  |
|
|
INTRODUCTION
The Canadian Delegation to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Parliamentary Assembly (NATO PA) has the honour to present its report on the Joint Meeting of the Defence and Security, Economics and Security and Political Committees, held in Brussels, Belgium, on 24-26 February 2013. Canada was represented by Mrs. Cheryl Gallant, M.P., Head of the Canadian Delegation, Senator Raynell Andreychuk, Chair of the NATO PA Political Committee, Senator Joseph A. Day, Chair of the NATO PA Defence and Security Committee, Senator George Furey, Brent Rathgeber, M.P., Paul Dewar, M.P., and Lawrence MacAuley, M.P. The Delegation was accompanied by Ms. Michelle Tittley, Secretary of Delegation, and Ms. Melissa Radford, Association Advisor from the Library of Parliament.
The main purpose of annual joint committee meetings in Brussels, which also include the the officers of the Committee on the Civil Dimensions of Security and the Science and Technology Committee, is to provide delegates with an update on the Alliance’s activities and operations from senior bureaucrats and military officers working at NATO headquarters. Canadian delegates also met with the NATO Deputy Secretary General, Ambassador Alexander Vershbow, and were briefed by Canada’s Permanent Representative to NATO, Mr. Yves Brodeur.
In addition to the meetings in Brussels, two Canadian delegates - Mrs. Gallant and Senator Day – attended the annual NATO PA Economics and Security Committee’s consultation with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in Paris, France, on 27 February 2013. Delegates had the opportunity to discuss issues related to the ongoing debt crisis facing much of Europe and the United States, new approaches to industrial policy and OECD global outreach with senior OECD officials, as well as the world’s energy outlook with officials from the International Energy Agency.
The meetings in Brussels and Paris were conducted under the Chatham House rule.
Summary of Discussion
Delegates attended eight sessions where they heard from senior civilian officials and senior military personnel from NATO headquarters, senior officials from the European Defence Agency (EDA), as well as various Ambassadors and Permanent Representatives to NATO and the European Union (EU). Senator Andreychuk chaired two sessions of the Political Committee, while Senator Day chaired three sessions of the Defence and Security Committee.
Topics of discussion included an update on ongoing NATO operations, the current state of NATO military capabilities and Smart Defence, partnerships, NATO enlargement, emerging threats, NATO’s implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolutions on Women, Peace and Security, and U.S.-Europe trade relations.
With respect to ongoing NATO operations, delegates were told that Afghanistan remains NATO’s highest priority. The NATO mission in Afghanistan is currently one of transition; region by region, responsibility for security is being transferred from NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) to the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF). Discussion centered on current and future challenges as the transition mission draws to a close in 2014. Though officials agreed that this transition to ANSF responsibility for security in Afghanistan is exceeding expectations, they expressed concern with respect to the country’s security situation and political and economic stability going forward. Presidential elections are due to be held in April, but the UN is not confident that they will be free and fair. The situation within the country post-2014 is also of serious concern. Ongoing challenges with respect to corruption, drugs and terrorism may cause leaders to turn inwards to protect their own ethnic groups as opposed to Afghanistan as whole. This would have a destabilizing effect within the country. It was argued that a coherent strategy led by the Afghan Government and supported by the international community is needed to deal with these interconnected challenges. Officials are also concerned that non-governmental organizations will leave Afghanistan once international military forces pull out.
Officials talked briefly about NATO’s mission in Libya and Kosovo, as well as the Alliance’s counter-piracy operations off the Horn of Africa. Regarding Libya, they noted that the operation was a prime example of why partner countries are important to the Alliance. With respect to Kosovo, the European Union Rule of Law Mission (EULEX), which includes a police force component, has been reduced. As a result, NATO’s Kosovo Force (KFOR) has increasingly taken on the role of first responder, which is not a traditional military task. This has caused tension between NATO and the EU. Officials also noted that corruption continues to impede progress in stabilising the country. Regarding counter-piracy operations, delegates were told that instruments of hard power, such as NATO’s naval operations, and of soft power, such as EU and African Union assistance for strengthening governance and the judicial sector in the affected countries, are all required to combat piracy and insecurity in the region.
Officials also addressed questions pertaining to the crises in Syria and Mali. With respect to Syria, they maintained that the situation is both politically and militarily different than the one encountered in Libya. Therefore, a military solution has not been seen as the best answer. In addition, there has been no UN Security Council Resolution authorizing military intervention. Officials discussed the effects of the Syrian crisis on Turkey, particularly with respect to refugee flows and the deployment of four batteries of Patriot anti-missile systems to its border region with Syria. Canadian delegates expressed concern over who the participants in the Syrian conflict were and those responsible for arming them. With respect to Mali, while some noted with concern the proximity of Mali to Europe, suggesting the need for a more concerted response by NATO, others argued that there would not have been consensus for the Alliance to intervene militarily in the region. Further, some argued that NATO capabilities have not been necessary for the current French-led operations in Mali. NATO, however, is on hand if non-combat activities, such as disarmament through, for example, the control and disposal of small arms and ammunition, are requested by the Malian government. Canadian delegates were interested in learning about NATO’s assistance to military command structures within regional organizations in Africa. Officials stated that while NATO has a mandate to work with the African Union, it does not have a mandate to work with other regional organizations such as ECOWAS.
Officials discussed NATO’s current capability gaps and how allies could help strengthen NATO’s military capabilities to ensure that the Alliance will be able to counter future threats in an era of fiscal restraint through Smart Defence initiatives and better cooperation with the EU. NATO officials urged member-states to stop decreasing defence spending, noting that NATO is currently at a low point. They pointed out that Smart Defence initiatives are meant to ensure that the Alliance does more with less and should not be used as an excuse for governments to make more cuts to their defence budgets. They argued that Europe needs to work towards building its own full spectrum of capabilities since no single European ally can deliver on this alone. Europe also needs to balance its NATO contribution in terms of capabilities, responsibilities and leadership with that of the US. In addition, NATO is planning to increase its military exercises which includes covering the full range of operations allies may participate in, from high intensity combat to crisis management operations.
Officials and delegates also discussed the difficult relationship between NATO and the EU, and the need for the organizations to better cooperate, particularly with respect to defence capabilities and procurement. Delegates were informed of the European Defence Agency’s (EDA) priorities which include working with NATO on a capability development plan and finding synergies among its Pooling and Sharing projects with NATO’s Smart Defence Initiatives. Canadian delegates were interested in the EU’s military procurement process, particularly with respect to the responsibilities of contract authorities and successful tenderers when subcontracting portions of a contract to small and medium enterprises and the associated risks such as added costs and delays. Officials stated that this is the greatest challenge facing the EDA as companies are reluctant to change their supply chain.
NATO officials emphasized the importance of partnerships and enlargement. NATO has worked with non-Alliance states such as Australia, New Zealand, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, to name a few, in operations in Afghanistan and Libya. These partnerships not only help with burden sharing but also give the Alliance situational awareness of regions outside of North America and Europe, where crises may erupt. The Alliance is looking to strengthen these partnerships and build new ones. For example, there are ongoing discussions within the Alliance as to how NATO can enhance its partnership with the Central Asian states beyond the role they currently have as hosts to NATO’s supply routes for its mission in Afghanistan. This reflects in part a recognition that Russia has also given its engagement in Central Asia a high priority while its relations with NATO have not received similar attention in recent years. Therefore, although NATO and Russia are important partners, particularly in Afghanistan, discussions over challenging issues such as NATO’s ballistic missile defence project will likely remain unresolved in the short term.
NATO also maintains its open door policy to liberal-democracies within Europe, but explained that current aspirant states have yet to meet NATO’s standards for accession. Canadian delegates noted that they have been lobbied by parliamentarians from aspirant states who have argued that the NATO standards are unreachable. Officials maintained that some of the standards require the governments of NATO aspirant states to make difficult decisions, but that these are challenges that democracies must address. They argued that if these domestic obstacles cannot be overcome, aspirant states would not have the ability to tackle tough decisions within the Alliance.
Delegates received a briefing on the emerging threats that NATO must be prepared to counter. With respect to cyber-security, NATO officials noted that there were ongoing differences in perspectives among the 28 member-states as to what the Alliance’s mandate should be. So far, NATO’s cyber policy is focussed on defence and there are no plans for an offensive capability. Canadian delegates noted that governments have separated responsibilities for cyber-security between civilian and military departments and agencies, while the private sector is also left out of the equation. Officials argued that these delineations are no longer useful since the most vulnerable targets lie within civilian infrastructure. With respect to terrorism, officials argued that no country should feel immune to this threat. Although the world has yet to experience a cyber-terrorist attack, nations must be working towards countering this possibility. NATO is also concerned about energy security and is working on securing critical infrastructure. Officials urged delegates to raise awareness within their parliaments on these and other emerging threats. Given that one member-state’s vulnerability is also an Alliance vulnerability, officials asked delegates to challenge the belief that national solutions alone are the appropriate way to successfully counter these threats.
NATO officials briefed delegates on NATO’s implementation of the UN Security Council Resolutions on Women, Peace and Security. They reiterated that governments have the primary responsibility to implement the resolutions. So far, NATO only has a fragmented picture of how member-states are incorporating gender training within their own defence departments and militaries; officials called for more transparency on this issue. NATO itself has four strategic priorities with respect to women, peace and security: to raise awareness, show political leadership, further institutionalize the resolutions within NATO’s work and strengthen collaboration with other actors such as the UN. NATO is preparing to integrate a gender perspective in all its decision-making processes. The Alliance has learned that at the operational level, this has enhanced the operational effectiveness of NATO missions. A number of member-states and NATO partners are contributing to information gathering and sharing best practices while others are launching new initiatives. For example, the Nordic Centre for Gender in Military Operations in Sweden is currently conducting a review of NATO operations. As well, the UK government has set up a team of experts with a specific mandate to combat and prevent sexual violence in armed conflict. This team has the capacity to deploy overseas on short notice to gather evidence and testimony in support of investigations and prosecutions. Canadian delegates were interested in how NATO and the UN work together on this issue. Officials explained they were holding a conference with their UN counterparts in May and collaborating on a mapping exercise on training with the view of sharing responsibility for training. Delegates were also told that UN Women was in the process of conducting a review of the national action plans states have developed to implement the UN Security Council Resolutions on Women, Peace and Security.
Finally, delegates received a briefing on the trade and economic relationship between the US and Europe. The combined GDP of the US and Europe currently accounts for 50% of the world’s GDP with trade becoming an increasingly important component of their economic relations. A shared challenge remains promoting transparency and free-market capitalism in light of the increased dominance of Chinese and Russian state-owned enterprises in global markets. Also, in response to the disappointing outcome of the Doha Development Agenda (also known as the Doha Round) and a real need for the US and Europe to create jobs and growth at a time when the majority of these states are struggling economically, the US and the EU plan on formally launching negotiations on a free trade agreement in June 2013. Delegates were told that there appears to be a great sense of urgency from the current leaders in power to have an agreement in place. Negotiations are expected to take two years. Canadian delegates expressed some concern with respect to the US-EU free trade agreement and its possible impact on the Canada-EU free trade agreement currently under negotiation. Officials stated that the intention of the US is to move in parallel with Canadian negotiations given that both countries are seeking a common regulatory standard.
Conclusion
The annual joint committee meetings in Brussels and Paris offer Canada’s delegates the opportunity to have in-depth discussions with senior officials at NATO and the OECD and with parliamentarians from NATO member-states on current defence and economic priorities pertinent to the Alliance. Topics covered by the presentations included ongoing NATO operations, the current state of NATO military capabilities and Smart Defence, partnerships, NATO enlargement, emerging threats, NATO’s implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolutions on Women, Peace and Security, and U.S.-Europe trade relations.
Canada continues to have significant interests in all these issues.
Respectfully submitted,
|
|
 |