8/17/2019 NATO at 70: What's next?
- POLITICO
As member nations gather to celebrate NATO's 70th anniversary this week, POLITICO asked experts to
forecast what the military alliance will look like 10 years from now. | Finnbarr Webster/Getty Images
To give you the best possible experience, this site uses cookies. If you
DEFENSE
continue browsing, you accept our use of cookies. You can review our privacy Accept
NATO at 70: What's next?
policy to find out more about the cookies we use.
By POLITICO STAFF | 04/03/2019 11:51 AM EDT
[Link] 1/9
8/17/2019 NATO at 70: What's next? - POLITICO
As member nations gather to celebrate NATO's 70th anniversary this week, POLITICO
asked experts to forecast what the military alliance will look like 10 years from now.
How should it spend its growing resources? What new technologies are needed to
counter Russian aggression? What threats must NATO prepare for that are not being
discussed today?
Answers have been edited for length and clarity.
Envisioning NATO 4.0
Retired Adm. James Stavridis is operating executive at the Carlyle Group. He is a
former supreme allied commander for NATO
If you think of NATO as a computer program, NATO 1.0 was the Cold War — two
massive war machines on hair-trigger alert staring each other down across the Fulda
gap in Europe. NATO 2.0 was very expansive and reflected the counter-terrorism
operations post-9/11 into Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. Now we are in NATO 3.0, which
has refocused on Europe and the threat of Russian adventurism as exemplified by their
forays into Moldova, Georgia and above all Ukraine — not NATO members to be sure,
but NATO partners.
I'd say NATO 4.0 in 10 years will continue to guard its members in Europe from Russian
pressure, but will also be far more engaged on the borders of the Alliance in the High
North (Arctic); be vastly better at cybersecurity and offensive cyber capability as an
alliance; and continue to address illegal migration and attendant movement of terror
groups from the south.
Morning Defense newsletter
Sign up for Morning Defense, a daily briefing on Washington's national security apparatus.
Your email…
By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.
While NATO might add another member or two (perhaps Georgia, Sweden or Finland)
it will remain roughly the same size and composition.
NATO’s biggest long-term challenges are a diminishing appetite from the U.S. for
security
To give guarantees for Europe,
you the best possible as exemplified
experience, by
this site uses the Trump
cookies. If you administration's highly
ambivalent attitude toward the alliance. This will be compounded by Brexit
continue browsing, you accept our use of cookies. You can review our privacy
and the
Accept
attendant centrifugal forces pulling at Europe, which will in turn undermine political
policy to find out more about the cookies we use.
[Link] 2/9
8/17/2019 NATO at 70: What's next? - POLITICO
unity — the true Achilles’ heel of an organization that operates on consensus. Finally,
there will be downward pressure on defense budgets on both sides of the Atlantic as
nations try to address social and infrastructure needs.
Priorities will be more on cyber, unmanned vehicles (from space to the bottom of the
sea) and special forces. There will be a greater emphasis on maritime and less on land-
warfare capabilities, unless Russian adventurism becomes particularly acute.
A more balanced partnership
Alexander Vershbow is a distinguished fellow at the Atlantic Council. He was deputy
secretary general of NATO.
In terms of what NATO will look like, I think it will probably not have expanded any
further, with the possible exception of Finland and Sweden going from partnership to
membership. What I would like to see is the alliance become a more genuinely balanced
partnership between the United States and Europe. Today the United States provides 70
to 80 percent of all key capabilities as well as spending a disproportionate amount of
defense dollars.
I think as the U.S. shifts its focus increasingly toward countering China, Europe is going
to need to backfill and take on much greater responsibility, including the defense of
Europe against Russia.
The only actual live candidates to join the Alliance are Bosnia-Herzegovina, Ukraine and
Georgia, which are special cases because of territory occupied by the Russians. I think
after the addition of North Macedonia and Montenegro, there will probably be a pause
in actual admissions. If Finland and Sweden decide they’re sufficiently threatened by
Russia, they may decide to move from a very close partnership to actual membership.
In terms of spending, there’s a long list of capabilities where the United States is
providing the lion’s share these days — airlift, transport aircraft, air-to-air refueling
tankers, intelligence, surveillance and drones.
Over the next decade, Europe should set what NATO calls a “higher level of ambition.”
The challenge to getting there is making the case to the public that defense spending still
matters. Many countries are still worried about terrorism or illegal migration. These are
the immediate challenges that worry the southern flank: the Spanish, Italians, Greeks
and French.
To give you the best possible experience, this site uses cookies. If you
NATO hasbrowsing,
continue partnerships withour
you accept countries southYou
use of cookies. ofcan
Europe,
review such as the Mediterranean
our privacy Accept
Dialogue
policy to and themore
find out [Istanbul Cooperation
about the Initiative]. So I would hope in the next 10 years
cookies we use.
[Link] 3/9
8/17/2019 NATO at 70: What's next? - POLITICO
NATO will get more serious about its southern neighborhood at a level comparable to
the eastern flank with Russia.
WHITE HOUSE
As Trump rages over border, Kushner quietly plans legal
immigration boost
By ANITA KUMAR
Watch the eastern flank
Heather Conley is director of the Europe Program at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies. She is a former deputy assistant secretary of State in the Bureau
of European and Eurasian Affairs.
At the 80th anniversary, and assuming the Russia threat remains constant if not more
aggressive, I would suspect there’s going to be a greater NATO presence on the eastern
flank, potentially seeing a more significant maritime, land and air presence.
The alliance may not bring on new members but just enhance the heck out of the NATO
partner countries.
There’s the potential for Georgia and Ukraine to join, but right now I don’t believe either
have the consensus to join. The politics would need a significant sea change in the
Russian government’s perspective on this. Russia’s position could become more
unstable and externally aggressive, and those border nations would seek an even closer
relationship with NATO. I just don’t think it’s going to be a formal membership. I think
you’ll see a more pragmatic set of engagements.
The challenge for NATO for the next 10 years is the variety of threats that they need to
have the military capability to respond to.
Looking at Russia, we’ll continue to see NATO build out its maritime capability. The
German navy has become more capable with more surface and subsurface vessels. We’ll
have the United Kingdom with the two aircraft carriers finally online. With Russia
modernizing its submarine nuclear deterrent, we’ll see a lot more anti-submarine
activity and things like that.
Countering China in a new age
Kenneth Weinstein is president and CEO of the Hudson Institute.
To give you the best possible experience, this site uses cookies. If you
I think we’re entering a whole new stage. NATO has had massive needs toAccept
continue browsing, you accept our use of cookies. You can review our privacy
build up its
deterrent capacity to face a new era of warfare that’s going to be radically different than
policy to find out more about the cookies we use.
what we’ve faced so far, with artificial intelligence, with cloud capacity, with big data,
[Link] 4/9
8/17/2019 NATO at 70: What's next? - POLITICO
with the Internet of things, facing authoritarian nations that will themselves be
increasing their capacities in these areas.
Part of the problem is, both China and Russia are bringing the battle against NATO
home. As the security challenges rise, NATO’s opponents will continue to augment their
game against alliance unity.
Turkey’s future in NATO I think is uncertain. Looking at the Balkans as well I think
there will be the temptation to expand as Russia tries to expand its footprint there. [The
alliance could expand to] Georgia and the Balkans. I think Ukraine, that’s liable to
depend on political developments.
In terms of weapons purchases, we’re entering a whole new phase in the way one thinks
about deterrence and cyber warfare. There will be an increase in purchases of drones,
underwater unmanned vehicles, next-generation fighters, F-35s. It’s a big moment
where the challenges are getting greater and NATO is certainly stepping up its
capabilities.
In terms of speed, I think there’s a strong sense that [the member nations] need to get
their act together. I think the French are leading the effort in pushing for a European
defense capability within NATO designed to bolster the transatlantic alliance. They’re
trying to make sure the defense industrial base in Europe doesn’t completely wither
away. It’s a gigantic change, particularly at a time when Germany is just not in the game
as it should be.
The strategic challenge of the future requires a level of creativity and engagement in
developing technologies with a mindset that you need these technologies in place to
deter, but you don’t necessarily need to use them.
It’s a critical time for the alliance and even more critical as these new technologies
develop as the Chinese seem absolutely hell-bent on developing them and the Russians
seem very intent on using their massive economic resources. We’re entering a whole
new age.
Look to the Arctic
Daniel Kochis is a policy analyst for European affairs at The Heritage Foundation.
If NATO completes the shift back toward its primary reason for existence — the
territorial defense of the member states — then the alliance will be in good shape in
2029. The alliance needs the capabilities, plans and political will in place to defend the
To give you the best possible experience, this site uses cookies. If you
territorial integrity of all of its members, particularly in the Baltic and Black
continue browsing, you accept our use of cookies. You can review our privacy
Sea regions.
Accept
policy to find out more about the cookies we use.
[Link] 5/9
8/17/2019 NATO at 70: What's next? - POLITICO
Russia is unlikely to change its behavior across the next decade. If anything, the
continued economic problems Russia will face, along with its declining geopolitical
weight, means that the regime will continue to utilize outside aggression to justify its
domestic oppression.
One other theater NATO should address in the coming decade is the Arctic. The Arctic is
a strategically important region, and ignoring its importance for collective security is
short-sighted. NATO must take on a greater role in this region, starting with developing
a NATO Arctic strategy.
The biggest challenges to NATO across the next decade are going to be internal. One
facet is the burden-sharing discussion. Another facet of the internal challenge is political
willingness. NATO must do all in its power not to devolve into an alliance where some
nations take part in hard security, and are willing to risk the blood and treasure of their
people to defend freedom, and others only take part in soft power-type missions, or in
support roles, rather than combat roles.
A separate, but no less important, challenge is the effort of some within Europe to
develop an independent EU military capability. The creation of an EU force would not
only be duplicative, but would weaken NATO, siphoning off scarce resources from the
alliance.
More member states need to be spending money on actual capabilities — planes, ships,
tanks — and in developing new technologies. Recent calls by some in NATO for a change
in national budget spending rules, most recently suggested by Italy’s defense minister,
are mistaken. These changes would count things like infrastructure and cybersecurity
into countries’ defense spending figures. This would in turn accelerate the movement of
national defense budgets from procuring capabilities to domestic infrastructure projects
which are politically expedient to national politicians. Ultimately, this would hasten the
erosion of capabilities within many member states.
Reinforce weak spots
George Robertson is a British Labour Party politician who served as the 10th
secretary-general of NATO from 1999 to 2004.
When it comes to NATO's future, we — the alliance's members — are our own greatest
challenge. If we don't take seriously our own safety, we'll be endangering all that has
been achieved in the last 70 years.
To give you the best possible experience, this site uses cookies. If you
NATO today has considerable firepower. The reason it has survived longer than any
continue browsing, you accept our use of cookies. You can review our privacy Accept
other defense alliance in history is that it has
policy to find out more about the cookies we use.
put values — like free speech and a free
press, the rule of law and an independent judiciary, the separation of church and state,
[Link] 6/9
8/17/2019 NATO at 70: What's next? - POLITICO
and above all else a tolerance of contrary opinions — at the core of its mission. These are
our towering strengths, and they must be protected.
We're entering a time of great geopolitical change and cannot afford to become
complacent. The alliance needs to do more to deliver on promises made and share
burdens equitably. Although NATO is powerful and its deterrence forces are credible, we
also have weak spots that our adversaries know how to exploit. They seek to interfere in
elections, dominate online platforms, exploit corruption, and feed global organized
crime networks. Battle tanks and missiles are no defense against online interference and
targeted infrastructure attacks.
To face these challenges, we need to dedicate more resources to ramping up intelligence.
We need to be agile with informing and educating our populations and countering
online mischief. We need to reinforce the defenses of our democratic institutions.
U.S. President Donald Trump has shattered the illusion that Washington will always be
there to secure Europe. And while he should remind himself that 70 years of NATO have
been one of America's best investments, his attitude has had a silver lining: It has
galvanized Europeans into spending more on defense. As we enter into the next decades
of the alliance, we also need to make sure we're spending our money the right way.
CONGRESS
Disaster aid stalls in Senate, as Trump revs up attack on
Puerto Rico
By MARIANNE LEVINE
Lock in gains
Camille Grand is assistant secretary-general for defense investment at NATO.
Today, NATO faces the most unpredictable security situation in many years: with Russia
destabilizing large parts of Europe; instability across the Alliance’s Southern flank
feeding terrorism; and new cyber and hybrid threats. Since 2014, we have been engaged
in an ambitious transformation to make sure NATO addresses these threats.
The defense spending trend has been reversed, with an additional $100 billion invested
in defense in the 2016-2020 period. This has started to address the critical issue of
burden-sharing across the Atlantic and movement toward the alliance's 2 percent
spending target. It will also greatly enhance our ability to preserve, for the next 10 years
and beyond, NATO’s position as the single most important contributor to security,
To give you the best possible experience, this site uses cookies. If you
stability and peace for almost 1 billion citizens in Europe and North America.
continue browsing, you accept our use of cookies. You can review our privacy Accept
policy to find out more about the cookies we use.
[Link] 7/9
8/17/2019 NATO at 70: What's next? - POLITICO
The alliance's acquisition of core capabilities that address shortfalls and enhance our
readiness has also put us on the right track to address future challenges. NATO has
renewed its focus on interoperability requirements, complemented by a strategy of long-
term investment in cutting-edge technology.
NATO’s relevance in 10 years will rely on its ability to continue to react, adapt,
modernize and reflect the common interests of the allies. Our investment in the
transatlantic bond will also be key to our future success. Like any relationship, it needs
nurturing and it is evolving. We must never take the mutual benefits for granted.
Protect critical infrastructure
Tomáš Valášek is director of think tank Carnegie Europe.
To strengthen NATO for the next decade, don't start with the militaries — they're
already reasonably strong. Military investments will come to naught if, in times of
crises, our governments can be blackmailed and paralyzed by cyberattacks. The
alliance's most pressing challenge lies in securing its member countries' critical IT
networks.
The increasing interconnectedness of the critical civilian networks that manage trains,
hospitals and utilities is our greatest vulnerability. Our adversaries would be foolish to
hit us where we are relatively strong. Instead, they will take the path of least resistance:
disrupting the provision of life-saving care to patients in hospitals; turning off electricity
and heating; and sowing chaos on the roads and rails via cyberattacks.
By crippling our critical networks, our adversaries' goal is to divide NATO from within.
Even Russia knows it would struggle against the combined forces of the 29. What it
seeks to do instead is to put pressure on allied capitals and test their willingness to come
to one another's aid.
This trap is not particularly difficult to escape but the solution requires time, focus and
money. Managers of critical IT services should face penalties for failing to properly
secure them. The insurance companies should insist on higher internet security
standards. Governments should pay for the (mostly private) managers of a country's
most important networks to have access to the best IT expertise and assistance. This will
cost money — and most of it will come, presumably, from outside governments' defense
budgets.
This is not an argument against raising defense budgets. NATO allies still fall short on
To give you the best possible experience, this site uses cookies. If you
many important military capabilities, including the means to destroy adversaries' air
continue browsing, you accept our use of cookies. You can review our privacy Accept
defenses. The alliance needs to make both
policy to find out more about the cookies we use.
issues — securing critical infrastructure and
increasing national defense spending — equal priorities.
[Link] 8/9
8/17/2019 NATO at 70: What's next? - POLITICO
About Us
Advertising
Breaking News Alerts
Careers
Credit Card Payments
Digital Edition
FAQ
Feedback
Headlines
Photos
POWERJobs
Press
Print Subscriptions
RSS
Site Map
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy
© 2019 POLITICO LLC
To give you the best possible experience, this site uses cookies. If you
continue browsing, you accept our use of cookies. You can review our privacy Accept
policy to find out more about the cookies we use.
[Link] 9/9
