sda_utility_of_force_general_smith[1]

SECURITY & DEFENCE AGENDA Bibliothèque Solvay, Parc Léopold

137 rue Belliard, B-1040, Brussels, Belgium Telephone: +32 (0)2 737 91 48 Fax: +32 (0)2 736 32 16

E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.securitydefenceagenda.org

"The Utility of Force: The Art of War in the Modern World”

GENERAL SIR RUPERT SMITH Commander of the British Armoured Division in the first Gulf War and the United Nations Protection Force

(UNPROFOR) in Bosnia 1995, former NATO DSACEUR

&

JAVIER SOLANA High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy and Secretary General of the Council of the

European Union

SDA Book Presentation with the support of Thales

19 January, 2006, Brussels

Rapporteur: John Chapman

“THE UTILITY OF FORCE: THE ART OF WAR IN THE MODERN WORLD” SDA BOOK PRESENTATION

SECURITY & DEFENCE AGENDA 2

Contents: INTRODUCTION – GENERAL SMITH CALLS FOR REVOLUTIONARY THINKING p. 3

GENERAL SIR RUPERT SMITH p. 4

JAVIER SOLANA p. 5

THE DEBATE p. 5 WHAT’S TO BE DONE?

ANY IMPACT ON IRAN? A LINEAR PROCESS OR A JUDGEMENT CALL? NEW WAYS OF THINKING CONDUCTING WAR CORRECTLY LIST OF PARTICIPANTS p. 10 ABOUT THE SDA p. 19



GENERAL SMITH CALLS FOR REVOLUTIONARY THINKING At the outset of his presentation of his new book “The Utility of Force: the Art of War in the Modern World”, General Sir Rupert Smith called for fundamental changes in the way modern warfare is approached. General Smith argued that adversaries were now “of and amongst the people”. It was no longer a case of defending territory, the goal was now to defend a way of life. Wars had to be conducted differently, with the desired outcome being defined ahead of any campaign – force alone would never be sufficient. Expounding on the ideas set out in his book, Smith argued that today’s institutions were not suited to manage the types of holistic campaigns essential in the 21st century. General Smith concluded that the EU had the most potential to conduct such operations; while it carried no baggage from previous wars, it had an impressive “portfolio of power”. Dr. Javier Solana, the EU’s High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy, welcomed the content of the book and the debate it would set out. The importance of the book was the manner in which it conceptualised ideas that had been around for a period, while at the same time bringing some new ideas. It was a book to help us understand how to do politics right. Although he agreed with the majority of General Smith’s arguments, Solana warned that national elements were dominating the debate. Solana also called for added emphasis to be placed on the legitimacy of war, as without that, no campaign could be successful. In a frank and forthright account of his ideas and experiences, General Smith argued that future campaigns had to be rethought so that all options were examined ahead of any campaign. Diplomatic, political and humanitarian aspects of any operation had to be reviewed in addition to strictly military ones. Linear operations in which military force was seen as a last resort were no longer viable. Smith knew it would not be quick nor easy to change current thinking. He understood that it would take the concerted political will of the EU to make such a transformation happen. However, if that could be done, Smith was confident that successful operations could be achieved.



GENERAL SIR RUPERT SMITH

General Sir Rupert Smith insisted from the outset that he was not there to talk about his book, but rather about his ideas and how they related to the EU’s defence and security policies. Smith contended that times had changed. The emphasis was now on “war amongst the people” rather than on old-style industrial wars. He explained that, in the former, military force alone could no longer decide the outcome. Instead, it would be used to create a condition in which strategic results could be achieved. The general added that this strategic object was likely to be used to alter opponents’ intentions rather than destroy them.

Putting things slightly differently, Smith argued that the purpose of modern warfare was to defend a way of life and values rather than territory. This meant that the old-fashioned linear process (peace-crisis-war-resolution-peace), in which military action was seen as a last resort, was no longer applicable. That brought further problems, because while the institutions1 could manage such a linear process, they were less well-versed in conflicts where the military played a supporting role. IN SEARCH OF SUCCESS General Smith insisted that the many complexities of modern warfare had to be understood and that the institutions were part of the process that had to change. He saw no point in changing the tools of modern warfare, as the emphasis had to be on how they were used and the desired outcome. Simply put, General Smith wanted a fundamental shift in institutional thinking. General Smith added that the enemy was often “acting below the threshold of our weapons”. He wanted the enemy to be respected as it was no

1 Institutions included in General Smith’s thinking included: governmental (civil and military), inter-governmental institutions (such as the EU and NATO), executive institutions (national, intelligence, diplomatic, armed forces), multinational agencies and organisations, defence industries, and the institutional relationships and processes that linked them all together.

longer a matter of building up a superior range of equipment. The general wanted the armed forces to “learn, then strike”. NO MORE NATIONAL THINKING General Smith wanted an end to national thinking, or rather to thinking “in separate boxes.” In “war amongst the people”, the enemy was likely to be a non-state grouping of several nationalities. Smith did not see current national institutions as being able to conduct the kind of modern warfare that was needed. He therefore called for the EU to take the lead as it had “the greatest potential to conduct operations in the new circumstances.” Developing his reasoning, Smith outlined why the EU is now best placed to act: § It has no historical baggage relating to

historical wars (i.e. World War II, the Cold War, etc.)

§ It has a “portfolio of power” (diplomatic, economic, political, military, humanitarian, etc.) and can therefore develop a comprehensive strategy

§ As individual member states have shared interests (the future of energy supplies, international transport, monetary stability, etc.), this could bring an element of solidarity

§ A European industrial base could be developed via the European Defence Agency (EDA)

§ The European Parliament could bring “democratic oversight”.

Despite these arguments, General Smith acknowledged that it would not be easy or quick to bring an end to the predominant national thinking that currently directed the use of military forces in Europe. Above all, he wanted a demonstration of the EU’s political will to make transformation happen. Given that, he argued that the EU could conduct successful operations in the modern theatres of war.



JAVIER SOLANA

Javier Solana welcomed the book and the ideas within it. While he found himself agreeing with 90% of the content, Solana emphasised that the concept of “war amongst the people” was a complex one, as individual conflicts could vary tremendously. This meant that it was difficult to develop a single doctrine that encompassed the necessary processes (military, police, peacekeeping, judiciary, etc.). He felt Smith was correct in mentioning ‘everyone is needed’ - not only military forces are essential in conflict situations, civilians play a crucial role.

As for General Smith’s reasoning that the EU was the best-placed organisation to take his ideas forward, Solana was in agreement. However, he insisted that the Union was already doing this to a certain extent. Looking for conclusions as to which actions needed to be taken, Solana called for: § A re-education of the military forces, to bring

them in line with the new thinking § More adaptable NGOs, as “everyone has a

role” in “war amongst the people” § Changes in the instruments of war, as, for

example, it was pointless to manufacture more tanks

But Solana had reservations about the book’s conclusions. He was a firm believer in military capability being an effective deterrent, i.e. in order to stop force being used. Solana wanted more discussion on that subject and on the need for the “legitimacy of force” – an essential pre-requisite. In conclusion, Solana agreed it would be difficult for the EU to adapt Smith’s vision, as national elements were still dominating the discussions. However, on a positive note, Solana said he had seen a “rapid change in mentality” since taking up his position. He hoped the consequences of the book and its arguments would lead to a change in the education of the military to adapt the mentality of ‘war amongst people’.

THE DEBATE

WHAT’S TO BE DONE? Edgar Buckley, Senior Vice President for Marketing, Thales, had taken two messages from the book:

1. War in its current form (industrial war) is dead

2. Military force (such as interventions) will continue to serve a purpose, but will have to mesh with a network of other capabilities

Given those conclusions, Buckley asked what must be done differently, as more clarity was needed on the actions to be taken. Friends of Europe trustee Keith Richardson supported Buckley’s view on that and also asked how Smith’s ideas might have been applied in Iraq.

Above all, General Smith wanted a change in institutional thinking. As an example, he reasoned that if military force was deployed in today’s world, it would always “fight to win”. There would be no possibility of those forces not going into action and it was likely that it would be reinforced. In that case, if force was a last resort – there would be no more discussion. Taking Iraq as an example, Smith said it was totally linear in application, with the Ministry of Defence being left in charge of an occupied country. This had been a failure of institutional thinking rather



than a failure of particular equipment. Equipment (“gizmos”) could be changed easily, whereas fundamental thinking could not. ANY IMPACT ON IRAN? The Commission’s Yves Mollard La Bruyère, Advisor in the European Commission’s DG External Relations, asked how Smith’s ideas might be used in Iran at the current time. Smith felt he was not confident to diagnose such a situation. However, he felt that if the situation was progressing in a linear way, this would be wrong as a holistic approach was necessary. Javier Solana added that the use of force in Iran was extremely unlikely. A LINEAR PROCESS OR A JUDGEMENT CALL? Gareth Evans, President of International Crisis Group and former Australian Foreign Minister, was concerned about the rather “clodding caricature” painted in the book to describe the way in which decisions were taken. He argued that force was only applied after a judgement call (was force necessary or did other reasonable alternatives still exist?) had been made.

Smith could only respond that the “plodding process” described in the book was exactly what he had experienced in places such as Bosnia and Rwanda. He agreed that debates (as to the nature of interventions) had taken place, but the General was cynical as to how “pure” such debates could ever be with the current thinking in place. NEW WAYS OF THINKING Jonathan Campbell-Jones, Intelligence Capability Development Officer with the European Defence Agency, switched tack slightly and called for a radical look at capabilities in Europe, as the armed forces were inherently conservative. As an example, Campbell-Jones suggested that increasing use be made of soldiers who speak the language of the country or region actually in the war zone.

Smith thought that soldiers should certainly be able to speak the local language but argued that this was never going to be feasible (for all soldiers to be trained in all languages). He wanted more use to be made of local forces as cooperation with the local population was of the utmost importance.

Alastair Ross, an Administrator with the University of Kent in Brussels, wanted confirmation that General Smith was suggesting that future inter-agency operations might be headed by civil servants who had a mandate to address the hub of the problem by involving various teams with different specialities (including, perhaps, Ministries of Education). Given such a scenario, did the General have any idea as to how such thinking would be received in the capitals of Europe. Smith confirmed Ross’s understanding but added that so far there had been no reaction to his ideas. His only comment was to warn about imposing one’s will on the affairs of people in other countries. Cooperation was the most important aspect of the new types of campaigns. Anthony Val Flynn, ECHO Headquarters & Field Coordinator at the European Commission, had heard General Smith say that armed forces should not be used for humanitarian purposes as they were not trained. Could the General clarify his thinking there? Referring to the book, Smith said it argued that the military were not particularly good at humanitarian aid. If they were the only option, then so be it. However, the military would never do as good a job as the professionals. He added that he’d made errors during his career, in terms of the correct siting of refugee camps, for this very reason. CONDUCTING WAR CORRECTLY Bernhard Jarzynka, an Administrator at EuropeAid, switched the discussion to how wars were conducted as local populations were often the main victims. He wanted to know how Smith saw the Geneva Convention being applied, how collateral damage could be reduced and how civilians could be protected.



Smith responded by arguing that it was imperative to act within the framework of the law. This was a strategic goal, as contrary actions would undermine the stated purpose of the action. As for reducing collateral damage, Smith emphasised the need for precision. To ensure such precision, information had to be collected simultaneously in three areas. These were: the target in question, the surrounding context (so it was safe to attack) and the way in which the strike was to be exploited. Henrik Kröner, Secretary General of European Movement International, liked Smith’s thinking and wanted to know if such ideas could be used politically to further the cause of Europe.

Javier Solana said that life would be simpler if the Constitution was in place. However, given the existing situation, it was necessary to work intelligently. Looking to the benefits of the civil/military planning cell and the EDA, Solana ended on an optimistic note as the Agency, in particular, was an adaptable instrument that could change both the way industry worked and the use of technology. However, he did look forward to the Constitution being implemented in the future.



List of Participants

Malgorzata Alterman Head of Media and Communication

European Defence Agency (EDA)

Massimo Amadei Policy & Plans Division

European Union Military Staff

Magnus Andersson Head of Unit, Department for European Security

Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Sweden

Lucy Aspinall

Fathi Ayoub Economic Counsellor

Mission of Libya to the EU

Horst Bacia Correspondent

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ)

Michal Baranowski Program Assistant

The German Marshall Fund of the United States

Hugh Barton-Smith Editor, Enterprise Europe

European Commission: DG Enterprise and Industry

Andrew Beatty Journalist, Foreign Affairs

European Voice

Hans-Ulrich Beelitz Former Adviser European Commission

Robert Bell Senior Vice President European Business

Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)

Alina Belskaya Program Assistant

The German Marshall Fund of the United States Transatlantic Center

Michael Berendt Senior Policy Advisor

Fleishman-Hillard

Ilana Bet-El Op-Ed Editor

European Voice

Timothy Beyer Helm Policy Adviser, Policy Strategy Unit

European Parliament

Alan Blagec Counsellor

Mission of Croatia to NATO

Marc-André Boivin Réseau francophone de recherche sur les opérations de paix

Université de Montréal

Catherine Boucher First Secretary

Mission of Canada to the EU

Edgar Buckley Senior Vice President, Marketing

Thales



Fraser Cameron Director of Studies

European Policy Centre (EPC)

Geert Cami Managing Director

Security & Defence Agenda

Jonathan Campbell-Jones Intelligence Capability Development


John Chapman Journalist

Gento Assets

David Chico Zamanillo Assistant to President Borrell

European Parliament

William Heng-sheng Chuang First Secretary

Taipei Representative Office in Belgium

Paul Claesson Official

European Parliament

Alan Coates Regional Marketing Manager

Mecar SA

Eli Cohen Attorney

Euroclear

Damian Collins Lawyer

Mccann Fitzgerald, Brussels

Elif Comoglu-Ulgen First Secretary

Mission of Turkey to the EU

Carolina Constantino Attaché

Mission of the Philippines to the EU

Robert Cooper Director General for External and Politico-Military Affairs

Council of the European Union

Jean-Michel Corre Membre du Conseil Académique

Université de Paix, Namur

Jocelyn Coulon Director, Réseau francophone de recherche sur les opérations de paix

Université de Montréal

Peter Crawley Project Officer

European Commission: DG for Research

Robert Cutler Senior Research Fellow

Carleton University

Nell Darolles Freelance Journalist



Michael W. David Vice President, International Business Development

Cubic Corporation

Robin Davies Defence Attaché

Embassy of the United Kingdom to the Netherlands

Gabriel Dayre Chargé de Mission

Thales

Ludwig Decamps Policy Planning Advisor

North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO)

Francisco Del Pozo Finance Director

Eurocontrol

Robert Draper President

AeroStrategies

John Durnin Public Relations and Public Information Officer, EU Military Staff


Katarina Engberg Minister for Defence Affairs

Permanent Representation of Sweden to the EU

Mari Eteläpää Special Advisor

Ministry of Defence, Finland

Gareth Evans President

International Crisis Group (ICG)

Steven Everts Adviser to Javier Solana


Christian Falkowski Ambassador, Head of Delegation

European Commission: Delegation to Austria

Julien Feugier European Affairs Manager

European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS)

Carole Fielding

Roger Fielding Coordinator

Delegation of the United Kingdom to NATO

Nicholas Fiorenza NATO and EU Affairs Correspondent

Jane's Defence Weekly

Rachel Fleishman Policy Director

American Chamber of Commerce to the EU (AmCham EU)

Anthony Val Flynn ECHO Headquarters & Field Security Co-ordinator

European Commission: European Community Humanitarian Office

Laure Frier Principal Administrator




Lars Fynbo Head of NATO AGS 3


Cristina Gallach Head of Unit, Spokesperson Attached to the Secretary-General/High Representative


Stanislas Gentien Aide-de-Camp to Mr. Jean-Paul Perruche, EU Military Staff


Fatima Ghardi Project Manager

Ecole Nationale d'Administration, Paris

Arnaud Ghys Responsable du secteur Paix

Coordination nationale d'Action pour la Paix et la Démocratie (CNAPD)

Bill Giles Director General Europe

BAE Systems

Dov Goshen Assistant to Head of Israeli Mission of Defence

Embassy of Israel to Belgium

Drora Goshen-Meskin Director, R&D and Business Development

European Advanced Technologies

Vivien Haig Director General

Transatlantic Policy Network (TPN)

Jean-Yves Haine Research Fellow on European Security

International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS)

Manfred Hanzl Branch Chief - Intelligence Production


Carl Hartzell Counsellor, Political Military Group, European Institute for Security Studies, WEU


Emmanuel Haton Director, European Government Affairs

BP Europe

Björn Hedskog Military Representative


Jessica Henderson Project Manager


Andreas Herdina Head of Unit, European Neighbourhood Policy Sector Coordination

European Commission: DG for External Relations

Martin Hill Vice President, Defence

Thales

Lukas Holub Administrator, Fight against Terrorism

European Commission: DG for Justice, Freedom and Security



Quentin Huxham Political Assistant of Anders Wijkman, MEP

European Parliament

Takeshi Ito First Secretary

Mission of Japan to the EU

Nikolay Ivanov Counsellor

Mission of the Russian Federation to the EU

Arnaud Jacomet Head of Secretariat General

Western European Union (WEU)

Gareth Jones Coordination Manager - NATO, EU and Cooperation

Thales

Jean-Pierre Juneau Ambassador

Delegation of Canada to NATO

Craig Karp Political Military Officer

Embassy of the United States of America to Belgium

Linda Karvinen Project Manager


Adrian Kendry Senior Defence Economist


Nawab Khan Brussels Bureau Chief

News Agency of Islamic Republic of Iran (IRNA)

Jeremy Kinsman Ambassador

Mission of Canada to the EU

Aleksandar Knezevic Second Secretary

Mission of Serbia and Montenegro to the EU

Cristin Koebele Program Assistant

WSI Brussels

Katarina Kovacova Third Secretary

Delegation of the Slovak Republic to NATO

Sergey Kozhetev First Secretary

Mission of the Russian Federation to NATO

Henrik Kröner Secretary General

European Movement International

Peter Lennon

Tjien-Khoen Liem Policy Officer Preparatory action for security research

European Commission: DG for Enterprise and Industry

Lee Litzenberger First Secretary / Political Officer

Mission of the United States of America to the EU



Ben Lovelock Marc Luyckx Director

Vision 2020

Milen Lyutskanov Deputy Head of Delegation

Permanent Delegation of Bulgaria to NATO

Guido Maene Military Professor

Institut Royal Supérieur de Défense

Huseyn Mahmudov Military Representative

Mission of Azerbaijan to NATO

Benedict Mann Second Secretary, Defence

Permanent Representation of the United Kingdom to the EU

Ivo Martinic Defence Attaché

Embassy of Croatia to Belgium

John Mattiussi National Expert - Terrorism & Non-Proliferation


Giles Merritt Director


Rolf Metz Defence Attaché

Embassy of Germany to Belgium

Milena Mitic First Secretary, Transatlantic Relations

Mission of Serbia and Montenegro to the EU

José Moerman Administrative Chief

Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Belgium

Juan Moliner-Gonzalez Chief of the Support Team for CEUMC


Yves Mollard La Bruyère Advisor


Annalisa Monaco Consultant


Charles Morgan Political Affairs Advisor

Mission of Korea to the EU

Marta Mucznik Program Coordinator

The Transatlantic Institute

Mircea Mudura Counsellor

Mission of Romania to the EU

Jarmo Mäkelä Bureau Chief

Finnish Broadcasting Company YLE

Milica Neacsu First Secretary

Mission of Romania to the EU



Olivier Ngandu Freelance Journalist

Reimer Reinholdt Nielsen Representative to PSC and WEU

Permanent Representation of Denmark to the EU

David Oppenheimer Assistant to Ana Gomes MEP

European Parliament

Caroline Pailhe Chargee de Recherche

Group for Research and Information on Peace (GRIP)

Silvia Pertzborn Translator

European Commission

Nicolas Pomey Consultant

JHL Conseil

Ruxandra Popa Director, Committee on the Civil Dimension of Security


Franck Potier Director of Defence and Space Strategy, Europe, Middle East and Africa

Honeywell France

Mikkel Preisler Business Development Manager

PricewaterhouseCoopers

Daniel Rackowski Fellow

The Transatlantic Institute

Paul Rasmussen Media Relations Manager

BBC Radio

Kyriakos Revelas Principal Administrator, Security and Stability, Counter Terrorism, Non Proliferation and Disarmament Unit


John Richardson Director General

Madariaga European Foundation

Peter Ricketts Ambassador

Delegation of the United Kingdom to NATO

Andreas Riem EU Official

European Commission: DG for Translation

Vibeke Roosen Bell Danish National Expert, Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova


Jacques Rosiers Assistant Chief of Staff for Strategic Affairs

Ministry of Defence, Belgium



Michael C. Ryan Representative of the US Secretary of Defense

Mission of the United States of America to the EU

Stefano Sannino Principal Advisor & Representative of the EC to the Political and Security Committee


Gennady Savostyuk Counsellor on military questions

Mission of the Russian Federation to the EU

Siebe Schuur Minister Plenipotentiary for External Economic Relations, Internal Market

Permanent Representation of the Netherlands to the EU

William Shapcott Director, Joint Situation Centre of the European Union


Davor Simac Third Secretary

Mission of Croatia to the EU

Pieter Paul Slikker Consultant General Sir Rupert Smith Commander of the British Armoured Division in the first Gulf War and the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) in Bosnia 1995 and former NATO DSACEUR Javier Solana High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy and Secretary General of the Council of the European Union

The Centre Council of the EU

Gabriel Sopanda Second Secretary

Embassy of Romania to Belgium

Peter Stamps Colonel

European Union Military Committee

Iréne Svensson Senior Vice President, Responsible for Saab Eu Affairs

Saab

David Tirr Head of Unit, European Correspondent, Coordination and CFSP Analysis & G8


Ines Troha Brdar Minister Counsellor

Mission of Croatia to the EU

Sergii Trotskyi First Secretary

Mission of Ukraine to the EU

Emil Valdelin Project Assistant


Vesselin Valkanov Political & Security Committee Representative

Mission of Bulgaria to the EU



John Vassallo Senior Counsel, Director European Affairs

General Electric International (GE)

Marielle Ver Elst Head Science Policy & Space Affairs - Minister Plenipotentiary

Service Public Fédéral Affaires Etrangères, Commerce Extérieur et Coopération, Belgium

Otto Vermeulen Director - Responsible for the Security & Technology Practice

PricewaterhouseCoopers

Joris M. Vos President, European Union and NATO Relations

Boeing International

Peter R. Weilemann Director of the European Office

Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung (KAS)

Andrew Wilson Director

European Press Agency

Rachel Winks Deputy Director, EU and NATO Relations

Boeing International

Peter Wragg Head of Unit, Information and Communication

European Commission: DG for Enterprise and Industry

Przemyslaw Wyganowski Counsellor, Head of European Security and Defence Policy Section

Permanent Representation of Poland to the EU

Ruey Yang Senior Adviser

Taipei Representative Office in Belgium

Ernst van Hoek Director European Affairs

TNO-Defence Research

Elif Ülgen First Secretary

Mission of Turkey to the EU

AABBOOUUTT TTHHEE SSDDAA


The Security & Defence Agenda, formerly the New Defence Agenda (NDA) has become established as the only regular Brussels-based forum where political figures and journalists gather to discuss the future of European and transatlantic defence and security policies. The aim of the SDA is not to replicate more academic research-based projects but to give greater prominence to the complex questions of how EU and NATO policies can complement one another, and how transatlantic challenges such as terrorism and WMD can be met.

Bringing clarity and new ideas to the rapidly-changing defence and security policy scene has been the SDA’s aim from its beginning. SDA’s activities range from monthly roundtables and international conferences to reports and discussion papers, all of which attract high-level speakers and authors and institutional, governmental and industry support.

One of our prime objectives is to raise the profile of defence and security issues among the Brussels-based international press. To encourage more in-depth coverage of these topics, the SDA holds regular, informal dinners for journalists with high profile decision makers.

Recent speakers and participants include Gijs de Vries, Counter-terrorism Coordinator, Council of the EU; Richard Falkenrath, Research Fellow, Brookings Institution and former Deputy Homeland Security Advisor to the US President; Franco Frattini, Commissioner for Justice, Freedom and Security, European Commission; Bill Giles, Director General, Europe, BAE Systems; Vecdi Gönül, National Defence Minister, Turkey; Scott A. Harris, President, Lockheed Martin International; Patrick Hennessey, Director, DG Enterprise, European Commission; Hilmar Linnenkamp, Deputy Chief Executive, European Defence Agency; Alessandro Minuto Rizzo, Deputy Secretary General, NATO; Sergei Ordzhonikidze, Director General of the United Nations Office in Geneva; Zonghuai Qaio, Vice Foreign Minister, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, China; George Robertson, Former Secretary General, North Atlantic Treaty Organisation; Gary Titley, MEP, Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, European Parliament; Michel Troubetzkoy, Senior Vice President, Director for Relations with European Institutions, EADS; Günter Verheugen, Commissioner for Enterprise and Industry, European Commission; Antonio Vitorino, former Commissioner for Justice and Home Affairs, European Commission; Karl von Wogau, Chairman, Subcommittee on Defence and Security, European Parliament, Geoffrey van Orden, Vice-Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs, European Parliament

“[NATO] An Alliance in which Europe and North America are consulting every day on the key security issues before them. Acting together, in the field, to defend our shared security... Because in a dangerous world, business as usual is not an option” NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, Annual Conference 17 May 2004

“Homeland Security = a concerted, comprehensive and nationwide effort to prevent future terrorist attacks, to protect the most vulnerable targets against future terrorist attacks and to be ready to respond against possible attacks and minimize loss of life and damage if such attacks occur” Richard Falkenrath, former Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy Homeland Security Advisor, 17 November 2003 Annual Conference

“The agency should generate ideas and speak the truth to defence ministers.” Nick Witney, Chief Executive, European Defence Agency 28 April 2004 Press Dinner

“There is an opportunity for Europe to take advantage of the US’s investment by issuing collaborative programmes – paid for to a certain extent by the US taxpayer. The European Defence Agency could foster transatlantic cooperation rather than follow more traditional approaches” Scott Harris, President Continental Europe, Lockheed Martin, 28 April 2004 Press Dinner

ABOUT THE SECURITY & DEFENCE AGENDA

La Bibliothèque Solvay



MMOONNTTHHLLYY RROOUUNNDDTTAABBLLEESS SDA’s series of Monthly Roundtables are attended by some 70+ defence and security experts who participate actively in the debates. Their discussions are summarised in concise reports that are circulated to a wide range of stakeholders across the globe. Roundtable topics include:

§ Is the transatlantic defence marketplace becoming a reality? § Defence aspects of EU and NATO enlargements § What policies will create effective peacekeeping? § Strategic priorities for protecting Europe’s infrastructure against terrorism § Will the EU get tough on opening-up national defence procurement? § The powers and responsibilities of the European Defence Agency § Europe’s drive to implement an anti-terrorist strategy § On the eve of Istanbul – Can NATO become a motor for reform? § Does Europe need a Black Sea security policy? § Is maritime security Europe’s Achilles’ heel? § Space and security in Europe

RREEPPOORRTTSS on Monthly Roundtables discussions are available on the SDA website. The SDA also published a Discussion Paper ‘Fresh Perspectives on Europe’s Security’ in 2004 and its Bioterrorism Reporting Group has published three in depth analyses on bio threats and our responses.

IINNTTEERRNNAATTIIOONNAALL CCOONNFFEERREENNCCEESS The SDA organises a number of major conferences with partners, in Brussels and elsewhere. Conferences gather 200+ senior defence and security policymakers, industrialists and media to discuss current policies and decision-making. § Towards an EU Strategy for Collective Security, Feb 2005 § Defending Global Security: The New Politics of Transatlantic Defence Cooperation, May 2004 § Towards Worldwide Security: Building the Transatlantic Agenda, Nov 2003 § Reinventing Global Security, June 2003 § The Relaunching of Transatlantic Relations and Anti-Terrorism Cooperation, May 2003 § How credible are Europe’s Anti-Terrorism Defences?, Oct 2002

PPRREESSSS DDIINNNNEERRSS Correspondents of top European newspapers take full advantage of these rare opportunities to explore in informal circumstances the thinking of senior MEPs, industry executives, ambassadors and EU and NATO officials. Recent press dinners featured Nick Witney, Chief Executive of the European Defence Agency (EDA) ‘Powers and Responsibilities of the new European Defence Agency (April 2004); Erkki Liikanen, EU Commissioner for Enterprise, ‘Europe’s Defence and Security Research’ (November 2003); General James L. Jones, Supreme Allied Commander SACEUR, NATO ‘NATO’s Transformation Process and Cooperation with the EU in the future’ (October 2003); Margot Wallström, EU Commissioner for Environment ‘Civil Protection and Bioterrorism’ (May 2003); and Robert Cooper, Director General for External & Politico-Military Affairs, Council of the EU (Oct 2002) BBIIOOTTEERRRROORRIISSMM RREEPPOORRTTIINNGG GGRROOUUPP Following the interest generated in past SDA events, the SDA decided to create a venue for more focused discussions on the

area of bioterrorism. The Bioterrorism Reporting Group meets every three months and will allow the discussions not only to be tailored to the evolving developments in the biological field but most of all, the resulting reports will act as a catalyst for the political world. § 21 June 2004 ‘Countering Bioterrorism: Prevention and Protection’ § 18 October 2004 ‘Countering Bioterrorism: Science, Technology and Oversight’ § 25 January 2005 ‘Next Generation Threat Reduction: Bioterrorism’s Challenges and Solutions’ § 25 April 2005 ‘Countering Bioterrorism: How can Europe and the United States work together?

General James L Jones, Supreme Allied Commander, NATO with Thomas Enders, Executive Vice President, EADS April 2004 Press Dinner

AACCTTIIVVIITTIIEESS



THE SECURITY & DEFENCE AGENDA (SDA) WOULD LIKE TO THANK ITS PARTNERS AND MEMBERS FOR THEIR SUPPORT IN MAKING THE SDA A SUCCESS

Ministry of National Defence,

Turkey

Mission of the Russian Federation to EU

sda_utility_of_force_general_smith[1]

Documents