By Nigel Chamberlain and Ian Davis, NATO Watch
The Summit
In an exclusive interview with AFP at NATO HQ in Brussels on 16 December, in advance of the European Union’s first summit on defence since 2008, Secretary General Rasmussen said: "We need a Europe that is committed to security, we need a Europe that is outward looking and taking on a global perspective," adding, "we need a stronger Europe -- a stronger Europe also means a stronger NATO”.
Rasmussen acknowledged that “it will be increasingly difficult for European nations to purchase advanced expensive military equipment in the future on their own," but
"if they pool and share resources, if they go for joint efforts ... if we do it together, then we can acquire these military capabilities”. He called for ‘complementarity’ whereby “European nations give priority to developing an air-to-air refuelling capacity there is no reason for NATO to do the same”.
Relations with Russia still prove difficult. Rasmussen insisted Russia had no reason to fear NATO and EU policy of encouraging former Soviet states, such as Ukraine, to move closer to European integration as "it is also in Russia's interest to have security and stability along its western borders”.
Asked about the possible impact on NATO of Washington's ‘pivot' towards Asia, Rasmussen said: "First of all I think it is also in Europe's interest that the US engage more actively in the Asia-Pacific region, taking into account the rise of emerging powers like China. I do not see that pivot to Asia taking place at the expense of the transatlantic relationship.”
Finally, Rasmussen said he thought it was right that Washington should ask its NATO allies to take a greater share in the transatlantic burden. “I think Europe could do more and in that respect I welcome the EU summit. I hope the outcome will be a stronger European commitment to investing in necessary military capabilities," he reiterated.
The Secretary General has repeatedly called for closer coordination between the EU and NATO to avoid duplication and for EU Member States to maintain investment in defence and increase procurement of drones for surveillance, intelligence and reconnaissance, heavy transport, air-to-air refuelling and sea-based radar.
He attended the EU Foreign Affairs Council (FAC) meeting in Brussels on 19 November to discussed the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and described the EU Summit on 19 and 20 December as a unique opportunity to enhance European defence capabilities. However, EU-level defence policy remains a contested-issue not least thanks to the resolute stance against more EU defence procurement planning or support among some member states, most prominently the UK.
The Opportunities
Two defence industry insiders have written an article which concludes that “in an era of austerity, NATO is offering real and significant opportunities in the near future”. They point out that ThalesRaytheon Systems secured an $180 million (130 million euro) contract in June to enhance NATO’s air command and control system and that Lockheed Martin Corp. won a contract valued up to $100 million (73 million euro) in September to design the active network infrastructure for the new NATO headquarters in Brussels.
They helpfully shed some light on the activities of the NCIA (NATO Communications and Information Agency) and the NSPA (NATO Support Agency), “two buyers of particular interest to industry, aptly hidden behind bland acronyms”. They report:
NSPA managed more than 24,000 contracts valued at more than $2.85 billion in 2012, and a nearly identical sum in 2011. NCIA has recently announced more than $1.3 billion — and up to an additional 30 percent in smaller awards — in opportunities over the next two years.
These are just some of NATO’s ‘needy’ programmes that they detail:
- satellite communications programme – estimated at $680 million over the next 15 years;
- communications and infrastructures programme – estimated at $77 million;
- cloud computing security, data security, mobile device security, malware analysis and cyber-intelligence (unspecified amounts);
- information-technology modernization programme- estimated at $240 million over 5 years; and
- air command-and-control systems and ballistic missile defence support, upgrades and communications programmes (unspecified amounts).
The authors tell us that defence companies on both sides of the Atlantic are competing intensely for a huge range of contracts and advises them that they must demonstrate to NATO ‘interoperability in theatre’, just as the NATO Secretary General is constantly reiterating. They recommend that larger companies team up with smaller companies in other counties and specialised, innovative firms. While accepting that NATO will face budget pressures, they state that “industry is increasingly looking to NATO as an attractive business partner”.
Further reading on the NATO Watch website: