On June 29, at the SDA’s annual flagship conference, Dutch Defence Minister Hans Hillen emphasised that “we are already seeing the effect of the financial crisis on our capabilities”. Facing these tough realities, the Minister was nonetheless optimistic that pooling, sharing and “Smart Defence” will lead to a successful transformation of European militaries, but only if they can come to accept the “mutual interdependence and reliance” that this entails. In the Ministers opinion, “you cannot rely on soft power alone, you must also have the muscle to defend your interests, and the interests of your allies abroad”.

 

Session 1

 

During the first session of the day, the debate focused on the practical challenges of declining national budgets for military, policy and industry actors. General Knud Bartels, Danish Chief of Defence, advocated a “military off-the-shelf” solution for Europe’s smaller states, for whomdevelopment and procurement costs were otherwise too high. He emphasised the value of “faster, cheaper and more effective solutions to real military priorities – not industrial interests”.

 

Jean-Francois Bureau, French Contrôleur General des Armées, explained how France’s own ambitious military reform efforts could help Europe navigate these difficult times. Referencing the recent British-French Lancaster Treaty, he explained that it sent the “message that we need to mutualise our military capabilities and future defence investments”.

 

Speaking about NATO’s own internal reform efforts, Huseyin Dirioz, Assistant Secretary General for Defence Policy and Planning, felt that while austerity was affecting “all branches of society – our armed forces are particularly exposed”. He maintained that “NATO has an essential part to play in “defence planning, procurement, identifying investment priorities and tackling emerging security challenges”.

 

Finally, speaking from the perspective of “the sector that provides the muscle”, Scott Harris, President for Continental Europe of Lockheed Martin, focused on Europe’s “pool it or lose it” moment. From his point of view, the most important thing governments can do to increase procurement efficiency is to “outline your requirements from day one”, to avoid costly alterations or wasted effort.

 

Session 2

 

The second session tackled the controversial topic of missile defence co-operation between Russia and NATO Gen. Emmanuel De Romémont, Deputy Director for Strategic Affairs in the French MOD, admitted that cooperation with Russia was “proving difficult”. However, he also felt that “reasonable and realistic ambitions” could yet be achieved, with the areas of early warning and joint exercises offering “lots to discuss” between both parties.

 

Karl-Heinz Kamp, Research Director at the NATO Defence College, agreed that “despite all the quarrels, the NATO-Russia relationship is better than in all of its history”, which offers a “stable foundation” for discussion. In a pointed query, the Director also asked “if European allies could specify what they intend to contribute” to missile defence plans – a reminder that the US currently carries the majority of the burden.
To crystallise the necessity of missile defence, Barry Pavel, Director of the Program on International Security at the Atlantic Council, highlighted the “growing and rather immediate rising threat from Iran”. Dismissing Russian concern that missile defence was intended to neutralise their nuclear deterrent as unfounded, he expounded that there is a “vast playing field for cooperation”, as long as certain US “red lines” regarding operational control and sensitive technology were observed.

 

In response to the conciliatory tone of his fellow panellists, Dmitry Rogozin, Russian Ambassador to NATO and Special Envoy on missile defence, posed a series of challenging questions about NATO’s plans. He was particularly keen to hear “why this system should have the capacity to intercept inter-continental ballistic missiles”, which nations such as Iran cannot obtain. In conclusion, the Ambassador imagined only two possible scenarios from current negotiations. In one, the creation of a “common NATO-Russia Council system”, with shared data fusion and interception. In the other, two separate systems, combined with a warning that “you cannot, must not, transgress national borders with your system”.

 

Session 3

 

In the final session, the future equipment and strategic needs of NATO were discussed, with a focus on cybersecurity. Adm. Giampaolo Di Paola, Chairman of NATO's Military Committee, discussed the "wake up" call for Europe issued by outgoing US Defense Secretary Robert Gates earlier this month. This process will be demanding, he continued, as "we have to prioritise, we cannot say we want everything - tis is not a situation we can afford". In the Admiral's opinion, "investment in deployable and usable forces" should take precedence within the alliance.

Moving on to cyber security, Jason Healey, Director of the Cyber Statecraft Initiative at the Atlantic Council if the United States, praised the "very strong foundations" laid by NATO's recent cyber defence strategy.
Calling on member states to "focus on the basics" of network security before tackling complex global cyber policy issues, the US expert also expressed his belief that "cyber-war" as it is imagined by the popular media may be an exaggeration. Instead, we should be concerned by basic espionage, and sensitive data "walking out the door" of unsecure networks.

Leendert van Bochoven, NATO and European Defence Leader at IBM, explored the deeper meaning of pooling and sharing in the cyber domain. "NATO's approach to cyber defence will require a pooling and sharing of capabilities, and also a pooling and sharing of insights and experience", he explained. He also expressed concern that "technology far outpaces procurement processes", a problem Europe will need to reform if it is to stay ahead of future threats.
The final address was delivered by Gerald Howarth, British Minister for International Security Strategy. In a far-reaching speech, the Minister addressed the need to "spend our scarce resources wisely" to pull Europe's declining capabilities back from the brink. He also cited how the unrest of the Arab Spring, operations in Afghanistan and Libya, and new threats such as piracy and cyberattacks prove "that you cannot address all security threats from the North Atlantic area".

Bearing this in mind, NATO members must follow the Franco-British example, and pool their collective resources to bring "teeth" to security operations.
However, "such arrangements must be pragmatic, and have real military co-operation at their core - if they are to be anything more than merely political posturing", he warned