Complete overhaul

It’s not like NATO hasn’t been reforming itself. As detailed in a special report by the National Defense University in Washington back in 2010, since the end of the Cold War the transatlantic alliance has in fact been in near-permanent reform mode.

In 1999 NATO gave itself a new strategic concept coupled with the Defense Capability Initiative (CDI). Three years later the alliance launched the Prague Capabilities Commitment (PCC) along with a new Response Force (NRF) and the Allied Transformation Command (ACT). And in 2006, NATO postulated the Comprehensive Political Guidance (CPG).

The goal of its constant transformation was to improve its joint capabilities and sharpen its mission, which the study's authors argue has succeeded in a way that "NATO forces have improved in key respects."

But compared to the challenges the alliance is expected to face in the future the reform efforts of the past decade may look like a cake-walk.

More bang for the buck

Essentially, notes the report, NATO must even speed up its reforms so its members can get more bang for their bucks from their defense spending which is particularly crucial for many European members.

"How can this be accomplished in a sustained period of slow growth or even declines in defense spending?" ask the authors. That was in 2010. The economic landscape for most NATO members certainly hasn’t improved in the meantime and for many has dramatically deteriorated.

This is where Smart Defense is supposed to come in.

Its goal is to encourage NATO members to pool and share military capabilities, setting common priorities and improving coordination.

New NATO

That entails a radical shift of defense budgeting that goes beyond the usual cutting measures, says Karl-Heinz Kamp, the director of research at NATO’s Defense College in Rome.

"At the end of the day it is not a question of some air forces or air planes here or a couple of tanks later there," explains Kamp. "But the question is how can military do its business differently, but efficiently."

He adds that he believes that not everyone has grasped yet how dramatic the situation really is.

It was Pentagon chief Robert Gates who painted a bleak picture before leaving his post last year, when he outlined that the US is providing two-thirds of all defense spending in NATO. He added that of the alliance’s 28 members only five - the US, Britain, France, Greece and Albania - have been spending the self-imposed two percent of their gross domestic product on defense.

But now, given their economic troubles, even the remaining five are not capable to maintain their spending: all of them already have slated drastic defense cuts and even deeper cuts are likely.

US less engaged

With steep cuts scheduled for the first time also in the US, this could severely affect NATO’s capabilities. Until now if push came to shove, other NATO members could effectively always rely on Washington with its military muscle to bail them out.

That might change, not just because of US defense cuts, but also because of Washington’s strategic shift, says Hans Pung, vice president of Rand Europe in Cambridge:

"I think the other thing that will impact on it which is not related to the economic crisis is the United States is clearly realigning its forces to face east toward Asia as opposed to across the Atlantic and I think that will probably mean that you will have fewer US assets that will be readily available to NATO as in the past."

Amid this economic and strategic environment for NATO to stand any chance of maintaining or even improving its capabilities, it must put Smart Defense into practice. That, coupled with NATO’s new strategic concept, means nothing less than a total transformation of the alliance, says Kamp.

No more national holy cows: Duplicate capabilities need to be slashed, niche capabilities must be developed, resources must be pooled, budget cuts must be agreed upon - and all of it must be done continuously in coordinated fashion.

The result will be a different NATO than we know today, says Kamp:

"We will have much less standing forces. We will have much more forces in reserve. We will have much less physical presence of the military in the countries."

For Smart Defense to succeed, what the experts call a free-riding mentality among some NATO countries must end. The increasing external pressures should make it clear to every member that it must do its share to keep the alliance viable.

"And I think it’s important to note that this isn’t just in the NATO context, but it’s in the wider European context as well," notes Pung.

Author: Michael Knigge
Editor: Rob Mudge