
NATO Parliamentary Assembly
SUMMARY
of the meeting of the Defence and Security Committee
Auditorium 2, Palacio de Congresos, Valencia, Spain
Saturday 15 and Sunday 16 November 2008
International SecretariatDecember 2008
1
262 DSC 08 E
ATTENDANCE LIST
ChairmanJulio MIRANDA CALHA (Portugal)
General RapporteurFrank COOK (United Kingdom)
Rapporteur, Sub-Committee on
Transatlantic Defence and Security
Co-operationRagnheidur E. ARNADOTTIR (Iceland)
Rapporteur, Sub-Committee on Future
Security and Defence CapabilitiesSverre MYRLI (Norway)
President of the NATO PAJosé LELLO (Portugal)
Secretary GeneralDavid HOBBS
Member delegations
BelgiumPhilippe MAHOUX
Luc SEVENHANS
Martine TAELMAN
BulgariaYani YANEV
CanadaClaude BACHAND
Joseph A. DAY
CzechRepublicTomas DUB
Michael HRBATA
Jiri NEDOMA
Antonin SEDA
Pavel SEVERA
EstoniaSven MIKSER
FranceJean-Michel BOUCHERON
Nathalie GOULET
Pierre LELLOUCHE
Xavier PINTAT
GermanyLorenz CAFFIER
Robert HOCHBAUM
Ursula MOGG
Hans RAIDEL
Kurt J. ROSSMANITH
Jörg SCHÖNBOHM
GreeceGeorgios KALANTZIS
Andreas LOVERDOS
Vassiliki PAPANDREOU
Savvas TSITOURIDIS
Mavroudis VORIDIS
HungaryIstvan SIMICSKO
ItalyFrancesco BOSI
Antonio CABRAS
Sergio DIVINA
Giorgio LA MALFA
LatviaVisvaldis LACIS
LithuaniaPetras AUSTREVICIUS
LuxembourgClaude ADAM
Fred SUNNEN
NetherlandsAngelien EIJSINK
Raymond KNOPS
Hendrik Jan ORMEL
NorwayPer Ove WIDTH
PolandJan DZIEDZICZAK
Konstanty MIODOWICZ
Jan TOMAKA
PortugalManuel Filipe CORREIA DE JESUS
Jorge NETO
RomaniaMihail POPESCU
SlovakiaRudolf PUCIK
SpainRamon ALEU
Hilario CABALLERO
Jesus CUADRADO
Alejandro MUNOZ-ALONSO
Francisco RICOMA
TurkeyAli Riza ALABOYUN
Kursat ATILGAN
Vahit ERDEM
United KingdomHugh BAYLEY
Peter BOTTOMLEY
David CRAUSBY
Jim HOOD
Michael MATES
Michael MOORE
Sir John STANLEY
United StatesJohn BOOZMAN
Kendrick MEEK
Jeff MILLER
John SHIMKUS
Associate delegations
AlbaniaLeonard DEMI
Bujar LESKAJ
ArmeniaArthur AGHABEKYAN
Raffi HOVANNISIAN
AustriaPeter FICHTENBAUER
Franz Eduard KUEHNEL
AzerbaijanZiyafat ASGAROV
Malahat IBRAHIMQIZI
Tahir SULEYMANOV
Bosnia and HerzegovinaIvo-Miro JOVIC
CroatiaKresimir COSIC
Marin JURJEVIC
Boris KLEMENIC
FinlandIlkka KANERVA
Johannes KOSKINEN
Esko-Juhani TENNILÄ
GeorgiaIrakli KAVTARADZE
Nikoloz LALIASHVILI
MontenegroBorislav BANOVIC
Russian FederationVictor A. OZEROV
Victor ZAVARZIN
SerbiaIgor BECIC
Bozidar DELIC
SwedenKarin ENSTRÖM
Allan WIDMAN
the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia[*]Vlado BUCKOVSKI
TalatXHAFERI
UkraineOstap SEMERAK
Andriy SHKIL
Mediterranean associate delegations
AlgeriaRachid ASSAS
Mostefa CHELOUFI
Messaoud CHIHOUB
Mohamed MEBARKI
IsraelAmira DOTAN
JordanMohammed AL ZRIQAT
Raji Noor HADDAD
European ParliamentAna Maria R.M. GOMES
Pawel PISKORSKI
Karl von WOGAU
Parliamentary observer
KazakhstanSat TOKPAKBAYEV
Interparliamentary Assembly
Assembly of WEU (IESDA)Robert WALTER
Parliamentary guests
AfghanistanKhalid A. PASHTOON
Assembly of KosovoNaim MALOKU
Slobodan PETROVIC
Republic of KoreaChul-Kook CHOI
Jang-Soo KIM
Jin-Sam LEE
SpeakersConstantino Méndez, Secretary of State for Defence, Ministry of Defence, Spain
Air Marshal Christopher H. Moran, Deputy Commander, NATO JFCBrunssum, Netherlands
Giorgi Baramidze,Vice Prime Minister andState Minister for European and EuroAtlanticIntegration, Georgia
Air Force General José Julio Rodriguez Fernandez, Chief of Defence Staff, Ministry ofDefence, Spain
Peter Flory, NATO Assistant Secretary General for Defence Investment
James M. Hart, Deputy Director for Strategy and Plans, Strategy, Plans and Programs Directorate (SPP), AFRICOM
International SecretariatAlex TIERSKY, director
Valérie GEFFROY, co-ordinator
Rouba AL-FATTAL, research assistant
Hakim DARBOUCHE, advisor for Mediterranean activities
Chris Mc PHERSON, research assistant
1
262 DSC 08 E
The Chairman, Julio Miranda Calha (PT), welcomed the members and speakers and introduced the day’s proceedings.
The draft Agenda [206DSC 08 Erev.2] and the minutes of the meeting held in Berlin, Germany, on Sunday 27 May 2008 [143DSC 08 E] were adopted without comment.
I.Presentation by Constantino Méndez, Secretary of State for Defence, Ministry of Defence, Spain, on Spanish security and defence policy
1.Constantino Méndez, Secretary of State for Defence for the Ministry Defence of Spain, presented to the Committee his views on Spanish Security and Defence Policy.Mr.Méndez began by offering a Spanish view of the international security environment set by the complexities of current conflicts and future conflict. In addition to the traditional risks that nations face, Mr.Méndez believed that six new areas will shape the international security dialogue over the coming years: American hegemony, the future of the EU, the Palestinian region, political developments in Latin America, Asia, and Africa. It is within this context that Spain has developed its international security strategy, which he summarized as the following: maintaining a defensive capability controlled by Spain and linking that national strategy to Spanish international policy. To that end, Spain's current agenda is based on the modernization of its forces and an examination of its defence forces.Spain has created a defence white paper, which Mr. Méndez hopes will be supported by the Spanish parliament.
2.Mr. Méndez then discussed Spain's commitment to international stability.Spain's security is linked to Europe, and as such, Mr.Méndez believes the EU should be a robust player in the international arena.Spain is a committed member of the Atlantic Alliance, celebrating its 25th year as a NATO member. Also, in addition to Spain's losses in Afghanistan, Mr.Méndez paid tribute to the almost 1,000 soldiers Spain has lost in 30 countries and across four continents over the past forty years.
3.Finally, Mr.Méndez spoke briefly about Spain’s bi-lateral relationships. With the United States, Spain's relationship is rooted in dialogue and mutual trust. For more than 50 years, Spain has supported the United States with the basing of American forces in his country. There have been over 180,000 US air force operations over Spanish airspace, 11,000 American naval ships have docked in Spanish ports, and together they have signed over 6,000defence procurement contracts. This represents a good number of achievements, but Mr. Méndez said that more needs to be done.Chairman Julio Miranda Calha opened the floor for comments and questions.
4.Sven Mikser (EE) noted his Sub-committee's recent visit to Italy and the impressive demonstration given by NATO's Operation Active Endeavour. Mr. Mikser asked Mr. Méndez if he felt that the mandate of Operation Active Endeavour was broad enough, or if anything should be done to make it more effective.
5.Ali Riza Alaboyun (TR) suggested that Secretary Méndez's use of the phrase "Islamic roots of terrorism" can alienate Islamic countries, and suggested to use the phrase global terrorism.
6.Ursula Mogg (DE) noted that the German parliament reauthorized Germany's troop commitments to Afghanistan, and asked Méndez to give his opinion on the Parliament's control over the military forces.
7.Hilario Caballero (ES) echoed other questions by asking Mr. Méndez to comment on requiring the Parliament's assent when deploying soldiers abroad.
8.Secretary Méndez responded first by stating that maritime security operations are highly sophisticated in nature and that NATO operations will profit as a result of the experiences off the coast of Somalia. Mr. Méndez then noted that rules of engagement need to be as sensitive as possible, and should not be amended if ISAF is receiving satisfactory results.
9.Secretary Mendez stated that this is the first time NATO has been carrying out maritime operations such as its operation off Somalia, which has become an issue because ungoverned states are not responsive in dealing with these problems themselves.
10.Finally, another new change in Spain is that any operation now has to be approved by the Parliament. The Spanish Parliament has been very responsible in exercising this power, and it is now done as a matter of course for planned missions. This process has served to promote greater consensus around Spain's current missions.
II.Procedure for Amendments to the Draft Resolution NATO’S Ongoing Operations [198DSC 08 E] by Frank Cook (United Kingdom), General Rapporteur
11.Frank Cook (UK)introduced the Resolution on NATO’s Ongoing Operations.
III.Consideration of the Draft General Report NATO’S Operations: Current Priorities and Lessons Learned [158 DSC 08 E] by Frank Cook (United Kingdom), General Rapporteur
12.Mr. Cook went on to present his draft General Report. He pointed out that opinions on Afghanistan are diverse and conflicting, with excessively pessimistic media reports. He drew attention to the importance of the next few months in shaping the future of Afghanistan, while emphasizing that military efforts alone cannot provide for overall stability of the country. Therefore, he stressed that the efforts of all international and domestic actors are needed. He reaffirmed the importance of the United Nations Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA)in particular, as well as the recent move by President Karzai to reshuffle his cabinet to have the right team around him.
13.Mr. Cook outlined some of the challenges he saw for Afghanistan, including corruption and the looming food crisis. However, he hopes the upcoming elections (scheduled for 2009) will have the potential to reenergize both Afghanistan’s internal political process as well as the drive of international actors. He suggested NATO had been asked to do too much in too many different domains and was often blamed for problems for which it had no responsibility.
IV.Presentation by Air Marshal Christopher H. Moran, Deputy Commander, NATO JFCBrunssum, Netherlands, on ISAF – An operational perspective
14.2009 will be a year of challenges and opportunities in Afghanistan, according to AirMarshalMoran. The change of the US administration and the upcoming Afghan elections bring the possibility of new approaches, although the economic crisis has made it even harder to nations to continue to fund their efforts in Afghanistan. The main objectives for this year, Air Marshal Moran said, are to provide a safe and secure environment for the elections to run smoothly, and to emphasize the development of the Afghan National Forces and Police.
15.UN efforts in providing food, development aid, and anti-narcotic measures are very crucial. He hoped that these initiatives would be supported by regional actors, especially Iran and Pakistan, who play a crucial role in the stability of the region. NATO also expanded its mission in Afghanistan to deliver Afghan national security forces that can sustain security without NATO’s support. In order to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people, the Afghan leadership needed to be involved to the maximum extent possible in decision-making.
16.While emphasizing that security cannot move forward without development and reconstruction alongside it, the Air Marshal also noted that security required additional troop deployments as well as development of Afghan forces. He pointed to shortfalls in key areas such as Operational Mentoring and Liaison Teams (OMLTs), intelligence, surveillance, and air medical evacuation as particularly critical. Chairman Julio Miranda Calha opened the floor for comments and questions.
17.Sir John Stanley (UK) highlighted the problems of limited governance, porous borders and Pakistani safe havens, as well as challenges in intelligence sharing. He also raised the fact that the narcotics trade funds the insurgency to the tune of about $100 million annually.
18.Claude Bachand (CA) suggested righting a difficult situation through a strategy of coordination (between actors in the field), negotiation (with elements of the insurgency that could be brought into the political discussion) and rotation (lengthened tours to take advantage of relationships and acquired knowledge of the terrain).
19.Vahit Erdem (TR) suggested the number of forces available would never rise to that desired by commanders in the field, underlining the need to train Afghan forces quickly. He also saw coordination between international actors as crucial.
20.Air Marshal Moran praised developing ties between Afghan and Pakistani authorities. He suggested that the new US administration should take a regional approach, ensuring Iran is an active partner in anti-narcotics efforts. He lamented civilian casualties but affirmed NATO’s continued commitment to avoid them at all costs; he also reported extensive dialogue with human rights NGOs on the subject. Overall, Air Marshal Moran described himself as optimistic.
21.Mavroudis Voridis (GR) inquired about the impact of the financial crisis on military budgets.
22.Khalid Pashtoon (AG) called for a change of ISAF forces’ behavior, suggesting that civilian casualties were intolerable. Afghanistan continues to face corruption, he said, with some remaining Ministers still in place despite incompetence or corruption. The drug trade was principally a problem of dealing with the drug lords rather than small scale farmers.
23.Lieutenant General Karl Eikenberry, Deputy Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, was asked to comment by the Committee’s Chairman. Eikenberry praised the role of the Joint Force Commands such as JFC-Brunssum. He saw a tipping point approaching when Afghan National Army (ANA) and Afghan National Police (ANP) are leading security operations. The ANA is doing well, although the ANP continues to face difficulties. He praised President Karzai’s appointment of a new minister of the interior, and suggested that ISAF should become engaged in police training. He suggested that NATO start thinking about the possibility of community policing strategies in the outlying communities.
24.On the issue of civilian casualties, General Eikenberry remarked that more ANA and ANP forces means less ISAF lead missions, which means less civilian casualties attributable to ISAF forces. On force generation,General Eikenberry said NATO should focus on OMLTs; he also supported the recommendation to extend deployments in Afghanistan—four to six months is much too short. Combat is all about developing mutual trust with your unit. A minimum of 9 to 12months would be much better.
25.Pierre Lellouche (FR) stated that he agreed with the report’s conclusion that NATO’s present force generation and funding systems do not allow it to meet its requirements in theater. While he supported NATO’s involvement in Afghanistan, public opinion in many countries was beginning to doubt the mission.
26.Ramon Aleu (ES) asked for clarification on whether members were questioning the basis of Mr.Cook’s report, and also asked for a more clear explanation on the role of Iran in Afghanistan.
27.Joseph Day (CA) noted a UNAMA recommendation that donor funds be channeled through Afghan authorities rather than bilaterally, and asked whether corruption was not a concern in this respect.
28.Antonio Cabras (IT) underlined the importance of the forthcoming elections and relayed his concern that their results could complicate reconciliation of factions within Afghanistan.
29.Robert Walter (Assembly of the WEU) suggested increased co-operation among NATO and Pakistani commanders on a day to day basis. He noted the difference in the rhetoric of President Bush and President Karzai regarding Iran, and asked if the speakers had evidence that Iran was supporting the insurgents.
30.Air Marshal Moran underscored the importance of Pakistan as regards ISAF’s logistical support and the safe transit of supplies. He described ongoing communication and coordination with Pakistani officials, NATO, and Afghan officials. Regarding funding, he noted the tension between a desire to create Afghan capacity and the need to deliver tangible development results quickly. He endorsed Mr. Cook’s report, stating that it accurately reflected the situation on the ground.
31.Mr. Cook agreed that upcoming elections were critical. He reiterated his concerns on corruption in Afghanistan, while suggesting a need for increased funding of projects through Afghan authorities. Mr. Cook noted that there will be no clear moment of ‘victory’ in Afghanistan, but that continued engagement will result in a better and more constructive form of governance.
The draft General Report NATO Operations: Current Priorities and Lessons Learned [158DSC 08 E] was adopted.
V.Consideration of the Draft Report of the Sub-Committee on Future Security and Defence Capabilities Contributions of non-NATO members to NATO Operations [159DSCFC 08 E] by Sverre Myrli(Norway), Rapporteur
32.Sverre Myrli (NO) presented his report on the contribution of non-NATO members to NATO operations.
33.John Shimkus (US) suggested the Alliance should engage more with Central Asian countries, particularly on the issues of narcotics trafficking. He also inquired about the extent of Russian co-operation since the war in Georgia in August.
34.Allan Widman (SW) declared that on behalf of Sweden he was flattered by the report’s discussion of Sweden’s contributions to NATO operations. Mr. Widman also noted continued lack of political consensus in Stockholm on participation in the NATO Response Force. He also reported that any future membership of Sweden in the Alliance is uncertain, even though a public discussion on the issue has truly begun.
35.Juha Korkeaoja (FI) expressed Finland’s satisfaction with the report and with co-operation with NATO, asserting that Finland has ample opportunities to express its views at the Alliance. He confirmed the report’s conclusions that Finland continues to have some reservations concerning its participation in the planning process. He lamented problems in the co-operation between NATO and the EU, and suggested Nordic defence co-operation – which he hoped Denmark would join – is not an alternative for Finnish membership in NATO.
36.Mr. Bachandargued that decision-making at NATO through consensus could be made more difficult as more players were added. While praising links with partners and contributors, he sought more clarity on their status.
37.Mr. Myrli confirmed that increased defence co-operation among Nordiccountries is appropriate and a positive development for NATO. However, he insisted that this co-operation was no substitute for eventual NATO membership. Mr. Myrli stressed the need to insure that nonNATO countries are involved early on in the planning process. He also underlined the need to share intelligence; however, he firmly believed there was a difference between NATO and nonNATO countries which needed to be maintained.
38.The Chairman asked whether a member of the Russian delegation would like to respond to questions regarding Russian co-operation with NATO. Victor Zavarzin (RU) suggested that the Russian position towards the Alliance has not been changed. He reminded the Committee that it was the Alliance that wanted to freeze relations with Russia, but that Russian participation from the point of Western interests is needed. He stressed that he was in favour of maintaining relations between Russia and the Alliance, for example in training anti-drug officers. He saw opportunities for Russia to support NATO’s operations in Afghanistan, and hoped to salvage relations.