NATO's Global Open Door Policy:
Increasingly Unpredictable, Complex And Interlinked
02 July 2012
By Rick Rozoff
On July 4 NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen
delivered an address entitled "NATO – delivering
security in the 21st century" at the Chatham House in
London that should lay to rest forever any doubts
about Western plans, already well underway, to create
an international military network dominated by the
United States and its major alliance partners.
Citing new challenges to Western preeminence in the
world – with "many commentators predict[ing] the
decline of the West as we know it" – especially to the
virtually uncontested sway the U.S. and Western Europe
have held in the quarter-century post-Cold War era,
the military bloc's chief cited "turmoil and
uncertainty across the Middle East and North Africa"
and "emergence of new powers – economically,
politically, and militarily" as areas of concern the
alliance must address.
Although the world is "increasingly unpredictable,
complex and interlinked," he intoned, nevertheless
"Europe and North America still have tremendous
resources, resolve, and ideas" and "there is no
greater force for positive change" than NATO states on
both sides of the Atlantic Ocean working in tandem.
With the emergence of trends toward multipolarity and
the potential for a second-generation anti-colonial
(or anti-neo-colonial) struggle in the
non-"Euro-Atlantic" world – that is, the world of
almost eight-ninths of humanity not residing in NATO
member states – the "fundamental questions" have to be
answered: "How can the Trans-Atlantic community keep
its global power of attraction and influence? And as
the world shifts, how do we embrace that shift and
help shape it?" For which read divert and control
contemporary dynamics emanating from beyond the
"Trans-Atlantic community."
The solution, of course, is "a strong NATO," one
moreover operating throughout the world. In
Rasmussen's words: "It is an essential contributor to
wider international security and stability. It means
we can face today's challenges from a position of
strength."
With recent wars in three continents to back up his
contention, he added: "We can launch and sustain
complex joint operations in a way that no one else
can. We can work effectively with partners in a way
that no one else can."
NATO's purview, and theaters of war, having already
expanded beyond its member states' territory to the
Balkans, South Asia, the Arabian Sea and North Africa,
the bloc must extend its reach to crisscross the
planet and "must continue to strengthen its connection
with other countries and organisations around the
globe."
The armed forces of nations on all six inhabited
continents (see below) must continue to be integrated
for NATO interoperability and to provide troops and
hardware for future missions. For, Rasmussen reminded
his audience: "Militaries around the world aspire to
our standards and the ability of our forces to work
together. Importantly, we can integrate other nations'
contributions into complex multinational operations
like no other organisation."
The international partnerships NATO has cultivated
over the past twenty years, often while conducting air
and ground wars and post-conflict "peacekeeping"
operations "From Afghanistan to the Balkans, and last
year over Libya," must expand beyond the forty or more
nations enmeshed in them – which with NATO's 28
members account for comfortably over a third of the
nations in the world – and be added to in all parts of
the world.
"Partnership is not a choice between staying at home
or going global. It is not peripheral to our business
– it is part of NATO's core business…"
"We cannot deal with today's security challenges from
a purely European perspective. What matters is being
engaged wherever our security matters. That means here
in Europe. Across the Euro-Atlantic area. And around
the globe."
To do so the home front must be further secured,
further integrated militarily.
"Alongside the European Union's enlargement, NATO's
Open Door policy has already transformed this
continent fundamentally, and permanently."
European Partnership for Peace members and those with
Individual Partnership Action Programs and Membership
Action Plans in addition – Armenia, Austria,
Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia, Finland, Georgia,
Ireland, Malta, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro,
Serbia, Sweden, Switzerland and Ukraine – "have
restructured their armed forces" as a prerequisite for
NATO integration. That is, they have been
"professionalized" by abolishing conscription and
shifting their mandate from territorial defense to
expeditionary deployments abroad and transitioning
from domestic and often Russian armaments to Western
ones.
In a statement more truly revealing than perhaps he
intended it to be, Rasmussen added:
"At the same time, the prospect of NATO membership
gave confidence to investors. Which in turn led to
economic drive, development and dynamism. And it is no
coincidence that those countries who have joined NATO
over the past thirteen years have also joined the
European Union, or are preparing to do so.
"10 years ago, I was Prime Minister of Denmark when my
country held the presidency of the European Union.
That year, at the Copenhagen and Prague Summits, we
invited new members to join the European Union, and
NATO…"
Under the Berlin Plus agreement adopted at the
fiftieth anniversary NATO summit in Washington, D.C.
in 1999 and several arrangements in the interim the
distinction between NATO and EU military policy has
become at most an academic one.
Although "Russian misperceptions about NATO's Open
Door policy persist," NATO has done its ungrateful
neighbor a favor by providing it "Stability on its
western borders." For example, military bases,
training and cyber warfare centers, Patriot Advanced
Capability-3 and soon Standard Missile-3 interceptor
batteries, air patrols by Western warplanes near its
northwestern frontiers, and naval, air and infantry
war games from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea and the
South Caucasus.
As if the import of the above comments regarding
business investment and the economy could be missed,
Rasmussen reiterated:
"Our economy is globalised. Our security is globalised.
And if we are to protect our populations effectively,
our approach to security has to be globalised too."
"It means NATO must be able, and willing, to engage
politically and militarily with other nations,
wherever they may be…" Australia, for example.
The NATO chief recalled visiting Australia last month,
where he met with Prime Minister Julia Gillard and
signed a Joint Political Declaration. "It is the first
of its kind. But I am confident it won't be the last."
In Afghanistan, "Australia is part of a NATO-led
coalition of 50 nations, the largest in recent
history." (The geography-challenged Rasmussen added
"from all five continents.") The largest – far the
largest – number of nations supplying troops for a war
in any country, or in any theater, in history.
Even when, or if, NATO withdraws the bulk of its
130,000-150,000 forces from Afghanistan, "we won't get
a holiday from history afterwards," Rasmussen
asserted," as "we must build on the practical
experience of working with our partners in order to
work even more closely together in the future."
The ten and a half years NATO has spent in its first
Asian war have provided it the opportunity to forge a
coalition of 50 nations for the alliance's next
conflicts.
The post-Chicago summit concentration "is about NATO
assuming a global perspective, about "[p]laying its
part globally, and strengthening our ability to act in
concert with our partners around the globe."
The militaries of the world must be subordinated to
NATO standards, practices and policy and be equipped
with "interoperable" weapons:
"Today, many partner countries take the opportunities
NATO offers to participate in our military education,
training and exercises. But this is largely on an
ad-hoc basis. I would like to see a much more
structured approach. And the broadest possible range
of nations being involved in such activities."
Particular attention must be paid to the integration
of and interoperability among special forces:
"We must build on the lessons that we learnt together
in action in Afghanistan. So we can boost our ability
to act together in the future."
Ever-expanding global partnerships should focus on
"maritime security, energy security, and cyber
security" cooperation.
Rasmussen stressed building partnerships, by which it
is not to be understood ones of equality, with China
and India. In March NATO's Supreme Allied Commander
Europe, Admiral James Stavridis, spoke to the U.S.
Congress on the topic of building partnerships with
India and Brazil. The "emergence of new powers" must
be neutralized and if possible co-opted. In
Rasmussen's words: "To do all this, we need an
alliance that is globally aware. Globally connected.
And globally capable. That is my vision for NATO."
"NATO's partnerships play a key part in meeting the
security concerns of today and tomorrow – be they
local, regional, or global. The range of our
partnerships reflects the world we live in."
But among the scores of allies and partners around the
world, NATO's first among equals was, is and ever will
remain the U.S.
"The transatlantic bond lies at the very heart of
NATO…"
"Some see the United States' pivot to Asia-Pacific as
the end of this unique partnership. They are wrong.
The security of America and Europe is indivisible. We
are stronger, and safer, when we work together. And
that is why NATO remains the indispensable Alliance."
The indispensable, global military bloc. Rasmussen
used the words globe, global, globally, globalized,
world and international 27 times in his speech. No one
can pretend not to understand what NATO's plans are.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments