The Heritage Foundation hosted a panel on “North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) militaries, today and tomorrow: what kind of partners can America expect in Europe?”. Sally McNamara, senior policy analyst of European affairs at the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, said that there has been an on-going debate about ‘America’s unilateralism’ compared to ‘Europe’s unwillingness to fight the war on terror.’ McNamara expressed that the discussion was not meant to point fingers but to look at Europe’s military capabilities.
Dr. Jackson Janes, executive director of the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, said that since 1994 Germany has been overcoming a ‘culture of reticence’ for wanting to use military action. According to Janes, Germany has projected that by 2010, their armed forces will be structured with 350, 000 response forces for high intensity operations, 15,000 forces for NATO rapid response, 70,000 forces for stabilization and 147,000 forces earmarked for comprehensive joint and sustainable support of operations. Janes also said that Germany faces budgetary constraints as only 1.4% of its gross domestic product (GDP) is used for defense, compared to the minimum two percent of GDP that is usually recommended.
Peter Podbielski, senior analyst at the Center for European Policy Analysis, said that NATO transformation has been hindered by factors such as time, money and the absence of a coherent military transformation concept. With regards to military cooperation, Podbielski cited the Polish for being the most capable and enthusiastic military to partner with both the U.S. and NATO. Podbielski also expressed that missile defense could serve as a ‘catalyst for further cooperation’ between NATO and the U.S.
Brigadier Phil Jones, military attache and British defense staff at the British embassy, emphasized that states no longer have to choose between NATO and the European Union (EU). Jones said that 'complementarity' is a concept that everyone is comfortable with and everyone is working to develop usable military capabilities.
‘Complementarity’ key to U.S. and Europe military partnership
Dr. Jackson Janes, executive director of the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, said that since 1994 Germany has been overcoming a ‘culture of reticence’ for wanting to use military action. According to Janes, Germany has projected that by 2010, their armed forces will be structured with 350, 000 response forces for high intensity operations, 15,000 forces for NATO rapid response, 70,000 forces for stabilization and 147,000 forces earmarked for comprehensive joint and sustainable support of operations. Janes also said that Germany faces budgetary constraints as only 1.4% of its gross domestic product (GDP) is used for defense, compared to the minimum two percent of GDP that is usually recommended.
Peter Podbielski, senior analyst at the Center for European Policy Analysis, said that NATO transformation has been hindered by factors such as time, money and the absence of a coherent military transformation concept. With regards to military cooperation, Podbielski cited the Polish for being the most capable and enthusiastic military to partner with both the U.S. and NATO. Podbielski also expressed that missile defense could serve as a ‘catalyst for further cooperation’ between NATO and the U.S.
Brigadier Phil Jones, military attache and British defense staff at the British embassy, emphasized that states no longer have to choose between NATO and the European Union (EU). Jones said that 'complementarity' is a concept that everyone is comfortable with and everyone is working to develop usable military capabilities.