Report

The Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association has the honour to present its report on the Meeting of the Standing Committee and the Secretaries of Delegation, held in Copenhagen, Denmark, from March 22 to 24, 2013.  Canada was represented by Senator Raynell Andreychuk, Senator Joseph A. Day, Cheryl Gallant, M.P., Jack Harris, M.P., and Michelle Tittley, Association Secretary.

SECRETARIES OF DELEGATION MEETING

The Secretaries of Delegation met on March 22, 2013, at 16h10.  The meeting was chaired by the Secretary of the Danish delegation to the NATO PA, Mr. Flemming Kordt Hansen.   Topics discussed were as follows:

·         Overview of the programme of the meeting to be held in Copenhagen.  Mr Kordt Hansen presented the logistical arrangements and outlined the programme of meetings and social events.

·         Consideration of the draft Agenda of the Standing Committee meeting. Ruxandra Popa (NATO PA) presented the latest change to the Standing Committee meeting agenda mentioning that the agenda had been revised to allow for a discussion on the invitation to the NATO PA to participate in the International Election Observation Mission for the upcoming Parliamentary Elections in Bulgaria. 

·         Discussion regarding preparation of the Spring Session in Luxembourg City, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, 17-20 May 2013.

·         Consideration of draft programme

·         Discussion regarding future sessions and meetings

·         Preparation of the 59th Annual Session in Dubrovnik, Croatia, 11-14 October 2013.  Maroje Katalinic (HR) noted that his delegation is looking forward to hosting the Annual Session in Dubrovnik in 2013 and informed Secretaries of Delegation that they are making good progress with the preparations.  Due to financial constraints, the Croatian hosts will charge the delegations concerned for five interpretation booths (German, Italian, Spanish, Greek and Polish – a Polish booth is required this time because there is a Polish Rapporteur in the Political Committee) as a result of total costs of more than 15.000 euros. Mr Blazekovic, the Head of the Croatian delegation, will shortly send a letter to all delegations concerned informing them of this.

·         Mrs Heffinck (NATO PA) informed Secretaries of Delegation that the International Secretariat has thus far not received any offer from delegations to host a session after 2015.  She underlined that a Spring and Annual Session require ample time for preparation.  Delegations which are willing to host a session in 2016 should inform the International Secretariat as soon as possible. 

·         Other business

·         Andrius Avizius (NATO PA) reminded Secretaries of Delegation of the upcoming visit of the Committee on the Civil Dimension of Security to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia* on 22-23 April.  He encouraged delegations to participate in this visit and said that the deadline for registration is 3 April. 

·         Andrius Avizius (NATO PA) informed Secretaries of Delegation about the Rose-Roth seminar in Georgia and underlined the importance of the seminar, as it would be the first NATO PA event in the country since the elections in 2012. 

The meeting closed at 16:50.

STANDING COMMITTEE MEETING

The Standing Committee met on March 23, 2013. The President, Hugh Bayley (UK), opened the meeting at 09.30.

The President thanked the Head of the Danish delegation, Troels Lund Poulsen, for his delegation’s hosting of the Standing Committee meeting. Troels Lund Poulsen (DK) thanked the President, and welcomed General Peter Bartram, Chief of Defence of Denmark, and all participants.

The President welcomed Antonin Seda, the new Head of the Czech delegation to the meeting. Apologies had been received from the following members of the Standing Committee:

Dobroslav DIMITROV (Bulgaria)

Boris BLAZEKOVIC (Croatia)

Han TEN BROEKE (Netherlands)

Jadwiga ZAKRZEWSKA (Poland)

Gabriel VLASE (Romania)

Jaroslav BASKA (Slovakia)

Mike TURNER (United States)

The President explained that a new item had to be added to the agenda at the last minute. This was because, just a few days before the meeting, he had received a letter from the Prime Minister of Bulgaria inviting the Assembly to send a delegation to observe the parliamentary elections scheduled on 12 May.

The President thanked the Head of the Czech delegation, Antonin Seda, for his delegation’s hosting of the Annual Session in Prague in November 2012, ten years after the historic NATO Summit also held in Prague.

Presentation by General Peter BARTRAM, Chief of Defence, Denmark

The President welcomed and introduced General Peter Bartram, Chief of Defence of Denmark.

General Bartram expressed his strong conviction that NATO is and will remain the key foundation for Allies’ security. However, it was important to continue to develop the Organisation, not least because of the current strains on defence budgets.

As a first step, General Bartram urged Allied governments to take full advantage of NATO’s defence planning process, which aims to analyse Allies’ needs and reach agreement on a schedule for developing the capabilities required to fulfil these needs. General Bartram argued that nations should avoid making political statements on their defence plans outside the framework of the NATO defence planning process, as this created uncertainty and undermined the process. It was also important for the NATO process to be synchronised with the European Union. Lastly, General Bartram suggested that partner nations could be associated with the process on a voluntary basis.

Turning to the transformation of Danish defence, General Bartram explained that much had already been achieved thanks to the important reforms of the past 10 years. Despite a 15% cut in the overall defence budget, the objective of the latest reform was to maintain the same level of ambition, and even add resources in certain priority areas, such as the Arctic and cyber defence. Operational capabilities will be preserved, but savings will be achieved through the following measures:

·         further optimising supporting structures; in particular, further measures are envisaged to reduce costs related to human resources management;

·         further savings in the fields of maintenance and logistics, including reducing the number of barracks;

·         further increasing "jointness", e.g. for special operation forces and for the military police; and envisaging a permanent joint headquarters for all services.

General Bartram concluded that many nations will be forced to refocus their efforts as they face the dual challenge of spending cuts on the one hand, and increasing costs of new, technologically advanced equipment on the other. As not all nations will have the full set of capabilities in their tool kit, increasing interoperability between Allies’ armed forces will be essential. Building the necessary trust will take time, however, and will likely require working in the framework of small clusters of nations or strategic partnerships rather than on a large scale, involving all Allies at once.

Nicole Ameline (FR) thanked Denmark for its support to France’s military intervention in Mali, and asked whether, if faced with the decision today, Denmark would reconsider its opt-out on the European Union’s security and defence policy. General Bartram commented that, besides working through NATO, Denmark had also developed bilateral and multilateral co-operation with individual members of NATO or the EU, particularly its Nordic and Baltic neighbours.

Rasa Jukneviciene (LT) thanked General Bartram on behalf of her country for Denmark’s participation to the air policing mission over the Baltic countries. In response to her question about future air assets, General Bartram explained that Denmark was currently considering plans for replacing its F-16 fleet, but no decision had yet been made about the number or type of aircraft.

Asked by Marit Nybakk (NO) whether the fact that Nordic countries had different statuses within NATO and the EU hindered defence co-operation, General Bartram agreed that there were certainly limits to Nordic co-operation. However, he welcomed the fact that co-operation was flexible and open, so that whenever two countries of the region felt they wanted to develop bilateral co-operation based on a shared interest, the others agreed.

Answering questions from Ragnheidur Arnadottir (IS) and Cheryl Gallant (CA) on Denmark’s policy in the Arctic, General Bartram stressed that, because of Greenland, Denmark had a special responsibility to follow developments in the Arctic. The priority for Arctic countries was on solving problems and challenges through dialogue; a militarisation of the area should be avoided. Co-operation focused for instance on analysis and tests to better understand the threats. Chiefs of Defence of the Arctic countries also met regularly and Denmark would be hosting their next meeting in June. Nations were considering mapping assets present in the region – for surveillance, search and rescue, etc. –, with a view to maybe sharing some of these in the event of a crisis. However, General Bartram stressed the need to tread carefully and with an appropriate level of ambition.

In response to a question from Giorgio La Malfa (IT), the speaker clarified that closer co-operation between Arctic countries should certainly not be interpreted as a tacit endorsement of a geographic division of labour inside NATO whereby northern Allies would focus on northern challenges, while southern Allies would focus on southern issues. In fact, Arctic co-operation took place among Arctic countries outside NATO’s structures.

General Bartram agreed with Diego Lopez Garrido (ES) that nations faced a difficult dilemma between the need for rationalisation and divisions of labour to save costs on the one hand, and the need to support national defence industries on the other. However, like Lord Jopling (UK), he felt that military efficiency and value for money should take precedence over industrial interests. Consolidating defence markets would bring important savings, the speaker argued. However, Denmark had experienced first-hand how difficult it was sometimes to coordinate procurement of new capabilities, when it failed to convince seven of its partners to buy new armoured personnel carriers jointly. It was important therefore to start with small, modest projects, the speaker noted.

Asked by Raynell Andreychuk (CA) about those aspects of the reform relating to personnel and career planning, General Bartram confirmed that Danish authorities were looking at reducing the number of career planning staff within the armed forces. Current resources assigned to training would remain, however, and the speaker insisted on the need to train armed forces for the next conflict whatever it might be. He called for more co-operation in this area too, as smaller nations in particular did not have the resources to provide training for the whole range of possible scenarios.

In response to a question from Julio Miranda Calha (PT), General Bartram explained that Denmark was the lead nation for NATO’s Smart Defence project on munitions. The idea behind that project was that nations could cut cost by buying in bulk for instance. Denmark was not yet participating in any EU-led Pooling and Sharing project.

José Lello (PT) asked whether the speaker could share more information on the reforms he had mentioned, as these could be useful for Portugal as well.

The President thanked the speaker for his presentation and for Denmark’s contribution to NATO.

Assembly Activities in 2013

·         Invitation to participate in the International Election Observation Mission for the Parliamentary Elections in Bulgaria on 12 May 2013. 

·         The President referred to the letter he had received from the Prime Minister of Bulgaria inviting the NATO PA to send a delegation to observe the parliamentary elections scheduled on 12 May. This raised a specific issue because it concerned a member country of the Assembly. It was clear that the invitation had been sent as a show of transparency, but indications were that the Bulgarian authorities would not be surprised or embarrassed if the Assembly were to decline the invitation on the grounds that other organisations were better suited for this mission. The Bureau’s recommendation was therefore to politely decline the invitation

·         The Standing Committee endorsed the Bureau’s recommendation to decline the invitation to observe the parliamentary elections in Bulgaria on 12 May.

·         The Secretary General presented plans for Assembly activities in 2013. 

·         The main themes were developments in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA); Alliance adaptation, with a focus on strategy, capability and resources; operations in Afghanistan; and partnerships and regional security. Several other priority areas identified by the Standing Committee were also well covered, including the High North, gender and security, the development of military technology, developments in the Western Balkans, etc. A total of eight Committee visits would take place in NATO countries, five in the MENA region, and three in the Far East.

·         The Secretary General presented the main changes to the programme of activities since the last meeting of the Standing Committee in Prague in November 2012. First, a special report on the Sahel region had been added on the Defence and Security Committee’s agenda, and the Rapporteur, together with the President, were planning to visit Mali. Second, the visit by the Defence and Security Committee to the United States was now scheduled in July. Two other joint Committee visits to the United States – in California and Texas respectively – would take place in June.

·         Highlights of this year’s programme included the upcoming joint Rose-Roth and Mediterranean seminar in Marrakesh, which would focus on developments in the Sahel, as well as defence and security sector reform in the MENA region; the upcoming Rose-Roth seminar in Georgia, which will be held in a new and interesting political environment, and will also focus on regional developments; and the planned Rose-Roth in Kyrgyzstan, which stemmed from former President Karl A. Lamers’ visit in 2012. The Secretary General also hoped that one or two visits could be organised to Afghanistan in 2013.

·         The President moved the discussion to the STC’s plans to visit Israel.  The President concluded that the Standing Committee’s intention was not to change the topic for the STC visit, but to include discussions with the two delegations with which the Assembly has relations: the Israelis and the Palestinians. He recommended explaining this to the Israelis in a frank and open manner to avoid any perception of a hidden agenda. The Standing Committee agreed with the President’s proposed course of action.

·         Lord Jopling mentioned that he would be writing to Heads of delegation shortly to ask them to fill in a questionnaire about national implementation of UN Security Council resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security. The Secretary General welcomed this initiative, and mentioned that the President had suggested that a British government representative could brief the CDS Committee on this issue at the Annual Session in Dubrovnik.

·         The Standing Committee approved the revised programme of activities for 2013. 

·         The President called the attention of the Committee to the Comments of the Secretary General of NATO on the Policy Recommendations of the NATO PA. He welcomed these comments as part of the constructive relationship between the Assembly and NATO.

·         The Assembly of Kosovo’s application for parliamentary observer status.

·         The President retraced the history of NATO’s involvement in the Western Balkans and of the Assembly’s relations with delegations from the region. He recalled that the NATO PA had started inviting representatives of the Assembly of Kosovo to seminars and training programmes in 2002, and to sessions in 2006. Since then, members of the Assembly of Kosovo had been invited to sessions as parliamentary guests on an ad hoc basis.

·         The Assembly of Kosovo was now requesting to be granted the status of parliamentary observer. This would mean that invitations to sessions would be automatically issued by the International Secretariat for all annual sessions. The President stressed that the status would be granted to the Assembly of Kosovo, not to Kosovo and that it would therefore not imply any form of recognition.  

·         A second issue before the Standing Committee was whether to consider holding a seminar in Kosovo in 2014. The concern was that the location might make it impossible for certain delegations to attend.

·         The President noted that this discussion was taking place as high-level talks between Belgrade and Pristina continued under the auspices of the European Union. He reminded delegates that the decision to grant the status of parliamentary observer required the approval of the Standing Committee with a simple majority, and ratification by the whole Assembly.

·         The President reported that the Bureau’s recommendation was to consult the four delegations which do not recognise Kosovo as a state before making any firm decision. Three of these were not represented at this meeting. He therefore suggested postponing the decision until the Spring Session in Luxembourg, but he welcomed any immediate comments delegations wished to make.

·         The President noted that there was a consensus to delay a decision on this matter until the Standing Committee meeting in Luxembourg. In the meantime, relevant delegations would be consulted informally.

·         Ad Hoc Invitations to the Luxembourg Spring Session.

·         The President informed delegates that the Bureau had decided to extend exceptional invitations to the Spring Session to delegations from the MENA region with which the Assembly has formal relations, to Libya, Mali and Afghanistan in view of the relevance and importance of developments in these regions for the Assembly. The decision had to be taken by the Bureau in February because of accommodation deadlines for the session and the need to provide sufficient preparation time for invited delegations.  The Standing Committee endorsed the Bureau’s decision to invite regional partner and observer delegations from the MENA region, as well as parliamentarians from Libya, Mali and Afghanistan, exceptionally to attend the Spring Session in Luxembourg.

·         Arrangements for the Assembly’s plenary sittings.

·         Concerning the joint meeting between the North Atlantic Council and NATO Parliamentary Assembly during the Plenary Sitting in Luxembourg City on Friday 17 May 2013, the President reported that during his bilateral meeting with NATO’s Deputy Secretary General in February, he had requested that the time allocated for the exchange with the NATO Secretary General during Assembly sessions be extended. The President explained that he had also received a proposal from Senator Sergio de Gregorio (IT) about how to prioritise questions to NATO’s Secretary General during Assembly sessions. The idea was that no delegation would be invited to pose a second question until all delegations who wished to do so had posed a first question. The President supported the principle and would try to follow it, but he also wanted to leave some flexibility.

·         The President explained that the Spring Session in Luxembourg would follow a different model, as the Assembly would meet with the North Atlantic Council rather than just the NATO Secretary General. This required a more structured approach to the question-and-answer period. The President suggested discussing both issues separately.

·         The President agreed that the discussion period needed to be steered by the members present in the plenary sitting, rather than rigid rules or formulas. The Standing Committee approved this approach.

·         The President concluded that it was indeed important to have quality time with the NATO Secretary General. After all, it was in his interest to speak to the Assembly’s plenary sittings, as openness and transparency were at the top of his own agenda. The Assembly provided an excellent opportunity for him to make a better case for defence spending.

·         Turning to the format for the joint session with the North Atlantic Council in Luxembourg, the President explained that delegations would be asked to register in advance and indicate the topic of their question. The Secretary General added that the list of topics in document was indicative, and members could ask questions on other issues as well. They would only be asked to indicate the main topic of their question, not the exact question.

·         Enhancing the Assembly’s Public Outreach and Preparations for the Assembly’s 60th Anniversary.

·         The President noted that citizens no longer deferred to politicians but increasingly wanted to have their say, including on security matters. He paid tribute to the work done by former President Karl A. Lamers to increase the Assembly’s public outreach. He and John Dyrby Paulsen had followed Mr Lamers’ example and participated in a public discussion hosted by the Danish Atlantic Committee and the Youth Atlantic Treaty Association the previous day. He encouraged members to do more of these public events, in conjunction with the local Atlantic Committees. The President was also trying to encourage the British Parliament to include information on the NATO PA as part of its own outreach efforts. He invited delegates to comment both on outreach activities in general, and on proposals for celebrating the Assembly’s upcoming 60th Anniversary.

·         The President underlined that national delegations were primarily responsible for engaging with their publics. He concluded by asking all delegations present to review the paper that the International Secretariat had prepared and feed their comments back to the International Secretariat.

 

·         Mandate of the NATO PA Secretary General

·         In a closed session, the Standing Committee considered a change to the Assembly’s Rules of Procedure, concerning the Secretary General`s term.

·         Finance

·         The Standing committee considered the Report of the Secretary General on the Financial Statements for 2012, the Financial Statements for 2012 approved by the Secretary General, and the Treasurer's Report and proposal for the allocation of the 2012 surplus.

·         The President thanked the Treasurer for his outstanding work. As the Treasurer could not be present at this meeting, the President gave the floor to the Secretary General to present the financial documents on his behalf.

·         The Secretary General explained that the audit of the Assembly’s financial statements had just been completed successfully. The findings of the audit would be presented by the Board Member from the International Board of Auditors for NATO (IBAN) to the Standing Committee at the Spring Session in Luxembourg. However, because the Standing Committee would exceptionally meet after the plenary in Luxembourg – rather than before -, the financial statements would only be put to the Assembly for adoption at the Annual Session.

·         The Secretary General informed members that the surplus for 2012 on the normal budget was only about 4,000 euros. This was because the savings made following the departure of a staff member, who had not been replaced for a period of six months, were used to conclude an early retirement arrangement with another staff member. A number of transfers had also been made from other budget chapters to help finance this arrangement. The very careful planning of these movements had meant that the balance of the budget had come very close to zero.

·         The current surplus of 30,000 euros was due mostly to interest earned on Assembly accounts, and the proposal was to allocate it to the provisions for personnel costs. The Secretary General explained that the Assembly was on its third zero nominal growth budget. Yet, legislation in Belgium required that salaries be adjusted in accordance with the health index every year. This created a pressure on the salary budget, which the Secretariat was monitoring carefully by looking in particular at upcoming staff retirements. A number of senior staff members were indeed scheduled to retire in 2014 and 2015. However, to bridge the gap in the salaries budget until then might require drawing upon the reserves. The Treasurer’s proposal was therefore to allocate this year’s surplus to the provision for salaries to build up the reserves to cope with this situation.

·         The Standing Committee adopted the financial documents.

·         Future sessions and meetings

·         The Standing Committee considered documents concerning the Assembly Sessions and Standing Committee Meetings, the Sessions and Meetings from 2013, the Spring Session (Luxembourg City, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, 17-20 May 2013), and the Annual Session, Dubrovnik, Croatia 11-14 October 2013.

·         The President explained that hosts had come forward for all Standing Committee meetings and sessions until the early spring Standing Committee meeting in 2016. However, hosts were still sought for the two sessions in 2016.

·         Ali Riza Alaboyun (TR) announced that he would propose to the Speaker of the Turkish Parliament that Turkey host the Spring Session in 2016. Mr Alaboyun also commented on two important recent developments: the announcement by the PKK of a ceasefire; and the resolution of the dispute between Turkey and Israel.

·         Mr Demi also announced that Albania was prepared to host the Spring Session in 2016, recalling that when Albania last offered to host an Assembly session, the Standing Committee had decided to accept Luxembourg’s offer instead. He kindly asked Mr Alaboyun to consider whether Turkey could host the Annual Session in 2016 instead. Mr Alaboyun agreed to enquire about the Annual Session instead of the Spring Session.

·         The President then conveyed the apologies of Marc Angel, Deputy Head of the Luxembourg Delegation, who was not able to attend the afternoon session of the Standing Committee since he had fallen ill. However, Mr Angel had assured the President that the Luxembourg Delegation was well on track to deliver an excellent Spring Session 2013.

·         Maroje Katalinic, Secretary of Croatian Delegation, conveyed the apologies of Boris Blazekovic, Head of the delegation, who was unable to attend the meeting. On his behalf, he briefed the Standing Committee on preparations for the Annual Session 2013 in Dubrovnik.

·         The President extended his sincere thanks and gratitude to all future session hosts.

 

·         Miscellaneous

·         No other business was brought to the attention of the Standing Committee.

·         The President thanked the Standing Committee, and again thanked Mr Poulsen and the Danish delegation for their hospitality.

The meeting closed at 15.00.

 

Respectfully submitted,