Military twists and turns in world politics: downsides or dividends for UN peace operations?

Russia’s challenge to the post-cold war order, and the rise of Islamic State have resulted in a call for increased military spending among NATO members. Despite the increased demand for UN peace operations, any expansion is unlikely to benefit the world organisation. Instead we see an increasing reliance upon regional organisations like the African Union, European Union and NATO, in particular, for robust peace operations. An analysis of Western states (France, Germany and the USA) suggests that future investments in weaponry, technology and staff will primarily benefit NATO and the EU, but not the United Nations.     

One measure cannot trump it all: lessons from NATO’s early burden-sharing debates

This paper calls for a qualitative turn in discussing NATO burden-sharing. The paper takes issue with the numerical burden-sharing narrative in NATO and identifies its two main problems. Despite being simple, the 2% defence spending pledge lacks other basic attributes of any contributory system: fairness and effectiveness. Drawing from concepts of distributive justice, the paper analyses NATO’s first burden-sharing debates and demonstrates that due to their qualitatively different capabilities, the allies agreed on an egalitarian ability-to-pay distributive justice. Furthermore, it shows that the allies refrained from implementing fairness in terms of a one-size-fits-all formula, since this simple numerical approach could not produce fair and effective burden-sharing at the same time. Rather, they developed a dynamic framework for optimal sharing. These formative burden-sharing debates provide valuable lessons learned for the current build-up of NATO’s posture: less focused on formal sharing, more concerned with strategic outputs.     

Preparing NATO for the Future – Operating in an Increasingly Contested Environment

The global proliferation of precision-strike systems may be challenging the foundations of Western military-technological supremacy. Relatedly, the development of so-called Anti-Access and Area Denial (A2/AD) capabilities across the globe threatens to complicate Western freedom of military movement and access, and could give way to a more contested military-strategic environment. The twin challenges of precision-strike proliferation and A2/AD strongly impact NATO’s agenda, which revolves around strengthening deterrence and defence in Eastern Europe, and addressing the different threats emanating from the so-called Southern European neighbourhood. In order to address or mitigate such challenges, the Alliance needs to produce operational concepts and capabilities able to deliver deterrence and expeditionary warfare in a maturing precision-strike environment, one characterised by the emergence of A2/AD capabilities.     

NATO: The United States, Transformation and the War in Afghanistan

During the Bush years, NATO exhibited in stark form two trends which have long characterised its development: periodic exposure to crisis and division, and a subordination to American leadership. Despite signs of American indifference towards the alliance, talk of the Bush administration levering a break with NATO was always overstated, particularly so during its second term of office. Views of NATO after 2004 were shaped by Afghanistan giving rise, in fact, to a return to the alliance on America's part. NATO remains important to Bush's successor but on terms which are as demanding as those of his predecessors. NATO, in other words, is valued in so far as it accords with current US foreign policy priorities. The safest assumption in this regard is that Obama will continue to favour the trend towards a global NATO pursued by the Bush administration. However, retreat (or defeat) in Afghanistan could hasten a contrary trend towards a consolidating NATO with a renewed concentration on the wider Europe.     

历史演进视角下的欧盟与北约关系走向——兼析拜登当选的影响

自欧盟确立共同安全与防务政策以来,欧盟独立防务与北约之间存在着“相互替代”和“相互增强”两种论调。争论焦点在于价值观念、威胁评估和战略文化、军事和民事能力、国防工业和支出。在过去几年,欧盟与北约的关系也围绕上述四个方面发生变化。具体而言,欧盟与北约之间总体上呈现以合作为主、竞争为辅、两者同步增强的发展态势。美国新任总统拜登承诺修复美国与盟友的关系,包括进一步加强北约。同时,美、欧将在价值观念上回归“旧常态”,在威胁评估和战略文化上进一步靠拢,在民事和军事手段的运用以及增加国防工业投入上也会有更多共识和共同行动。因此,欧盟与北约的关系将进一步呈现相互增强的态势,但前提是欧盟的战略自主建设不只是出于做强自身,而是更多地为了使欧、美双方公平承担相应的责任。     

Kosovo: Where It All Began

Kosovo, a largely ethnically Albanian province of the Serbian republic, played an important role in Yugoslavia's troubles in the last two decades of the twentieth century. Shortly after Tito's death in 1980, disturbances in Kosovo set the Albanians and the Serbs on a collision course and also polarized the country politically. Ironically, when Yugoslavia began to disintegrate in 1991, and as it fell into four years of warfare, Kosovo remained relatively calm. Only after the Dayton peace, in late 1995, did Kosovo's Albanians opt for a militant policy toward the Serbs. Meanwhile Serbs escalated their oppression of the local population. International diplomatic intervention failed to defuse tensions, and ultimately, NATO initiated military action to stop Serbia. NATO prevailed in the seventy-eight day engagement in 1999, while Kosovo acquired greater autonomy and was put under UN protection.     

Foreign policy, rhetorical action and the idea of otherness: The Czech Republic and Russia

This article employs the concept of rhetorical action in an analysis of the recent developments in Czech-Russian political relations. Through the discourse analysis of key Russian political speeches and official documents related to the Czech Republic, as well as Czech speeches tackling the same issues, we look at two different rhetorical actions employed by Russia to induce changes in Czech policy. The attempts to make Czech policy unacceptable in the wider community of European democracies were only partially successful. While the first rhetorical action aimed against Czech NATO membership failed, the new diplomatic strategy stressing the need for a “normalization” of relations was successful in transforming Czech policy towards Russia.     

New threats – different response: EU and NATO and Somali piracy

When the European Union (EU) launched its first military naval mission, EU NAVFOR Somalia, Atalanta, the states who are members of both the EU and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) made a political choice: to prioritize the EU over NATO in their multilateral military efforts to fight piracy and its consequences. Thereby, Atalanta challenges the conventional assumption that EU security cooperation will remain limited. It also challenges the widely held belief that the European states will chose to act through NATO if dealing multilaterally with international security issues. How can we explain this decision? This analysis suggests that it can be explained in two phases where different mechanisms were at work. In the first phase, which can be accounted for from a neo-realist perspective, France, who held the Presidency, used particular favorable geopolitical conditions to put an autonomous EU operation on the agenda. However, agreement on the EU option cannot be explained as a result of strategic bargaining. Instead, in a second phase and in line with an alternative hypothesis building on the theory of communicative action, the EU member states came to support the French suggestion due to legitimacy considerations regarding the legal framework of the two operations.     

乌克兰事件的世界意义 及其对中国的警示

2014年乌克兰危机和克里米亚回归俄罗斯,对欧洲的意义是确定了欧洲人主导的“新凡尔赛体制”东扩的极限和边界。边界历来都是武力确定的。克里米亚的结局对俄罗斯的意义在于俄罗斯守住了生存底线——底线是俄罗斯未来复兴的基础和前提;对欧洲来说,意味着欧洲东扩已抵极限。从彼得大帝到斯大林,俄罗斯只是在波罗的海东岸地区与欧洲进行过边界拉锯,而在乌克兰,除了在第二次世界大战中的斯大林和冷战时期的戈尔巴乔夫有意收缩和放弃外,俄罗斯在乌克兰这个地方基本没有失过手。从对付拿破仑到希特勒的“胜利”经验中,西方人明白,在陆军可以发挥作用的近地,俄国人往往可以完胜。黑海离俄罗斯太近且陆地相连,陆军可以直接进驻;而西方海权国家在此则鞭长莫及。克里米亚对俄罗斯是生死之地,而对欧洲则是重要利益点,为了它,俄罗斯会用全部资源,而西方则不会。如果清楚俄罗斯在乌克兰归属的历史,也就知道2014年乌克兰事件意味着俄国反击欧洲东扩的历史才真正开始。乌克兰事件的影响是全球性的,其中的一些经验教训对中国而言,是有警示意义的。