Report

The Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association has the honour to present its report on the visit of the Mediterranean Special Group held in La Maddalena, Italy July 4-5, 2011, the Joint meeting of the Ukraine-NATO Interparliamentary Council, the Sub-Committee on NATO Partnerships and the Sub-committee on Democratic Governance held in Kyiv, Ukraine July 5-7, 2011 and the visit of the Sub-Committee on Transatlantic Defence and Security Co-operation, held in Rome, Italy July 6-7, 2011.

The three visits were combined in this report, as they occurred consecutively.

REPORT ON THE VISIT OF THE MEDITERRANEAN SPECIAL GROUP

LA MADDALENA, ITALY, JULY 4-5, 2011

In La Maddalena, Canada was represented by Senator Raynell Andreychuk, Senator Joseph A. Day, Mr. Darryl Kramp, M.P. and Mr. Stephen Woodworth, M.P.

From 4-5 July, members of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly Mediterranean and Middle East Special Group (GSM) chaired by Vahit Erdem from Turkey and members of the Sub-Committee on Transatlantic Defence and Security Cooperation, chaired by the Rt. Hon. Sir John Stanley of the United Kingdom, gathered in La Maddalena, Italy for a seminar dedicated to exploring the rapidly changing situation in the Middle East and North Africa. The Italian Parliament’s delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, headed by Senator Sergio de Gregorio, hosted and organised the seminar for the Assembly’s Mediterranean and Middle East Special Group (GSM). Participants in the seminar reviewed recent events on both a national and regional basis. Among those addressing the more than 50 members of parliament attending the event were senior leaders from Italy, Egypt and Iraq, as well as distinguished experts on regional dynamics. The participants were also briefed on NATO’s ongoing Libya operation by a senior NATO Commander. On the initiative of the Seminar host nation, the event also featured an appearance by a senior Iranian official.

Giuseppe Cossiga, a Secretary of State in Italy’s Defence Ministry, made the opening presentation at the conference. He noted that Italy’s interest in the Middle East and Mediterranean is rooted in his country’s long history of engagement with the region. He said that the key role being played by a young generation of Arabs represented a central unifying theme of the Arab Spring. He noted that the West harbors certain misperceptions about the role religion plays in political and cultural life in the region. Italy is particularly sensitive to changes in Libya, and Mr. Cossiga asserted that NATO’s Operation Unified Protector was an important step for the Alliance; yet the crisis in that country would ultimately be solved by political not military means. He also indicated that Syria might be even more consequential than Libya.

The Keynote speaker Ambassador Mohammed Moustafa Kamal, Assistant Foreign Minister for Parliamentary Affairs of the Arab Republic of Egypt, suggested that his presence at the seminar was meant to signal a desire for strong cooperation between Egypt and the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. Virtually nobody anticipated that Egypt’s political landscape would be so profoundly altered so quickly this past January and February, he said. There are a broad range of political and constitutional changes underway. The Supreme Council will play a critical part in the transition but will also cede power to the president and parliament once they are elected. Social and economic policies designed to lower unemployment, encourage foreign investment and boost small businesses will be essential to ensuring a smooth transition to democracy. A just and lasting solution to the Palestinian problem is necessary to achieve stability and peace in the region.

An Egyptian constitutional declaration will be drafted by a 100 member committee from the parliament. It is to be based on the principle of Egyptian citizenship and will not define minority or majority communities. Sharia law will inform the new constitution but this is nothing new. In the elections, the Muslim Brotherhood could enjoy some advantages as they have existed for some sixty years. Current estimates are that it will attain 25-30% of the vote. The new state will abide by the old treaties with Israel, but the public will certainly want to see progress on the peace process.

The Italian delegation invited Ali Ahani, the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs for Europe and America of the Islamic Republic of Iran, to address the seminar. This was a subject of immediate discussion among the parliamentarians. The Israeli delegation noted that the Iran’s President had called for Israel to be “wiped off the map” and chose to leave the room for the duration of that presentation. Several members, including Senator Raynell Andreychuk and Mr. Stephen Woodworth, M.P. from Canada then raised objections to the presence of a senior Iranian official at the gathering. Senator De Gregorio indicated that the invitation was extended to give parliamentarians an opportunity to engage in a frank exchange with an Iranian official so that both sides better understood each other’s positions. This was, in no way, an endorsement of the Iranian world view. This was the first time an Iranian official had briefed the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. NATO PA Secretary General David Hobbs then took the floor. He said Iranian leaders had made reprehensible statements that were unacceptable and that Iran had been subject to a range of sanctions because of its nuclear policies; yet, there was no rule that expressly prohibited a discussion with an Iranian official. Assembly rules dictate that the chairman and host country make political decisions on controversial questions of this sort and all procedures had been observed.

Mr. Ahani was then given the floor and he shared his government’s views of recent developments in the region. He focused on three questions – Iran’s standing in the region, Iran’s assessment of the uprising, and the outlook for the new Middle East. He noted that Iran is heir to millennia of history. Its culture is ancient and the Iranian people had constructed a constitutional order over a century ago. He also argued that Iran is a symbol of peace in the region and has played a positive role in settling several crises, including wars in the Balkans, Iraq, Kuwait and Afghanistan. Mr. Ahani asserted that his country plays a leading role in fighting drug trafficking, handling refugees and counter-terrorism, and has sought to create a nuclear-free region. He added that the rise of pro-democracy movements in Tunisia, Egypt and elsewhere carries an important message to the world and that it cannot be denied that certain powers stood by the regional dictators who disregarded the views of the people. He alluded to forces that are working to derail the progress towards democracy to favor their own narrow interests.

Mr. Ahani said the time has come to change the way we think about each other and work towards a stable world, with a true understanding of diverse cultures, mutual respect, dialogue and fair play. He said that the Palestine question had festered for decades because the West had disregard fundamental principles of human rights. Libya, he noted, is an oil-rich country in a geopolitically important region and this explains the engagement of the US and other countries there. NATO’s “opportunistic interpretation of UNSCR 1973” had paved the way for a massive military operation under the pretense of saving civilians. The intervention, Mr. Ahani asserted had only caused more suffering and damage. He described Libya as a second Afghanistan in the making for NATO. He pointed also to implicit double standards with regard to Bahrain, where the rights of the Shiite majority have been ignored. The Saudi intervention could not have happened without US approval. He then warned that foreign intervention in Syria will jeopardize security and stability and trigger rising radicalism and terrorism. He argued that Iran has played a pioneering and constructive role in Afghanistan and Iraq and that it has introduced a new and successful model of democracy for religious societies. It has offered solutions to the region but it has been portrayed as a threat by the interventionist powers.

In the discussion, Mr. Ahani suggested that Iran is frequently misrepresented in the Western media. He claimed that democracy is thriving in his country and said that the “voters’ will is respected”. He said that Iran is not working to build nuclear weapons and respects all of its NPT obligations. He added that all Iranian nuclear facilities are monitored and are subject to numerous snap inspections. Mr. Ahani also said that Iran’s ballistic missile program seeks to develop missiles with ranges of no more than 2000 kilometers. Members challenged both assertions.

Mr. Ahani told a seminar participant his country is supporting the government of Iraq and that it respect’s Iraq’s territorial integrity. He also claimed that human rights are respected in Iran but that the West tends to use western criteria to make judgments about Iran in this regard. He was referring in particular to women’s rights issues. This led one member to suggest that human rights are universal in nature and not national as the speaker was implying. Mr. Ahani noted that his country has hosted 3 million Afghan refugees on its territory and provides an array of social services to that community. The links between Iran and Afghanistan are deep and so Iran “cannot stand idly by” at a time when that country confronts so many challenges. He called for caution in the case of Syria and warned that international interference in that country would threaten stability and peace. Mr. Ahani denied that President Ahmadinejad had ever called for Israel to be wiped off the map or denied the reality of the Holocaust. He then blamed Israel for failing to restore basic rights to the Palestinians.

Antonello Cabras (Italy) presented his draft report “Implications of the Uprisings in the MENA Region.” The wave of demonstrations in the region have revealed that mass political mobilization can indeed trigger deep political change in societies long characterized by authoritarian stasis. It has also demonstrated that there is no “Arab exception” when it comes to aspirations for democracy, human rights and economic opportunities. The uprisings have revealed both the MENA region’s commonalities and its heterogeneity. Growing popular frustration with political, economic and social exclusion has been apparent throughout the region. The uprisings have been partly the product of a demographic explosion and the increasing economic marginalization of the region’s youth.

Forging a calibrated Western policy response has proven challenging. Indeed the approach of western governments has not been entirely consistent. They have expressed support for democratically minded opposition groups. Nevertheless, the extent of such support has varied. In Libya, NATO has become a protagonist and is now fully engaged in the implementation of two UN Security Council Resolutions - (1970 and 1973) - aiming at the enforcement of a no-fly zone, an arms embargo and the protection of civilians. In contrast, it has been far more reluctant to express strong support for opposition groups in Syria or Bahrain for a range of reasons. Bahrain, of course, is a host to the Fifth Fleet of the United States Navy and that country is largely seen, and, indeed, promotes itself as a bulwark against the Iranian presence in the Gulf. Given its location, military power and regional ties, Syria is also of considerable strategic importance. Although it is generally to be a rival to the West, it was also potentially useful to Western policy makers. That notion has now evaporated. The Syrian crisis now risks spilling over into neighbouring Lebanon, Turkey and Iran and could have repercussions for internal Palestinian politics and the dynamics of the Arab-Israeli peace process. The Iranian regime has tried to identify itself with demonstrators beyond its borders, but this is not at all convincing given its extremely harsh treatment of those who have demanded greater openness in that repressive society.

It is also far too soon to determine if any of these popular rebellions will actually result in democratic regimes and greater regional stability. Perhaps the most important lesson that can be drawn so far is how vulnerable and brittle non-democratic regimes can be, particularly when basic public needs are not met. If there are no vehicles for expressing grievances, political explosions will inevitably occur.

The effects of the Arab spring are being felt in Europe too. There is a refugee crisis, which has alarmed Italian authorities, as thousands have landed on the island of Lampedusa seeking sanctuary. Italy has argued that this is a European and an international problem, not simply an Italian one. Turkey is also threatened with a potential refugee crisis along its border with Syria. Europe, like North America, must therefore redefine its relationship with this region, but there is uncertainty about how it can actually shape outcomes. The speed of events has surpassed Europe’s capacity to respond with agility. New political systems will ultimately have to be constructed at the same time that national economies are suffering serious strains. Many factors will condition the transition process including: the overarching security framework, the uncertain nature of some opposition forces, the residual power of old and sometimes undemocratic elites and the not inconsequential potential for radicalization if these governments prove incompetent or should they give in to authoritarian temptations.

The West must also be aware that its endorsements can sometimes backfire. Support to the region should be extended, but domestic forces must take the lead in redefining these political and economic systems. Finally, Senator Cabras suggested that the NATO PA can be of help to the region, particularly after new parliaments are elected.

In the discussion, it was pointed out that the NATO PA should focus on those areas where it can make a difference such as in security sector reform, although members agreed that the MENA region should be a priority area for the Assembly’s work. Countries will also need to target their foreign assistance but need to be very precise about what they are hoping to achieve. It was also suggested that the section on Libya be developed, that the universal nature of democracy be stressed, that the failed uprising in Iran be explored, and that the paradox of Western support for Libyan rebels and the absence of support for those in the streets of Syria.

Stefania Craxi, Italy’s Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs told seminar participants that those engaged in the uprisings in the MENA region have not sought external scapegoats for the problems they confront; they have focused on the real source of the problem. It is too soon to assess the full reasons for and impact of these uprisings. Economic inequality is certainly one factor but the need for dramatically improved governance systems is what genuinely motivated the people of Egypt and Tunisia. The revolutionaries are young and have used the Internet to evade censorship and repression. There is a risk that this transition period could play into the hands of the better-organized religious groups. The international community must therefore move beyond a business as usual approach to the region, focus global attention on the region, and help strengthen the hand of democratic reformers. Europe cannot afford to see the momentum of the movements fail and is uniquely positioned to support democratic dialogue. Job creation in the region is also imperative. Italy has proposed a development bank for the Euro-Mediterranean area to support small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). The Union for the Mediterranean came to a standstill because of grave difficulties with the Middle East peace process; yet, its founding principles remain important, as does its practical focus on infrastructure, energy and transport.

Dr. Tarik Yousef recalled participating in a GSM panel two years ago in Naples at a moment when most participants were extraordinarily pessimistic about the future of the Arab world. Obviously the outlook for the region has shifted significantly and this change is very good news indeed. Many had simply accepted the idea that these governments delivered stability and assumed that governments would endure for a very long time. Many simply thought that the machinery of repression was too powerful. When the Arab Spring broke out, it was initially expected to end in April or May, and yet it continues to this day. It is important as well to note that those in the streets are demanding good governance, social justice, and opportunity. These are all values fully embraced in Europe. These revolutions have largely been led by urban, educated upper class individuals who seek to induce change themselves rather than simply express a desire for it. Social media has played a key role in Libya and elsewhere.

Thus, the ideas that will shape the future are already driving positive change. There are now clear benchmarks for what is acceptable and defensible; what the public wants in government is becoming clearer. In the short- term, economic problems are not likely in Egypt or Tunisia and both governments will garner support from the outside world. Over the longer term matters of political economy will pose a paramount challenge. If the outside world wants to help, however, it needs to do so with a degree of respect for the sovereign concerns of these societies. In two years, the countries of the Arab world will look very different politically and the alliance system will also change. A few years ago many thought the region would grow to look like Dubai – high buildings and no freedoms. Now it will be split between the Gulf countries and the new revolutionary republics. Relations between the Arab world and the outside world will shift, and a broader regional Mediterranean arrangement may finally be possible. Today there is space for new dynamics, fresh ideas and deeper exchange. In the discussion, Dr. Yousef warned that there would be many challenges in the region and they would be greater in Libya, Yemen and Syria than in Egypt and Tunisia.

Dr. Maha Azzam discussed the transition to democracy and the links between religion and the state in Egypt. He noted that the protests emerged after decades of dictatorship and oppression. Meetings like this seminar tended to sideline human rights in favor of economic and strategic interests. There is now room for optimism but much works remains. The fate of Syria and Bahrain is uncertain. Egypt and Tunisia are in a stronger position, but compelling questions must be answered. The Egyptian military supposedly wants to step back from politics, but it remains a formidable power to be reckoned with. In some respects, there are parallels between the Egyptian and Turkish military—or at least the Turkish military of the past. So far, the Egyptian military’s statements have been encouraging but it has deeply embedded economic interests and there could be resistance to change. Unemployment and problems surrounding the so-called “youth bulge” also need to be addressed. These challenges will not be resolved through short-term investments. At the same time, the Egyptian welfare and health systems have disintegrated and the educational system is in disarray.

Connecting justice with Islam is not a problem for the majority of revolutionaries; they want a system of checks and balances and they want rulers to be accountable. Religion remains at the forefront of discussions on the obligations of the ruler towards the ruled. The Muslim Brotherhood will likely play a larger role in the political process than some in Europe would want. But it has been part of the political landscape for decades. Egypt now has an opportunity to forge new relations with genuinely open societies in the region. This will also alter relations with the West. The Egyptian peace with Israel could also come under fire just as the role of national military establishments may be questioned. Many in the region believe Israel should come under the same scrutiny as others in the region whether the issue is its nuclear posture or the oppression of Palestinians.

Mr. Ayad Allawi, former Prime Minister of Iraq, opened the Tuesday session. He said Iraq still confronts many obstacles in the struggle for full fledged democracy. Achieving stability and the rule of law has proven extremely difficult in Iraq. Internal and external regional factors are driving profound changes and can be unpredictable. Iraq lies in a strategic location between the important countries of Turkey and Iran, is ethnically and religiously diverse and possesses great resource wealth. The primary struggle in the country is between moderation and various forms of extremism with terrorist tendencies. Political, economic and social stability are all linked to security questions. Mr. Allawi suggested that political life in his county must ultimately be based on true partnership among the various communities rather than ethnic or sectarian division.

Mr. Allawi suggested that the Kurds played a vital role in fighting the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. Dialogue with the Kurds must be based on understanding and partnership, with basic rules on distribution of national revenue, adoption of a law on oil and natural gas, and constructive dialogue on current disputes. Mr. Allawi expressed regret about recent attacks against Christians which he characterized as inhuman and immoral. He called upon the countries of the world to aid the Christian community in Iraq.

Mr. Nechirvan Idris Barzani, the former Prime Minister of the Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq, opened his remarks by suggesting that the Kurdish people have learned there is no substitute for the support of European nations and have therefore sought to build links with the West. The atrocities that occurred in the Kurdish region should not be forgotten – 182,000 Kurds disappeared, 4,500 villages were razed to the ground, and civilians were targeted with chemical weapons. The Iraqi High Tribunal and Council of Representatives have recognized these crimes as genocide, but this is not enough.

Profound changes are unfolding in the region. Iraq has been spared from civil disturbances because it is now more democratic and open than many other countries in the region. Iraq itself confronts three major challenges. It needs to build a measure of trust and confidence among its parties and political forces. It must institutionalize the constitutional system in such a way as to accord substantial autonomy to the regions. Kurds will continue to insist on a federal, pluralistic, democratic state. The constitution must also address the problem of disputed territories and correct mistakes made by the Baathist regime.

Kurdistan has a long experience with self-government and has prospered and grown even as the rest of the country has suffered. The Kurdish people welcome refugees and can make an important contribution global energy security. The story of Kurdistan is a narrative of how democracy can unleash the potential of a long suffering people.

In the discussion, a Dutch member noted that the Dutch have pushed to have the Saddam Hussein’s Anfa operation against the Kurds recognized as genocide. Mr. Barzani added that Kirkuk is a Kurdish city and a symbol of the Kurdish people’s oppression. He suggested that this needs to be recognized and then the matter of sharing the oil revenues from that region can be settled. In response to a question, Mr. Allawi acknowledged that corruption in Iraq represented a very serious problem that was undermining the investment climate. He also called for making the entire region a WMD free region and suggested that Iran be engaged in discussion to assume them they will not be the victims of aggression. Mr. Barzani acknowledged that corruption was also an issue in the Kurdish region although he said the extent has been exaggerated. He finally noted that Turkey has become an important partner for Kurdistan, adding that there are many Turkish companies investing in the region.

Admiral Samuel J. Locklear III, Commander, Allied Joint Force Command, Naples gave an overview of NATO operations in the Mediterranean. He stated that NATO is involved not just in Libya but throughout the Mediterranean region including the Balkans. These operations are putting tremendous pressure on Allied resources, but the Alliance is holding together well.

Operation Active Endeavor seeks to assure that there will no terrorist operations on the maritime front. It has adopted a network-centric intelligence-based approach to the challenge. On an average day, NATO is able to monitor 60% of traffic moving through and around the Mediterranean. But this is not satisfactory and so improvements are needed.

NATO and EU operations have been an important success story in the Balkans. The number of deterrent forces in Kosovo has been cut from 15,000 to 5,000 over the past two years. The next step is to get those numbers down to 2,500, a goal that will be discussed in the NAC. There is no grave security threat in Kosovo, and the EU is able to exercise an important degree of influence in the region. Bringing Kosovo into regional organizations will contribute to longer-term confidence building with Belgrade. Yet it cannot be forgotten that KFOR remains the most trusted institution in Kosovo. NATO will continue to support the democratic evolution of both Kosovo and Serbia.

Serbia has made great strides in repairing relationships in the region and its cooperation with the ICTY has been key. The Serbian president recently hosted a NATO strategy summit in Belgrade featuring 56 nations; this was impressive, particularly given the still not inconsequential degree of popular mistrust of NATO. There are other security challenges in the region that must be addressed. Bosnia and Herzegovina must resolve defense properties issues, but this cannot happen with the current political deadlock. However, the military has made good progress in defense reforms and has contributed significantly to ISAF. Montenegro has built a small but capable armed force which contributes to ISAF and promotes regional security cooperation. That country is progressing steadily on Euro-Atlantic integration. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia continues to participate in a wide range of Partnership for Peace activities and has demonstrated that it is ready for NATO membership, but now must resolve the name issue with Greece.

In Iraq, the NATO Training Mission is a small organization of 200 people but has had an outsized impact and has provided a great return on the relatively small investment.

In Libya, Operation Unified Protector has successfully averted a humanitarian catastrophe with a mandate based on UNSCRs 1970 and 1973. Humanitarian aid is flowing to the country, and the regime’s war machine has been permanently degraded. 1.1 million people have left Libya out of a population of 7 million. For operations to end, NATO requires a ceasefire, armed forces to withdraw to their garrisons and the free flow of humanitarian assistance. The embargo has been effective; 17 vessels from NATO and partner nations have completed 1,500 hailings and 130 boardings, while 8 ships have been denied access to ports. The southern and land borders, however, are much more difficult to manage. The no-fly zone remains in place, with flights only authorized for humanitarian assistance and other essential services. The civilian protection mission has worked well. Life is fairly normal in the east except for fuel and food shortages. In Misrata, life is also beginning to return to normal. To the west, the freedom fighters or opposition have pushed the regime out of important areas and moved closer to Tripoli. People in Tripoli have food and water and are witnessing NATO airstrikes but live life without significant threats except from the regime. The rebels are coming together politically and cooperating more effectively on security. It is important to recognize that regime change is not in NATO’s mandate, and the Alliance is not targeting or tracking individuals. Colonel Qaddafi is simply increasingly less relevant to the situation on the ground.

NATO has conducted a complex air campaign. The operation is doing very well. 13,000 sorties had been flown as of early July, with over 5,000 strike sorties and 2,600 targets effectively destroyed.

In the discussion that followed Admiral Locklear acknowledged that there had initially been a problem with munitions stockpiles during the first few days of the Libya campaign. The United States helped fill the gap and this problem seems to have been addressed for the moment. He also refused to characterize the military situation as a stalemate, as Qaddafi’s forces were being systematically weakened. He noted that the United States was playing a key role in air refuelling and in intelligence and data gathering. He denied that NATO was seeking to win a war and that it was rather focused on ensuring compliance with a UN mandate. The military operations are designed to create room for diplomacy.

REPORT ON THE JOINT MEETING OF THE UKRAINE NATO INTERPARLIAMENTARY COUNCIL, THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON NATO PARTNERSHIPS AND THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE, KYIV, UKRAINE, JULY 5-7, 2011

Senator Raynell Andreychuk and Mr. Darryl Kramp, M.P. represented Canada in Kyiv.

Ukraine’s decision in July 2010 to adopt a policy of “non-block” status and set constructive cooperation with NATO – rather than membership – as its objective led to less controversy in domestic politics. Meanwhile political and practical cooperation went on and even intensified. These were some of the key findings of a meeting of NATO Parliamentarians with their Ukrainian counterparts in Kyiv on 5 July in the framework of the Ukraine-NATO Interparliamentary Council (UNIC). Seventeen members of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly (NATO PA) as well as several representatives of the Ukrainian parliament attended the meeting of the Council as well as the subsequent visit of the Sub-Committee on Democratic Governance (CDSDG) on 6-7 July.

Nearly 30 members of parliament from 17 NATO nations travelled to Rome 6-7 July 2011 for a high level series of exchanges on the Italian contribution to the implementation of the Alliance’s Strategic Concept adopted in November 2010.

The visit of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly’s Sub-Committee on Transatlantic Defence and Security Cooperation was led by the Sub-Committee’s Chairman, Sir John Stanley (United Kingdom) and hosted by the Italian parliament. The Assembly’s Subcommittees regularly travel to NATO countries for dialogue with officials and independent voices to improve members’ understanding of national views and contributions, and to collect information for each Committee’s analytical reports.

The delegation’s exchanges with senior government and military officials included discussions with the Secretary of State for Defence, Giuseppe Cossiga, and the Chief of Defence, General Biagio Abrate. The delegation also visited the headquarters of the Italian Carabinieri, as well as the NATO Defence College.

ITALY IN OPERATIONS

Italy currently deployed over 7,200 troops abroad in 30 operations covering 28 countries, the delegation learned from a briefing at Joint Operations Headquarters provided by its Commanding Officer, Lt. General Giorgio Cornacchione. Italy is the 17th force provider in the UN system, although the first ‘western’ country; it is the fourth-largest force provider under the NATO flag and the 2nd under the EU flag. Among its most notable deployments, Italy engaged 4,200 troops in Afghanistan (including 650 trainers and leading Regional Command West); dedicated roughly 1,500 to Operation Unified Protector (Libya); 1,600 in UNIFIL (Lebanon); 600 personnel in KFOR (Kosovo); and 73 to the NATO Training Mission–Iraq. Italy also participates in the NATO and EU antipiracy missions off the Horn of Africa.

The Joint Operations Headquarters (HQ) itself represented a new structure created in the late 1990s, which was designed in order to place the Chief of Defence squarely at the head of operational deployments, which had grown more numerous and complex. It is responsible not only for planning, coordinating and conducting joint, multinational and national operations and exercises, but also for the overall direction and coordination of all military contributions to the resolution of national disasters and other emergencies.

The institution also serves as one of five European Union Operational HQs, and has been designated as the HQ with responsibility for the EUFOR Libya operation. This particular HQ was not deployable and would be augmented by personnel from EU member nations should it be activated for an operation.

The delegation had the opportunity to discuss developments in Afghanistan by video-link with the ISAF Regional Commander West, Brigadier General Carmine Masiello, based in Herat. With roughly 8,000 troops from ten countries under his command, General Masiello stated that from a military point of view, he saw no difficulty with the plans for transition to Afghan security lead in the coming period, while warning that terrorist attacks were possible, as they were anywhere.

General Masiello praised the qualitative increase in the capabilities of the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) in his area of responsibility, stating that they were demonstrating very good combat skills; leadership and planning capabilities were two areas in which further progress was necessary. The Afghan National Police – in particular the well-trained and supported Civil Order Police or ANCOP – had demonstrated its very high effectiveness and had reacted quickly and successfully to deal with a recent attack on a regional Provincial Reconstruction Team.

The General suggested that the anticipated spring offensive of the insurgency had not appeared as significant as in previous years, and the shift by the insurgency towards greater use of suicide bombers and improvised explosive devices (IEDs) might be a sign of a turn towards desperation – something of a ‘last resort.’ He also offered his impression that the local population in Regional Command West was gaining trust in the ANSF as well as in international forces, as demonstrated by the increasing number of IEDs locals provided information about.

General Abrate, Italy’s Chief of Defence, suggested that as transition occurs, Italy would restructure its contribution to emphasise trainers and instructors.

ITALIAN MILITARY TRANSFORMATION AND NATO

The transformation of NATO under its new Strategic Concept mirrored that of the Italian Armed Forces, according to Secretary of State for Defence, Mr. Cossiga. Italy had been transitioning to a professional armed force from conscription since 2000. Italy had since averaged 9,000 soldiers deployed abroad annually, with a peak of 12,000. Plans for increased annual funding to ensuring training and specialization of the professional forces had fallen victim to political shifts in Italy; nevertheless, at a time of scant financial resources, he said, Italian armed forces had increased their bond with Italian society and provided real benefits.

Indeed, defence reforms had successfully moved the Italian Armed Forces from conscription-based, static, single-service forces focused on border defence, to professional, deployable, joint/combined forces geared to global contributions to peace and security, General Abrate, Italy’s Chief of Defence, told the delegation. Italy kept 61,000 forces ready for deployment, with 30,000 in a state of high readiness, he said. Italy was participating in the NATO reform process and would make significant contributions in the discussions on NATO’s Defence and Deterrence Posture Review as well as in the realisation of the Alliance’s initiatives on missile defence and cyber defence.

General Abrate suggested that re-inventing the wheel of NATO’s military structure was not necessary; the structure has been tested and passed these tests successfully, in particular in rapid response to the need for an operation in the Libyan context. General Abrate reminded the delegation that Italy did not consider itself a global power or actor, nor was it a nuclear power or permanent member of the UN Security Council. On the other hand, beyond its significant contributions in the NATO, UN, and EU contexts, it considered itself a major player in the enlarged Mediterranean area.

Italy is strongly committed to international cooperation on armaments and seeks pragmatism in this regard, according to National Armaments Director, Lt. General Claudio DeBertolis. He called for greater harmonization and clarity of armament requirements across NATO and the EU, and more flexible contracts that could be adjustable in mid-course as means to ensure value for money in capability development. General DeBertolis also called for greater impetus to the European Defence Agency, which he said could deliver real value.

The ongoing transformation of the Italian armed forces was necessary but faced many challenges, according to Valerio Briani, Associate Fellow at the International Affairs Institute. The difficulties were both organisational and cultural. Organisationally, the budget of the Italian armed forces was skewed towards personnel costs due to many factors, including an excessive proportion of officers to petty officers. Such economic realities meant that training, essential to modernisation and effectiveness was subject to under-funding. Procurement was similarly affected.

While solutions to these problems were possible, Briani stated, they were further complicated by a generalised lack of defence culture in the political elite. For fifty years, military operations and investments have been justified solely on coalition and Alliance grounds; discussion of the Italian national interest has been lacking from the debate. Parliamentary scrutiny focused not on strategic questions, according to Briani, but on marginal aspects of major decisions.

Both Briani and Professor Stefano Silvestri, President of the International Affairs Institute, endorsed multi-national arrangements such as pooling, sharing, and specialisation approaches to capability development, suggesting that there simply was no alternative. Mr. Silvestri, however, noted that a completely ‘specialised’ Europe could not have launched the Libya operation, given that Germany chose not to participate – thus raising the danger that excessive specialisation could lead to paralysis.

SPECIALISED ITALIAN UNITS

The delegation was briefed on the Italian Joint Special Forces Operations Headquarters (COFS), which was launched in 2004. The HQ calls on forces from each military service’s special forces in support of Italian and Alliance operations; interoperability with NATO Special Forces policies was assured. Such forces had been very effective in the Afghan context, the briefer suggested, in activities ranging across various regional commands.

In a visit to the Carabinieri Corps, the delegation learned about the dual responsibilities for national defence and public order and security of this exceptional force. As both an armed force and a police organisation, the Carabinieri report to both the Ministries of Defence and Interior, respectively. Some 5,300 Carabinieri personnel are deployed on Italian soil, in a presence extending to even the smallest villages. In addition, 620 Carabinieri are deployed abroad, with roughly 500 of those employed in diplomatic institutions. Carabinieri had deployed in NATO missions in Kosovo, Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan, the Middle East, Georgia, Congo, and elsewhere, conducting tasks such as training and mentoring of local forces, crisis monitoring, and military police tasks. The establishment of the highly-regarded Centre of Excellence for Stability Police Units also offered a unique contribution to the further development of the civil-military nexus that the Carabinieri represent.

THE NATO DEFENCE COLLEGE

The delegation took the opportunity to visit the Rome-based NATO Defence College (NDC), an educational institution founded by US President Eisenhower in 1951 to prepare officers for leadership in the Alliance context. The College’s efforts are based on three pillars: education (including the well-known Senior Course), outreach (to Partners and others), and research (publications and conferences). Major new initiatives such as the Middle East Faculty program have demonstrated the NDC’s continued evolution to address current challenges. The NDC’s Commandant, Lieutenant General Wolf-Dieter Loeser, suggested that the difficult financial climate for military education increased the College’s value as a ‘smart defence’ initiative, as it pooled resources from many nations. He called on nations to ensure that the ‘right’ students were sent for courses at the College – namely those with significant future leadership potential – and to continue to fund faculty and research positions, given the exceptional value they deliver as part of the NDC’s staff. Finally, the delegation engaged in a spirited debate with Dr Karl-Heinz Kamp, Head of the Research Division, on NATO’s nuclear policy.

REPORT ON THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE (CDSDG) AND THE VISIT OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON TRANSATLANTIC DEFENCE AND SECURITY CO-OPERATION (DSCTC), ROME, ITALY, JULY 6-7, 2011

In Rome, Canada was represented by Senator Joseph A. Day and Mr. Stephen Woodworth, M.P.

Nearly 30 members of parliament from 17 NATO nations travelled to Rome 6-7 July 2011 for a high level series of exchanges on the Italian contribution to the implementation of the Alliance’s Nearly 30 members of parliament from 17 NATO nations travelled to Rome 6-7 July 2011 for a high level series of exchanges on the Italian contribution to the implementation of the Alliance’s Strategic Concept adopted in November 2010.

The visit of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly’s Sub-Committee on Transatlantic Defence and Security Cooperation was led by the Sub-Committee’s Chairman, Sir John Stanley (United Kingdom) and hosted by the Italian parliament. The Assembly’s Subcommittees regularly travel to NATO countries for dialogue with officials and independent voices to improve members’ understanding of national views and contributions, and to collect information for each Committee’s analytical reports.

The delegation’s exchanges with senior government and military officials included discussions with the Secretary of State for Defence, Giuseppe Cossiga, and the Chief of Defence, General Biagio Abrate. The delegation also visited the headquarters of the Italian Carabinieri, as well as the NATO Defence College.

ITALY IN OPERATIONS

Italy currently deployed over 7,200 troops abroad in 30 operations covering 28 countries, the delegation learned from a briefing at Joint Operations Headquarters provided by its Commanding Officer, Lt. General Giorgio Cornacchione. Italy is the 17th force provider in the UN system, although the first ‘western’ country; it is the fourth-largest force provider under the NATO flag and the 2nd under the EU flag. Among its most notable deployments, Italy engaged 4,200 troops in Afghanistan (including 650 trainers and leading Regional Command West); dedicated roughly 1,500 to Operation Unified Protector (Libya); 1,600 in UNIFIL (Lebanon); 600 personnel in KFOR (Kosovo); and 73 to the NATO Training Mission–Iraq. Italy also participates in the NATO and EU antipiracy missions off the Horn of Africa.

The Joint Operations Headquarters (HQ) itself represented a new structure created in the late 1990s, which was designed in order to place the Chief of Defence squarely at the head of operational deployments, which had grown more numerous and complex. It is responsible not only for planning, coordinating and conducting joint, multinational and national operations and exercises, but also for the overall direction and coordination of all military contributions to the resolution of national disasters and other emergencies.

The institution also serves as one of five European Union Operational HQs, and has been designated as the HQ with responsibility for the EUFOR Libya operation. This particular HQ was not deployable and would be augmented by personnel from EU member nations should it be activated for an operation.

The delegation had the opportunity to discuss developments in Afghanistan by video-link with the ISAF Regional Commander West, Brigadier General Carmine Masiello, based in Herat. With roughly 8,000 troops from ten countries under his command, General Masiello stated that from a military point of view, he saw no difficulty with the plans for transition to Afghan security lead in the coming period, while warning that terrorist attacks were possible, as they were anywhere.

General Masiello praised the qualitative increase in the capabilities of the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) in his area of responsibility, stating that they were demonstrating very good combat skills; leadership and planning capabilities were two areas in which further progress was necessary. The Afghan National Police – in particular the well-trained and supported Civil Order Police or ANCOP – had demonstrated its very high effectiveness and had reacted quickly and successfully to deal with a recent attack on a regional Provincial Reconstruction Team.

The General suggested that the anticipated spring offensive of the insurgency had not appeared as significant as in previous years, and the shift by the insurgency towards greater use of suicide bombers and improvised explosive devices (IEDs) might be a sign of a turn towards desperation – something of a ‘last resort.’ He also offered his impression that the local population in Regional Command West was gaining trust in the ANSF as well as in international forces, as demonstrated by the increasing number of IEDs locals provided information about.

General Abrate, Italy’s Chief of Defence, suggested that as transition occurs, Italy would restructure its contribution to emphasise trainers and instructors.

ITALIAN MILITARY TRANSFORMATION AND NATO

The transformation of NATO under its new Strategic Concept mirrored that of the Italian Armed Forces, according to Secretary of State for Defence, Mr. Cossiga. Italy had been transitioning to a professional armed force from conscription since 2000. Italy had since averaged 9,000 soldiers deployed abroad annually, with a peak of 12,000. Plans for increased annual funding to ensuring training and specialization of the professional forces had fallen victim to political shifts in Italy; nevertheless, at a time of scant financial resources, he said, Italian armed forces had increased their bond with Italian society and provided real benefits.

Indeed, defence reforms had successfully moved the Italian Armed Forces from conscription-based, static, single-service forces focused on border defence, to professional, deployable, joint/combined forces geared to global contributions to peace and security, General Abrate, Italy’s Chief of Defence, told the delegation. Italy kept 61,000 forces ready for deployment, with 30,000 in a state of high readiness, he said. Italy was participating in the NATO reform process and would make significant contributions in the discussions on NATO’s Defence and Deterrence Posture Review as well as in the realisation of the Alliance’s initiatives on missile defence and cyber defence.

General Abrate suggested that re-inventing the wheel of NATO’s military structure was not necessary; the structure has been tested and passed these tests successfully, in particular in rapid response to the need for an operation in the Libyan context. General Abrate reminded the delegation that Italy did not consider itself a global power or actor, nor was it a nuclear power or permanent member of the UN Security Council. On the other hand, beyond its significant contributions in the NATO, UN, and EU contexts, it considered itself a major player in the enlarged Mediterranean area.

Italy is strongly committed to international cooperation on armaments and seeks pragmatism in this regard, according to National Armaments Director, Lt. General Claudio DeBertolis. He called for greater harmonization and clarity of armament requirements across NATO and the EU, and more flexible contracts that could be adjustable in mid-course as means to ensure value for money in capability development. General DeBertolis also called for greater impetus to the European Defence Agency, which he said could deliver real value.

The ongoing transformation of the Italian armed forces was necessary but faced many challenges, according to Valerio Briani, Associate Fellow at the International Affairs Institute. The difficulties were both organisational and cultural. Organisationally, the budget of the Italian armed forces was skewed towards personnel costs due to many factors, including an excessive proportion of officers to petty officers. Such economic realities meant that training, essential to modernisation and effectiveness was subject to under-funding. Procurement was similarly affected.

While solutions to these problems were possible, Briani stated, they were further complicated by a generalised lack of defence culture in the political elite. For fifty years, military operations and investments have been justified solely on coalition and Alliance grounds; discussion of the Italian national interest has been lacking from the debate. Parliamentary scrutiny focused not on strategic questions, according to Briani, but on marginal aspects of major decisions.

Both Briani and Professor Stefano Silvestri, President of the International Affairs Institute, endorsed multi-national arrangements such as pooling, sharing, and specialisation approaches to capability development, suggesting that there simply was no alternative. Mr. Silvestri, however, noted that a completely ‘specialised’ Europe could not have launched the Libya operation, given that Germany chose not to participate – thus raising the danger that excessive specialisation could lead to paralysis.

SPECIALISED ITALIAN UNITS

The delegation was briefed on the Italian Joint Special Forces Operations Headquarters (COFS), which was launched in 2004. The HQ calls on forces from each military service’s special forces in support of Italian and Alliance operations; interoperability with NATO Special Forces policies was assured. Such forces had been very effective in the Afghan context, the briefer suggested, in activities ranging across various regional commands.

In a visit to the Carabinieri Corps, the delegation learned about the dual responsibilities for national defence and public order and security of this exceptional force. As both an armed force and a police organisation, the Carabinieri report to both the Ministries of Defence and Interior, respectively. Some 5,300 Carabinieri personnel are deployed on Italian soil, in a presence extending to even the smallest villages. In addition, 620 Carabinieri are deployed abroad, with roughly 500 of those employed in diplomatic institutions. Carabinieri had deployed in NATO missions in Kosovo, Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan, the Middle East, Georgia, Congo, and elsewhere, conducting tasks such as training and mentoring of local forces, crisis monitoring, and military police tasks. The establishment of the highly-regarded Centre of Excellence for Stability Police Units also offered a unique contribution to the further development of the civil-military nexus that the Carabinieri represent.

THE NATO DEFENCE COLLEGE

The delegation took the opportunity to visit the Rome-based NATO Defence College (NDC), an educational institution founded by US President Eisenhower in 1951 to prepare officers for leadership in the Alliance context. The College’s efforts are based on three pillars: education (including the well-known Senior Course), outreach (to Partners and others), and research (publications and conferences). Major new initiatives such as the Middle East Faculty program have demonstrated the NDC’s continued evolution to address current challenges. The NDC’s Commandant, Lieutenant General Wolf-Dieter Loeser, suggested that the difficult financial climate for military education increased the College’s value as a ‘smart defence’ initiative, as it pooled resources from many nations. He called on nations to ensure that the ‘right’ students were sent for courses at the College – namely those with significant future leadership potential – and to continue to fund faculty and research positions, given the exceptional value they deliver as part of the NDC’s staff. Finally, the delegation engaged in a spirited debate with Dr Karl-Heinz Kamp, Head of the Research Division, on NATO’s nuclear policy.

Respectfully submitted,