International IDEA’s Post

Trans-Atlantic security and defence cooperation between the US and Europe, no doubt, is a "must". However, as democracy, rule of law and human rights affairs are already dealt by the Council of Europe; security and defence affairs are dealt by NATO, and, economic & commercial affairs had been dealt by European Economic Community; present day EU appears to me representing a bad example of duplication and overlapping of efforts, at the same time, waste of limited sources, in every aspect: https://lnkd.in/d5waFGmF

In late 2023 we brought together experts from across wider Europe (the Europe of the OSCE), including Ukraine and Russia, to discuss how different scenarios for Ukraine and the Russian invasion would affect the future of European security, including long term levels of conflict and risk, implications for NATO cohesion and European integration, societal frictions, arms control (or not), and the ability to tackle climate change. The report is attached in the link below and has a lot of food for thought. It was obviously not an easy discussion to have. It is difficult even to find a common language to describe the war precipitated by Russia’s 2022 full scale invasion of Ukraine. For Ukrainians it’s vitally important to acknowledge this as a full scale invasion (not the start of an invasion as that happened eight years ago). Meanwhile of course Russians living in Russia were originally supposed to call it “a special military operation”. Over time there has been more talk in Russia of a “war” - but which war? The invasion of Ukraine is increasing bound up with the idea of a larger (permanent, unwinnable) “war with the West”. So how to find neutral language? In practice we can simply talk about “the war” but even so there’s a question of the scope (Ukraine, Russia and Europe, Russia and “the West”, even if the West is a nebulous enemy with no defined borders or membership). The “Ukraine war” often used as shorthand triggered a sense in many east European participants that the reality of invasion and occupation was being papered over - even if the people using it were simply using it for convenience as they would speak of the Gulf war or the Falklands war. This sensitively reflects deeper concerns about the real intentions of outside observers and the subtle ways narratives can start to shift; being sidelined, neglected, misread; and in general about language and categories being defined by others who can’t be guaranteed to understand or care. This recurs across conflicts: “the war in Gaza” is something I speak of a lot; but there are meaningful differences between speaking of “the Israel-Hamas war”; “Israel’s war on Hamas”; “Israel’s war in Gaza”; “Israel’s war on Gaza”, or putting it in the context of a major escalation in a 75 year conflict and occupation; and that’s before we even get to the discussion of genocide, plausible risks of genocide and genocidal acts against Palestinians or Hamas genocidal acts against Israelis. Being able to actually discuss why these words matter can be worthwhile in itself as a way of discussing competing meanings and understandings. Our broader discussion was not designed to discuss how people thought the invasion and war would end or should end. We used a set of possible outcomes as inputs, not outputs, to discuss how Europe would live together “afterwards”, several years down the road. Again “the day after” is a sort of fiction - it’s a thought experiment. Please do read - would love to hear feedback.

NATO faces a new challenge in AI-Augmented disinformation and we need a strategy that prevents authoritarian regimes from manipulating public opinion. Read my latest piece in Project Syndicate on how NATO countries can defend again disinformation campaigns. https://lnkd.in/eZhKFBFk

The tenuous geopolitical landscape presents numerous challenges that demand our military’s full and careful attention. Ongoing conflicts, such as the situation in Ukraine and the escalation of tensions in the Middle East, underscore the need for a robust defense and intelligence apparatus. Coups in Africa and simmering tensions in Asia further highlight the volatile nature of our world. In light of these threats, reducing USASOC’s capabilities would severely hamper our ability to respond effectively.

Three important questions NATO must ask itself today: 1) whether it can withstand constructive criticism & debate from within - which can lead to necessary reforms? and 2) once celebrations about enlarging further are concluded, will a ponderous “mini UN” be able to use “consensus” to take responsive decisions on a timely basis in wartime, that are required to deal with NATO’s own obstructionist nations in an effective way w/o making concessions to obtain their support? And finally & most importantly, 3) will NATO be able to adopt a unified, durable GOAL: to assist Ukraine WIN its war against Putin’s aggression, as opposed to its current incrementalism, i.e., short term commitments, only in effect from one North Atlantic Committee meeting to the next?

Jan 16: "To what extent will de-risking shape regional economic dynamics? What will be the greatest military flashpoint in the region next year? Which 2024 election will have the greatest impact on international relations in the Indo-Pacific? Join CSIS experts to explore these and other questions during our annual preview of economic, political, and security developments across the region."

The Importance of Political Unity for NATO Defense The recent political shifts in Europe, highlighted by the 2024 European elections, have underscored a critical issue for NATO: the necessity of political unity for effective defense. NATO's foundation relies on the principle of collective defense, where an attack on one is an attack on all. However, this principle can only function if member states are politically united. The role of the Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) is pivotal, but without clear and unified political backing, NATO's ability to respond swiftly and decisively to threats, particularly from Russia, is compromised. The idea of a "coalition of the willing" within NATO has been suggested as a solution to potential disunity. While this might offer a temporary fix, it fundamentally undermines NATO's core principle of collective defense, potentially signaling the end of NATO as we know it. For NATO to remain credible and effective, member states must prioritize political cohesion. Continuous dialogue, compromise, and commitment to collective security are essential to navigating the changing political landscape. Maintaining unity is not just a matter of policy but a necessity for the defense and stability of all NATO members. #NATO #Defense #PoliticalUnity #EuropeanElections2024 #CollectiveSecurity #InternationalRelations

The signing of the 20 M by the EU Council coincides with the deployment of Kenyan armed forces in Haiti. The EU Council adopted a EUR 20 million assistance measure under the European Peace Facility today. Its objective is to improve the operational capabilities of the Kenyan Defense Forces to PROTECT THE TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY AND SOVEREIGNTY OF THE COUNTRY and its civilian population against INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL THREATS. Meanwhile, Secretary of State -US- Antony Blinken days ago ordered the State Department to proceed with the funding of $109 million for the deployment of an ARMED INTERVENTION MISSION in Haiti by Kenyan special forces. Some 300 million had been foreseen for this mission but reduced to the amount indicated above. “The crossover of interests and the political incoherence” These scenarios show the complexity of international relations and the interference of foreign powers in other countries, which can have negative consequences for the stability and peace for which they advocate. Moreover, previous results have shown that armed interventions cannot be a solution in the context of Haiti.

🔻 The article discusses NATO's need to address AI-augmented disinformation as a critical threat in modern warfare, particularly in light of hostile regimes targeting Western democracies. 🔻 It emphasizes the upcoming NATO summit in Washington as a pivotal moment to establish a collective-defense doctrine that treats the information ecosystem as a frontline. 🔻 The strategy involves real-time monitoring, strategic communications, international partnerships, and promoting media literacy to counter disinformation effectively and safeguard democratic principles. https://lnkd.in/ghDpPyc5

Evgeny Buzhinsky: Ukraine should accept Russia's terms before it loses more territories Evgeny Buzhinsky - professor at the HSE University, retired lieutenant general - gave an interview to GEOFOR on the most pressing foreign policy issues. Full text: