Niklas Novaky wrote that some duplication or overlapping of themes between the EU’s strategic compass and NATO’s 2022 strategic concept will be inevitable, but also necessary.
Niklas Nováky is a senior research officer at the Wilfried Martens Center in Brussels.
Since 2020, the EU has been reflecting on the future of its security and defense policies. This reflection is carried out within the framework of the Strategic Compass process, which aims to strengthen the EU’s ability to realize its ambitions in the security and defense fields, and to set new goals and targets for the next few years.
The first draft of the compass has been submitted to Council of the European Union Published on November 15th by Senior Representative Josep Borrell. The EU countries are currently negotiating the final content of the document for approval in March 2022. It is expected that the European External Action Agency will submit the revised draft in mid-January and February.
On the other side of Brussels, NATO is undergoing its own parallel reflection process. In June, NATO leaders instructed Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg to lead NATO’s next Strategic vision, Which outlines NATO’s overall mission and goals.
NATO’s current strategic vision was adopted before Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2010, when China was placed on the coalition’s agenda and mixed threats and climate change were seen as the main challenges. The new strategic concept is planned to be adopted at the NATO Madrid summit in June 2022.
The parallel nature of these two processes provides a unique opportunity to strengthen EU-NATO cooperation. This opportunity should not be wasted: it should be used to the greatest extent possible to coordinate the goals of the two organizations and minimize unnecessary overlap in their activities.
The core missions of the two organizations in the areas of security and defense will remain unchanged: NATO will guarantee European territorial defense, and the European Union will improve its capabilities in the areas of crisis management, resilience, and capacity development. The EU will not assume responsibility for territorial defense: EU and NATO leaders have repeatedly emphasized that, in any case, this is impossible under the Union’s Lisbon Treaty.
However, some duplication between the EU Strategic Compass and NATO’s 2022 strategic concept—or overlapping themes—will be inevitable, but also necessary. This is because the two organizations share the same threat environment to a large extent, and 21 of the 27 EU member states are also NATO allies. These two organizations also need the ability to act autonomously, because some EU countries are not NATO allies, and vice versa.
China and the Indo-Pacific region are an area that needs some kind of overlap. NATO is increasingly concerned about China’s growing influence and power, and their possible destabilizing effects in the North Atlantic. China’s successful hypersonic missile test in August highlighted the direct impact of Beijing’s ambitions on NATO.
The EU is also concerned about China’s growing strength and self-confidence.This is why the draft strategic compass states Among others The EU is planning to increase its naval presence in the Indo-Pacific region through it Coordinated maritime presence Concept to promote stability in the region and help develop the capabilities of its partners. Pilot cases for the CMP concept are in Gulf of Guinea In January.
Crisis management is another area that requires some overlap, especially now that NATO has reduced its extra-regional activities and refocused on territorial defense. The draft strategic compass suggests that the EU should establish a new 5,000 Rapid deployment capability Have the necessary impetus to improve the alliance’s ability to respond to crises and conduct Afghan-style evacuation operations on its own.
Some countries are concerned that rapid deployment capabilities may complicate NATO’s ability to ensure its deterrence on the eastern flank of Europe. However, if approved, the capability will not become a standing force: it will initially focus on improving the EU’s operational capabilities through scenario development and on-site exercises. In operation, it will be mainly based on the existing battle groups of the alliance.
It should also be remembered that the European Union has initiated several Military action Since the start of its security and defense policies in 2003, these operations have been deployed in Africa and the Western Balkans where NATO wants to withdraw or the alliance does not want to intervene. Therefore, EU-led actions contribute to transatlantic security and burden-sharing.
Hybrid threats and cyber threats are also issues that the EU’s strategic compass and NATO’s next strategic concept must solve.Compass draft call Among others It is used to create a broader EU hybrid toolbox and develop the EU’s cyber deterrence posture through capacity building, capacity development, and exercises. NATO is also improving its ability to respond to cyber and mixed threats.
The EU also discussed the mutual assistance clauses of the Lisbon Treaty. Article 42(7), Can be used in mixed or cyber attack situations. So far, France has only invoked Article 42(7) after the terrorist attacks in Paris in 2015. EU countries have been working to clarify the scenarios under which the attacked EU countries can invoke Article 42(7) and how to implement this provision in the context of cyber/hybrid attacks that may be below the NATO Article 5 threshold.
In general, both the EU’s strategic compass and NATO’s next strategic concept will enhance the ability of these two organizations to respond to the wide-ranging threats and challenges currently facing them. Given that the EU and NATO face many of these threats and challenges together, some overlap between documents will be inevitable.
However, this should not be regarded as a negative factor, because the EU and NATO play different roles and possess different capabilities in European security and defense. If anything, overlap will show that the EU and NATO are focused on finding solutions to common challenges. This is conducive to the security and resilience of the entire North Atlantic region.
