Dear YATA group members,

I would like to brought your attention to the recently published working paper by Tomas Valasek "NATO, Russia and European security" (November 2009)

http://www.cer.org.uk/pdf/wp_929_nato_nov09.pdf

Countries in Europe's east and north worry that Moscow is blundering into a confrontation with NATO. They have begun demanding that the alliance start preparing for a possible conflict. But are they right to be concerned? Would military preparations not make Russia more suspicious of NATO? And should the alliance not focus on the war in Afghanistan? Tomas Valasek argues that allies in Central and Northern Europe have good reasons to worry. And he cautions that unless NATO takes measures to reassure the government concerned about Russia, the alliance will have trouble 'resetting' relations with Moscow and maintaining public support for the war in Afghanistan.

As additional information to the topic, we recommend you to listen to the following panel discussions (video) of the Riga Conference 2009, held on October 23-24 in Riga.

1. Transatlantic agenda 2010 – A Baltic Vision

Three presidents of the Baltic States discuss the future of the transatlantic relations from a Baltic perspective, highlighting also the security related issues as well as NATO NSC. During her speech President of Lithuania Dalia Gribauskaite made it clear that Baltic States ask NATO for a contingency defense plan. As she stressed, "we are fulfilling all our obligations, which we promised to be as the members of providing security. The same we wait from the all Alliance to respectfully return."

http://www.rigaconference.lv/?p=4&l=video&id=98

2. Milestones for the new Strategic Concept of NATO

The speech made by Minister of Defence of Latvia gives you an excellent insight into the position of Latvia on the NSC.

http://www.rigaconference.lv/?p=4&l=video&id=99

3. Providing Strategic Reassurance in Northern Europe

A very interesting discussion between LV, EE, LUX Foreign Ministers reveals the difference of how these countries perceive Russia's recent behaviour and how both the EU and NATO should deal with Russia. And as usually Ron Asmus from the GMF gives you an excellent analysis on the present situation noth in Northern Europea and CEE, explaining also the nature of security concerns and lack of reassurance:

"But with the very brief focus on the Western side, and I can be self-critical as an American, there are all sorts of things we have intended to do, planned to do and pledged to do with Central and Eastern Europe that we did not do. Again, if we take Poland, when Poland joined NATO in the first wave of enlargement, not the second, which included the Baltic States, we pledged to Poland that we would have a NATO core size reinforcement capability that would exercise, we’ve built the infrastructure and exercise annually that capability. All of it is fine under the Russia-NATO Founding Act. We did not build it, we did not create it, we did not build the infrastructure, we did not do any of this. So, a lot of the doubts that are coming out from Central and Eastern Europe about Article 5, about credibility, about strategic reassurance aren’t always linked to Russia, it is about the things we did not do."

(...)

"It is interesting that in the run-up to the Strasbourg-Kehl summit, when President [Barack] Obama was briefed on the fact that some nations do not have contingency planning, his first order was: “This is unacceptable. Make it happen.” President of the United States! So, SACER now has been tasked and America’s military task is to make sure every NATO country has contingency planning. So, let’s wait and see how this debate evolves."

http://www.rigaconference.lv/?p=4&l=speeches&id=108

All the speeches are also available on the Riga Conference webpage - www.rigaconference.lv

Irina Ivaskina

Latvian Transatlantic organisation www.cer.org.uk

Reconnecting the Bering Strait

As President Obama pushed the reset button in the White House over the US-Russian relations it jump started many speculation and boundless fantasies. One of them was drawn up by Igor Yurgens, Chariman of the Institute of Contemporary Development, at the conference held parallel to the NATO Defense Ministerial Meeting in Bratislava when he said that in the future he would have seen Russia as a member of NATO, however clearly that NATO needed to be different. 

His speculation over that future NATO would suggest a new security architecture for the Northern Hemisphere which would make such a thing as the Russian Federation a part of NATO imaginable. Here is a short list of limiting factors:

• Throughout the centuries the Russian Federation always sought an expansionist foreign policy in order to create a buffer zone around the core of the country. This aimed at counter measuring the geographical fact that from East to West and from West to East there are no real natural borders. The buffer zone policy proved useful during the Napoleonic Wars, the WWI and the WWII. 
  In the latest history of the modern Russia, the policy it pursues vis-a-vis Ukraine, Belarus and the Caucasian States most notably Georgia fits into this picture. Previously the Baltic States and Poland were also included.
  

• Russia includes vast territories, 11 time zones and over 170 ethnic groups. This has been always a challenge to the leadership in Moscow which resulted in a bureaucratic administration that extensively use the power of terror to keep its citizens in line with official policies.
• The economy is heavily reliant in the export of raw materials such as oil, gas and different metals which could be used as a tool of power projection in the framework of foreign policy but weakens the country as it needs to import a significant portion of all value-added products. This is the case of basic agricultural products and machinery. 
• This adds to the dysfunctions in the society in which those who have control over the exploitation and export of raw materials and the import of goods can experience a much higher income level. Although it is by way far fetched to say that the export is controlled by the political elite (including the secret agencies) and the import by the crime groups, however those who have only a short glimps on the society could only see that. 
• Democracy is showing a very weak form and could exist only within the governing elite where different fractions battle over the control of rare assets of the country. 
• In such an environment freedom of speech is basically against the establishment and as such is not tolerated. It includes assassination of journalists, closing down radio and TV stations as well as banning non-governmental organizations. 

The above list could be further developed, however it is quite clear that these norms and situation does not comply with most of the values of NATO member countries in the field of politics, economy or society. Especially when some members of the Eastern side of NATO feels endangered itself from Russia that such a compromise could be done to accept Russia as a member of NATO.

All this said there is however a need to reset the relationship between Russia and the US or NATO. NATO and the Western community has to work on several issues together with Russia such as Afghanistan, Iran or even questions of climate change or drawing up a new international financial system.

This work requires platforms that exists today but the atmosphere need a bit of easing between the parties on the above mentioned questions. It is overly naive to imagine stability without a stabile and reaffirmed Russia in the Northern Hemisphere. Some countries that have vital interest in the Eastern side of Europe understands this like Germany, some have deep historical wounds that needs time to heal like Poland and the Baltics and some need guidance to recognize this like Hungary.

As the compromise is too great on both sides to make, there could be other forum than NATO to intensify cooperation. The UN, the OSCE, the Shanghai Cooperation or even the EU could be all part of a mozaik of an interlocking web of interests that is to provide value-added to the participating countries in securing the Northern Hemisphere.  

The future cooperation with Russian therefore heavily depends on what program will be loaded after the system reboot in the White House.

Thank You Bratislava!

'New Challanges, Better Capabilities' by the Slovak Atlantic Commission in Bratislava was a truly enjoyable event - Thanks everyone for the cooperation and organizing. The 3rd panel on NATO/EU relations with Russia, chaired by Edward Lucas, giving the floor to Mr. Klaeden, Mr. Smolar and Mr. Yurgens was HILARIOUS.. We thoroughly enjoyed it.
Also congratulations to 'Voices of Freedom' introducing us the spirit of the Velvet Revolution of '89 - a touching experience. (See the event hall above)
Keep up the good work - good luck to future events as well!

YATA Final Report on the 14th General Assembly

YATA General Assembly

7^th- 9^th October 2009, Kyiv, Ukraine

The 14th YATA General Assembly took place in Kiev, Ukraine from the 7th to the 9th of October 2009, under the general theme “60 Years of NATO and looking ahead.” The General Assembly usually represents the early occasion to review the work and activities performed in the past year, to elaborate the way forward and discuss some of the most challenging issues for the Atlantic Community.

This year General assembly was organized with the gracious support of the Atlantic Council of Ukraine, the Atlantic Treaty Association, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the NATO-Ukraine Civil League and the Naumann Stiftung Foundation.

On October 7^th, a session on Atlanticism and new Media: communication challenges in the XXI Century was organized. It aimed at providing participants with an analysis on the challenges that journalists, communication experts and leaders face when communicating with their public – especially the younger generation. According to Sabina Castelfranco and Antoinette Nikolova, the greatest challenges that journalists and reporters find when reporting news or an event are twofold: they must try to guarantee impartiality, while being able to get enough variety of independent sources. Information availability versus reliability has been at the centre of the debate, as the speakers have addressed the audience with concrete experience and analysis.

Michel Duray, Head of NATO Public Diplomacy Outreach Country Section concluded the debate with precious insights on the efforts that NATO is dedicating to informing partner countries civil society.

During the same session, the issue of Atlanticism beyond borders has been analyzed in depth, thanks to the reports delivered by Marat Nurgaliyev, First Secretary at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Kazakstan, Mohammed Tariq Ismati, Executive Director of the National Solidarity Programme of the Afghan Ministry or Rural Rehabilitation and Tahera Qurban Ali, Researcher at the Atlantic Council of Canada. Their view on Atlantic Community perceptions from partners countries, as well as their insights on the current situation in Central Asia – especially in Afghanistan – were of great interest for the participants.

On the same day, participants where hosted at the European University for a reception, where two memorable moments took place: first the Executive Board announced the dedication of the General assembly to a leading person of the Atlantic Movement. It was decided to dedicate this Kyiv Assembly to the memory of Karl Popper, the famous German philosopher who contributed to the debate on human rights, freedom and rule of law with his worldwide known ideas and concepts. Following, the Executive Board awarded four national chapters for their activeness and dedication to the Trans-Atlantic cause. The award for best international activity was given to the 14^th Edition of the Portuguese Atlantic Youth Seminar, organized in August by the Portuguese Atlantic Youth Association. The best national activity resulted to be the conference of “Environmental Change” organized by the Armenian Atlantic Chapter. Best Breakthrough activity was the “Energy For all, a Challenge to all” Conference organized by the Dutch Chapter, while most active chapter award was given to the Italian Chapter.

On the 8^th October, the YATA Council Meeting was attended by YATA representatives from 31 countries. Besides the annual reports and debates that followed, three were the major highlights:

- a video conference with Moscow Lomosov State University was organized. The video link was opened by the remarks of ATA President, Hon. Karl Lamers and it saw the participation of some 20 Russian students;

- the accession of the Belarusian chapter to the Youth Atlantic Treaty Association, as its 40^th member;

- a video campaign on “What does it mean to be an Atlanticist in XXI Century”, during which a series of video interviews where showed to the participants, along with a video on NATO history and most remarkable moments.

A new Executive Board for 2009-2010 has been elected. It includes Giuseppe Belardetti (Italy), President, Samuel de Paiva Pires (Portugal), Executive Vice- President, Tamas Godo (Hungary), Secretary General, Tornike Metreveli (Georgia), Vice- President for Outreach, Miroslav Mizera (Slovakia), Vice- President for Finance and Antti Talonen (Finland), Vice- President for Communication.

A final session on “Communicating Atlantic Values in the Ukrainian Civil Society was organized in cooperation with the Naumann Stiftung Fundation (NSF) and it saw the participation of Dr. Heike Dorenbacher, head of Ukraine and Belarus Desk at NSF, Col. Eberhard Von Seydlitz, Defense Attaché of the German Embassy to Ukraine, Dr. Tatiana Parkhalina, Vice President of the Russian Association for Euro-Atlantic Cooperation and Amb. Boris Tarasyuk, Deputy Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine.

The Atlantic Treaty Association General Assembly follow suits. It consisted of a series of panels and debates on the most pressing issues that the international community is facing in the years to come, ranging from energy security to public diplomacy initiatives, from the new NATO Strategic Concept to the security for civil society in XXI century.

Climate change and warfare: Cool heads or heated conflicts? | The Economist

Climate change and warfare: Cool heads or heated conflicts? | The Economist

Shared via AddThis

Italy Denies Report It Paid Off Taliban, Warlords

"Italy's government denied a report on Thursday that it paid off Taliban commanders and Afghan warlords, potentially costing the lives of French troops who later took charge of the area unaware of the payments. Britain's Times newspaper said Italian secret service paid tens of thousand of dollars to insurgents to keep the Sarobi area east of Kabul quiet while Italian forces were stationed there. The report cited unidentified Western military officials. Knowing nothing of the payments and carrying little ammunition in the incorrect belief they were in a benign area, French troops who took over the area in mid-2008 were surprised by an insurgent ambush that killed 10 soldiers, the report said. Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's office denied the accusations, citing several attacks on Italian troops in the first half of 2008 as proof Italy had not paid off anyone."