Global Security: in Search of a New Vision - Center for Strategic ...

Transforming NATO to Meet the New Global Challenges 37
like-minded part ners. And Afghan i stan is, again, tes ta ment to that with 14 ISAF part ners work ing with
us. Our rela tion ships with our ISAF part ners; with the Gov ern ment of Afghan i stan; with key neigh bours
like Paki stan; and through the NATO-Rus sia Coun cil are vitally impor tant.
But we have been slow to adapt our own work ing prac tices to make it easy for our part ners to work
with us. Aus tra lia is a key ISAF part ner which, sadly dem on strated by the Bali bomb ings, has com mon
purpose with us in tackling extremism in Afghanistan. Australia has committed significant numbers of
troops who put their lives on the line with us, and yet it has been hard work for Aus tra lia to get its say in
our col lec tive approach and plan ning in NATO. It is wrong that our part ners have to strug gle so much to
work in proper part ner ship with us—a clas sic case of pro cess defy ing com mon sense—but not the only
one, alas.
The need for NATO to work along side other organi sa tions, espe cially the United Nations and Euro -
pean Union, is equally strong. The fact that they can not is a vic tory for dogma over press ing oper a tional
need. It is incom pre hen si ble to me, the Defence Sec re tary of a coun try in all three organi sa tions, that we
should have such dif fi culty in work ing together. I do not belit tle national con cerns which con spire to
make co-oper a tion so hard, but I do not accept that our armed forces should be expected to pay the price
for this on oper a tions. The prize of the U.N., NATO and the EU work ing prop erly together along side
other inter na tional and regional organi sa tions is more effec tive oper a tions.
I have said what I think it is we need in a trans formed NATOwell-managed operations with the
capa bil i ties and the part ner ships to deliver them and the level of ambi tion we have set our selves in
NATO. I have also men tioned some of the chal lenges, such as struc tural inef fi cien cies, and oppor tu ni ties
to make prog ress, nota bly in learn ing from our col lec tive expe ri ence in Afghan i stan.
POLITICAL WILL AND PUBLIC PERCEPTION
But there is a fur ther, under ly ing issue which frus trates our abil ity to meet these three objec tives. We
must, in NATO, address the issues of polit i cal will and pub lic per cep tion.
The pub lic and pol i ti cians of many Euro pean NATO Allies do not yet see expe di tion ary oper a tions
and capa bil i ties as directly linked to their defence and secu rity. Trust me, they are. NATO is in Afghan i -
stan tak ing on extrem ism and the roots of that extrem ism because it is a grave and proven threat to our
pub lic and to the secu rity of every cit i zen in every NATO coun try, from Istan bul to New York. The ten -
ta cles of this extrem ism have spread far and wide, but its roots have been in the Taleban-pro tected train -
ing camps and safe havens of Afghan i stan. In Afghan i stan, NATO is act ing for our col lec tive defence in
its tru est and noblest sense.
The incli na tion to re-focus on patrol ling the home turf is deeply ingrained, but deeply flawed. And the
accom pa ny ing notion that pro vid ing much needed secu rity out side NATO’s core area some how com -
petes with or detracts from our col lec tive defence is to ignore the real ity that they are the same thing,
requir ing the same kind of forces.
NATO and its Allies need to focus harder on mak ing the case for change: we have one set of forces
which can be used for cri sis response or for col lec tive defence under Arti cle 5; our defence will often
need to hap pen far from home; increas ingly we shall need to work more closely with oth ersinternational
organi sa tions and part ner nationsin deliv er ing a broader vision of secu rity. We, as the polit i cal
lead ers, must be the agents for that change.
I do not see the chal lenge as fun da men tally dif fer ent from explain ing why we need to act on cli mate
change, or take action to avoid short ages in key nat u ral resources. Globalisation means we need to lift
pub lic atten tion beyond the ‘here and now’, beyond our respec tive back yards. Cli mate change does not
just affect the Arc tic; secu rity is not just about guard ing the gar den gate. Our publics need to know that