NATO'S NEW WORLD ORDER?

There will be plenty to discuss in early in September at the Celtic Manor Resort (close to Newport) and I suspect that we not talking about the NATO summit related chaos or the noisy protestors outside the fence. Perhaps unconsciously echoing the former US President George Bush, the  NATO secretary-general Anders Fogh Rasmussen, has warned that the “world order is at stake” and that the 28 state alliance faces “the biggest challenge since the end of the Cold War” as the Ukraine crisis continues.

Part of that particular fence...

The ‘World Order’ reference is interesting particularly as we  are living through ‘a period of significant anniversaries’ at the moment of events one hundred years ago that led to the fall of one particular type of world order and the emergence of a different and much grimmer new world order. On 31^st July 1914 Imperial Russia’s publically declared full mobilization (actual mobilization had begun one week earlier) this was a key event in the drift to war.

One hundred years on (31^st July 2014 ) the House of Commons Defence Committee published a report part of a review of Security and Defence. The report argues strongly that recent events in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine should be a wake-up call for NATO (and the UK). The report further argues that NATO is unprepared when it comes to facing the new threat posed by Russia.

Drawing imperfect parallels with 1914 only goes so far, as the secret diplomacy (mostly British) that was contributory factor to the drift to war in 1914 is now a thing of the past. We need to remember that this is not 1914, its 2014, and collective ‘publicly declared’ security commitments have tended to work. Clearly articulated public security commitments and agreements, which bring independent nations together, are on the whole a good thing, perhaps one of the reasons why the SNP has stated that an independent Scotland would join NATO.

Scotland and NATO

As for NATO itself, the report (here in html / and in PDF) says, has flagged up deficiencies in NATO’s command and control structures, in its ability to predict and its abilities to detect and give adequate warning of any potential attack.  The MP’s have identified weaknesses in the readiness of NATO forces and perhaps equally as important the fact that NATO itself may lack the collective political will to take concerted action to deter attack.

This lack of collective political will may be a combination of different developments. The consequences of the long term deployment in Afghanistan which was in response to an attack on a NATO member (Article 5) which took the security organisation into unknown and increasingly unstable territories. And the fact that an older Europe may be reasserting itself, as France and Germany develop their on-going (gas fuelled) relationship with Russia, which may result in questions being be asked about the on-going need for a Trans-Atlantic alliance and it’s perceived adherence to what are increasingly perceived as US interests.

The Russian Federation’s recent actions in the Crimea and eastern Ukraine have flagged up the possibility, admittedly unlikely, of a potential non direct Russian attack on a NATO Member State. A conventional attack on a NATO state remains a low probability, but, the report has flagged up the risks of unconventional attacks which NATO would find hard to counter. Unconventional means a combination of cyber attack, information warfare, the “ambiguous warfare” tactics (the use of irregular militias) as deployed in Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova  and elsewhere  all of which tend to be backed up with rhetorical threats about the need for protection for ‘Russian minorities’.

The MP’s have stated that NATO needs to reorder, train and exercise its capabilities to be able to defend against both eventualities. The Committee has called on the UK Government to take the lead at the NATO Summit in Wales (in Newport, in September) to ensure that NATO is ready to face such threats. The House of Commons Committee’s has produced some specific recommendations, which call for:

• The pre-positioning of military equipment in the Baltic States;
• A continuous presence of NATO troops on training and exercises in the Baltic;
• The re-establishment of large-scale military exercises including all NATO Member States and involving political decision makers;
• Improvements to the NATO rapid reaction force and the possible establishment of a new Standing Reserve Force for NATO;
• Improvements to processes for warning of imminent attack;
• Radical improvements in Russian expertise in the UK government, allowing for real analysis and assessment of the Russian threat;
•  The development of new tactics to respond to the threat of “ambiguous” attacks from Russia - including how to counter threats from cyber, information warfare, and irregular militia; and
• A reconsideration of Article 5, to allow response to less conventional attacks.

The committee has concluded that the threats to UK security are increasingly dynamic in their scale, complexity, uncertainty and urgency and for NATO to undertake radical reform to be able to anticipate, plan and respond to these threats. Hand in hand with this problem, the threats from terrorism and failed states will continue to increase, change and develop. The MP’s say that events in Ukraine and Crimea represent the re-emergence of a real state on state threat to NATO’s eastern borders.

Certainly those ‘Brits’ who since Suez blindly tailored their foreign policy and national strategic interests to mirror those of the USA regardless of the cost, may find themselves increasingly isolated. The bigger problem for NATO (and increasingly for the EU) comes not from the ‘Brits’ (who are perceived to be increasingly euro sceptic and too close to the US) but from the smaller countries of eastern Europe who have a less warm relationship with Russia but whose interests may end up being sacrificed for French and German interests.

Last week the UK announced that it will send a "full battle group" of 1,350 military personnel to take part in NATO manoeuvres in Poland to support allies in eastern Europe. This will be the UK's largest such commitment to the region since 2008. The party formerly known as New Labour stated that the report underlined NATO’s position as the "cornerstone" of UK defence policy and the "sole organisation for collective defence". On the basis of that sentiment there probably won’t be any constructive dialogue in Westminster about how NATO finds itself on the cusp of yet another confrontation with Russia. 

We may also wonder just how the West managed to get Russia so badly wrong. A few years ago Russia was publically humiliated over Kosovo by the US (and NATO). Before that Western help during the painful transition from a collapsed Soviet Union to the post Soviet economic reality was pretty minimal, rather than help, support and assistance all Russia got was bad advice in relation to a brutal rapid privatisation process that shattered the old Soviet economy and paved the way for the rise of the Oligarchs, not to mention wrecking the prospects of the emergence of a stable democratic Russia in the process.

HONOUR SATISFIED?

Yesterday, Newport West Labour MP Paul Flynn was somewhat predictably suspended from the House of Commons after claiming that Defence Secretary Philip Hammond was lying to Parliament over the conflict in Afghanistan. He refused a request by the Speaker (John Bercow) to withdraw the accusation, was duly accused of "disorderly" behaviour, and was suspended from the chamber for the rest of Tuesday.

Equally predictably the Defence Secretary said that the comments were scandalous. Mr Flynn’s attack came during questions on NATO strategy in Afghanistan, as Mr Hammond denied suggestions that coalition military operation was being scaled down after a series of fatal (“Green on Blue”) attacks on international forces by Afghan troops they were training to take over security operations before the NATO withdrawal in 2014.

Predictable histrionics aside, Mr Flynn raises a valid point. You can put as much spin on it as you like, but it is difficult to put a positive spin on the fact that the US has suspended the training for new recruits to the Afghan local police while security checks are carried out on investigating any possible ties to the Taliban. This decision follows a number of incidents in which foreign troops have been killed by Afghan soldiers or policemen they have been training or working with.

As the 2014 deadline for the withdrawal of coalition forces in Afghanistan comes ever closer, the number of Taliban attacks looks to be increasing. The Labour MP for Newport West and a consistent opponent of the conflict, who was interviewed on BBC Radio Wales, noted that Dutch and Canadian troops had been withdrawn from combat and the UK should do the same.

The BBC liberates Kabul

It seems a very long time since the Taliban were routed from Kabul (and most of Afghanistan) following NATO's successful invasion of Afghanistan (back in 2001); the relative ease of victory turned out decidedly deceptive. If anyone had told us almost eleven years ago that some of our service personnel (including some of my relatives) would be effectively commuting back and for to Afghanistan to fight the Taliban insurgency many people may well have doubted their sanity.

The US and NATO seriously took their eyes of the ball by invading Iraq, Afghanistan was forgotten. Serious efforts to build up the Afghan army did not really start until 2009 by which time the security situation in Iraq was pretty grim. Prior to the renewed Taliban insurgency NATO's intended to create a small Afghan force to deal with internal disorder of a domestic variety rather than a full scale insurgency.

The new Afghan army should have provided the Afghan people with a visible sign of unity after several decades of brutal conflict and civil war. NATO’s training mission only began in earnest almost three years ago, at that point the Afghan army's desertion rate was around 85 percent. Things improved as from January to June (2011), NATO figures, showed that around 24,000 soldiers, some 14 percent of the 170,000-man force, deserted.

Once NATO departs, few impartial observers, doubt that after the Taliban and their militant allies will stream back into Afghanistan from their sanctuaries in neighbouring Pakistan no doubt refreshed, rearmed and refunded by the Pakistan military. By 2014 if Afghanistan's standing army is not unready and the Afghan government is not able to support it then some thirteen years of war, thousands of lives, and billions of dollars will have been squandered for nothing and the country will fall will some pretty grim consequences, even by Afghan standards, especially for Afghan women.

Another significant problem to be dealt with by 2014 is that the Afghan government, which is estimated to be probably the most corrupt government on earth. The levels of corruption show few signs of abating, with documented cases of Doctors working in government hospitals leaving wounded Afghan soldiers to expire in their hospital beds if bribes are not paid. For ordinary Afghans the medical infrastructure in the country could be best described as fragile.

Vast amounts of aid has been poured in Afghanistan in recent years, yet the Afghan government does not have a transparent, workable budget, at least not in the normal sense. For 2011 the Afghan budget was nominally $14.3 billion dollars over 90% of which comes from foreign aid, if past years are anything to go by much of it will be stolen way before it gets a chance of being spent on any intended purposes.

History repeated 1975? or 2015?

Once Afghanistan is out of sight and out of mind (just like Iraq) will the money keep flowing in? Or will the West make the same mistake is made in the late 1980s and drop any interest in the country? The last time that happened the Afghan people were abandoned following their defeat of the collapsing Soviet Union, they paid the butchers bill in spades.

After the civil war the Taliban swept into power...they appeared reasonable in comparison with the warlords (who are currently NATO’s gallant allies) and we should all be painfully aware of what followed.