Report

The Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association has the honour to present its report respecting its participation in the Spring Session 2010 of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, held in Riga, Latvia 28 May – 1 June.  Canada was represented by Senator Raynell Andreychuk, Senator Jane Cordy, Senator Joseph A. Day, Senator Pierre Claude Nolin, Carole Freeman, M.P., Cheryl Gallant, M.P. and Brian Murphy, M.P.

The plenary session was opened by the Hon. John Tanner (U.S.), President of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.  In his remarks Mr. Tanner noted that he was pleased with the progress being made on NATO’s new strategic concept.  He also added that he was very pleased with the Assembly’s contribution to the process and that it was complimentary to the report delivered by the Group of Experts chaired by Madeleine Albright.  There is strong consensus on the critical points:  reaffirming the Alliance’s commitment to Article 5; preparing for new threats, and strengthening Alliance partnerships.

In his opinion there is, however, one issue that deserves particular attention and that is the reform of NATO structures.  Tanner suggested that there is a need to streamline the decision making process in both the civilian and military side of NATO.  “On the civilian side, there are many committees at NATO headquarters that could be combined or rationalized in a way that would make NATO a leaner and more efficient institution.” With respect to Afghanistan in particular, rationalizing the military side would allow Commanders on the ground to act more quickly and get the materials they need and respond to changing conditions on the ground.  He concluded by adding that the same level of efficiency and coordination needs to be brought to bear on civil reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan.  While there are a wide range of agencies and non-governmental agencies working on the ground to improve the well-being of the Afghan people, they do not always work together for maximum efficiency.

The Assembly was also addressed by General Wardak, Minister of Defence of Afghanistan.  He began by thanking Alliance members for the sacrifices they have made on behalf of the people of Afghanistan.  He also suggested that there can be little doubt that we are at a critical juncture with respect to stabilizing Afghanistan.  One of the problems he listed was the fact that those involved had underestimated the scale and of the challenge of rebuilding the state institutions and infrastructure destroyed in the quarter century of conflict.  He went on to point out that the IMF and World Bank have estimated the value of everything destroyed to be about $250 billion, this in a country that was already one of the poorest in the world.  As well, the initial threat assessment was unrealistically low and, as a consequence, not enough troops had been deployed.  According to General Wardak, 2007 marked the first significant investment in building a credible Afghan National Security Force.  He also conceded that progress has hampered by the under-performance of Afghans themselves.

In conclusion, he argued that Afghanistan now has the right strategy to achieve success.  This strategy is not narrowly focused on counter-terrorism, but on a comprehensive civil-military campaign.  The ultimate goal is not about eliminating the enemy, but rather about asserting and ensuring the authority of the government and delivering genuine and lasting peace.  He then listed the various points of agreement between the Alliance and Afghanistan’s government that will help ensure a positive outcome.

The Assembly also heard from His Excellency Mr. Valdis Dombrovski, Prime Minister of the republic of Latvia.  In welcoming delegates he noted that in the six years since NATO membership, Latvia had reached a level of external security, solidarity with its allies and a degree of psychological comfort necessary for Latvia’s further development.  He also argued that Latvia’s accession to NATO also helped strengthen the security of Europe as a whole.  Prime Minister Dombrovski pointed out that over the past six years between half and two thirds of the population supported membership in the Alliance.  He also pointed to the ability of the Alliance’s ability to adjust dynamically to the constantly changing international environment.  In conclusion he stressed the fact that Latvia’s commitment to the Alliance was a long term one.

In addition to Prime Minister Dombrovski, the Assembly was also addressed by Gundras Daudze, Speaker of the Saeima, who reminded delegates that soon after gaining its independence Latvia set membership in the Alliance as one of its most important strategic goals.  He also went on the highlight the importance of the NATO Parliamentary as a foreign for parliamentary diplomacy and the fact that it was celebrating its 55^th anniversary.

In his address to the Assembly, Secretary General Rasmussen spoke on the issue of Afghanistan.  He suggested that although much of the public has become sceptical about the possibility of success in Afghanistan, it was the responsibility of politicians to lead and to explain to their populations what needs to be done collectively.  He argued, with respect to the mission, that it was one that had to succeed, and that if the Alliance remained resolute, it would succeed.  If the Alliance were to walk away prematurely, the Taliban and Al-Qaeda would both be back.  Terrorism would spread through Central Asia and into Europe.  No country would, in the end be safe, facing bombings, high-jacking, and a variety of other terrorist attacks. 

The overall aim, according to Rasmussen, is to change the political foundations in key strategic areas of Afghanistan.  To marginalise the most extreme elements and to isolate the rest of the population those terrorists who will never put down their weapons.  Finally, it is important that the elected government be strengthened.  If this can be accomplished, he concluded, the people of Afghanistan will have a better life.

The Secretary General concluded his remarks with some observations on the New Strategic Concept to be put before heads of state at the next NATO Summit in Lisbon in November 2010.  He noted that the Strategic Concept must explain in clear terms how the Alliance is building security in an ever more complex world.

The Defence and Security Committee was briefed by Imants Liegis, Defence Minister of Latvia, Minister Liegis gave an gave an overview of the redefinition of NATO’s Strategic Concept, as well as Latvia’s role in this process and in the Alliance in general.  During his remarks he also outlined proposals for improved relations with Russia.  Before taking questions from the floor, Mr. Liegis welcomed the recommendations of the Group of Experts concerning the ongoing NATO dialogue with Russia on nuclear issues.  He concluded by suggesting that the Alliance should continue to pursue a united policy of engagement with Russia.

After being briefed by Major General Juris Maklakovs, Chief of Defence of Latvia, members proceeded to the consideration of the draft General Report on Partnering with the Afghan National Security Forces, presented by Frank Cook, General Rapporteur.  The report was a factual briefing on the state of the Afghan National Security Forces, which consist of the Afghan National Army and the Afghan National Police.  In his remarks, Mr. Cook pointed to some of the continuing shortcomings in the two institutions’ ability to provide for basic security for Afghanistan’s citizens.  These problems included leadership deficiencies, corruption, drug abuse, illiteracy, and equipment shortages.  Positive aspects included significant pay raises and literacy training.  In general, Cook believed the mission to be on the right track, but requiring proper resourcing, patience and resolve.

The Committee then heard from Mr. Jack D. Segal, Chief Political Advisor to the Commander, NATO JFC Brunssum.  Segal suggested that because the Alliance’s strategy remained unclear and a definition of success elusive, it has been difficult to coherently explain to our publics and the Afghan population what the Alliance is attempting to do.

According to Segal, the military strategy is to disrupt the Taliban’s efforts to overthrow the Afghan government, develop the Afghan National Security Forces to a level that allows them to operate independently, and to hand over control to the Afghans.  The political strategy he went on to argue relied on reconciliation and reintegration and a political settlement with various fighting factions that will involve unpleasant concessions.  We must stop imposing our own parameters for what is acceptable in reaching such a settlement.  It is not for the Alliance to determine the rights of women, impose a system of government, or define democracy for the Afghans.

Segal also argued that the security situation remained serious and lamented the fact that we are as large a part of the problem of corruption in Afghanistan as our Afghan partners, with huge and poorly monitored funding being poured into an unaccountable situation.  Segal offered a very pragmatic definition of success.  It mandated helping the Afghans build their own system of security, tightening controls over our massive financial contributions, and leaving it to Afghans to sort out political arrangements with their opponents.  Segal concluded by noting that the outcome is likely to be ambiguous, uncertain, and imperfect.  In the end, he believed it prudent that we accept this reality.

Senator Joseph Day then presented the report on Security Issues in the High North and NATO’s role in the region.  He presented the report on behalf of Ragnheidur Arnadottir who was unable to attend.  Senator Day suggested that the report put the situation in the Arctic into realistic perspective.  That is, all Arctic actors by and large agree on a basic legal and institutional framework to govern their cooperation in the region, which includes the Arctic Council and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas.  He concluded by saying that none of the Arctic actors have any interest in rising tensions negatively affecting the new economic opportunities emerging in the region.

The Committee then went on to Consider the draft Report of the Sub-Committee on Future Security and Defence Capabilities, on Us Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons in Europe: A Fundamental NATO Debate.  The report was presented by Raymond Knops (Netherlands).

The Science and Technology Committee heard from Vaira Vike-Freiberger, former President of the Republic of Latvia on the issue of energy security, a view from the Baltics.  She argued that Alliance members should not let their different energy situations obscure the common values and principles that should bind the Alliance.  Mrs. Vike-Freiberger also argued that statements from Moscow indicate that Russia intends to use its energy and other economic assets to increase its political influence over some of its most vulnerable neighbours.  A single NATO policy should be established to coordinate the different Allies’ priorities to ensure that the Alliance can “sing the same tune”, especially with regard to relations with Russia.

Inter alia, the Committee also considered the draft Special Report on Climate Change:  Post-Copenhagen Challenges, presented by Senator Pierre-Claude Nolin.  In introducing his report Senator Nolin stressed the fact that the global climate change response effort finds itself at a critical juncture.  Several recent developments have reduced the initial optimism that the international community would tackle this problem in a concerted and comprehensive manner.  He insisted that while there have been disputes over some scientific findings, the central tenets of climate science have stood up to scrutiny.  During the ensuing discussion Senator Nolin insisted that his report was realistic rather than idealistic and that the international community lacks sufficient leadership and willingness to act.

The Political Committee heard a presentation by Alvis Ronis, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Latvia, who spoke on Latvia’s Foreign and Security Priorities.  In his remarks Minister Ronis provided an overview of Latvia’s foreign and security priorities and offered suggestions on NATO’s possible adaptation to the changing international security environment.  He also argued that Article 5 remains the core of the Washington Treaty.

Inter alia the Committee considered the draft General Report Alliance Cohesion, presented by Senator Raynell Andreychuk.  Following opening comments by the Rapporteur, there was a wide ranging discussion on subjects such as Alliance relations with Russia, Alliance Members’ contributions to Afghanistan, reform of NATO institutions, the New Strategic concept, and the NATO-EU relationship. 

The Committee on the Civil Dimension of Security, heard from Professor Zaneta Ozolina, University of Latvia, on the subject of Human Security.  Professor Ozolina explained that the rapid emergence of the concept of human security in the early 1990’s reflects a transformation in the security environment, a shift from a state centric approach to one that emphasizes societal security.  Human security, she noted, is now universally defined as “the state of being free from fear and free from want.”

Ozolina argued that while the majority of studies and policies relating to human security are targeted at developing countries, the concept and its principles should be incorporated into the security policies of all countries.  Furthermore, human security should not be a component only of foreign and security policy but should also be incorporated into domestic policy.

The speaker also stressed that cooperation needs to be established and strengthened between the national and international levels, as well as among international bodies, in addressing human security concerns.  In particular, NATO and the European Union need to share rather than divide responsibility.

The Committee then went on to consider its various draft reports dealing with Maritime Security, Governance Challenges in Afghanistan, and Democratic Governance in the Western Balkans.

The Economics and Security Committee heard a presentation by Ilmars Rimsevics, Governor of the Bank of Latvia, on A profile of the Latvian Economy.  He noted that the Latvian economy had suffered a greater contraction than any other EU or NATO member.  He then went on to explain why this had happened.  Following the session with Mr. Rimsevics, the Committee was addressed by Spyros Economides, Senior Lecturer in International Relations and European Politics, London School of Economics.  He spoke on the Greek Financial Crisis:  Its Implications for the European and the Global Economy.  He argued that the crisis in Greece is primarily a political one, the root causes of which go back to the attitude of citizens toward the State.  Greeks see the state as a system of provision rather than one of support.  Thus, he felt that standard Greek economic practices – such as clientelism – were part and parcel of the running up of the enormous public deficits and debts.  While the debt crisis may be a recent phenomenon, it is the result of decades of poor State management.

The Committee then proceeded to the consideration of its draft reports on Transatlantic Economic Relations, Global Recession, Poverty and Insecurity in the Developing World, and the draft report on Long Term Economic Change and the Shifting Global Balance of Power.

Respectfully submitted,

The Honourable Senator Jane Cordy Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association (NATO PA)