LANDPOWER MAGAZINE FALL 2016 | Page 32

NATO Strategic Direction South A New Strategic Reality

����������������������������
Jordan Army In Combat Training

There are but two powers in the world , the sword and the mind . In the long run the sword is always beaten by the mind .”

Napoleon Bonaparte
NATO has preserved the peace in Europe for almost seven decades by gathering together allies who share the same values of democracy , liberty , human rights and the rule of law . But today peace and security are put at risk , on one side , by an unpredictable Russia in the east and , on the other side , in the south , by the arc of instability across the Middle East and Africa .
So what is NATO Strategic Direction South ( NSD-S )? NSD-S is defined as being the area of “ the Middle East , North Africa – Sahel and Sub-Saharan – Africa together with adjacent areas , waters and airspace 1 ”. Our leaders articulated this issue concerning the Alliance in 2014 ; in article 32 of the Wales Summit Declaration it stipulated that “ peace and stability in this region are essential for the Alliance ”. The Heads of State and Government defined it in more detail , this new strategic reality , as being “ the framework for NATO ’ s adaptation in response to growing challenges and threats emanating from the South . The framework focuses on better regional understanding and situational awareness , the ability to anticipate and respond to crises emanating from the South , improved capabilities for expeditionary operations , and enhancing NATO ’ s ability to project stability through regional partnerships and capacity building efforts 2 ”.
Why is NSD-S important to NATO ? Mainly because is a wide and complex environment with a lot of variables included ,
32LAND POWER all of those being a part in the security risks and threats , regarding the Alliance defence capability . NATO has identified the following six threats emanating from that region 3 :
- Competing states in the region , defined as states with competing national objectives with the potential to descend into an openly adversarial relationship with the Alliance ;
- Irregular threat networks , defined as state sponsored and ideologically – inspired sub national organizations ( E . g . AQAP , Al Shabaab , Boko Haram );
- Hybrid threats , defined as actors capable of applying a broad spectrum of complex and integrated military and non-military instruments , which are easily adaptable ( E . g . Hezbollah , ISIL / Daesh );
- Local armed groups , organized around tribal , clan or village interests , functioning either in opposition to or in concert with local governments ;
- Broad-based criminal networks ;
- Crisis spill over into NATO ’ s territory – overmatching governments ability to respond to crisis by creating large flows of displaced persons and refugees .
From a brief analysis of all the factors , threats and risks already mentioned , it is clear that NATO must address three main issues , using a comprehensive approach and in coordination with other international organizations ( EU , UN ) and actor-states . Initially the International Community should address the absence of state power which has led to the rise of non-state actors . Chief among these is the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and Levant ( ISIL / Daesh ), as observed by the NATO Deputy Secretary General :
“ ISIL seizure of territory and its reign of terror contributed to the escalation of the civil war in Syria , a worsening string of crises across the Middle East and North Africa , a series of terrorist attacks in several NATO countries , and the biggest migrant and refugee crisis in Europe since the World War II ” 4 .
Additionally the immediate and asymmetric threat posed by terrorism