react 2012 yearbook

REACT2012YEARBOOK

02 www.alfacentar.org

Aleksandar DedovicExecutive Director of ALPHA Centre

Dear friends,

I am very happy for having this opportunity to present to you Yearbook REACT 2012 as the summary of realized Fifth Regional Euro atlantic Camp REACT 2012, which has been held in Mojkovac Municipalty from August 28th to September 03rd.

Since we had started in 2008 in Crkvicko Polje, the idea to talk and discuss about NATO integrations, defense, military and diplomacy has been raised and this year, this Camp gathered ninety participants from twenty two countries and thirty six lecturers/speakers.

It seems that a general consensus has been reached in Montenegro as for entering the EU, whereas the membership in NATO had both their opponents and their followers since the very beginning. For the six past years, public opinion surveys on Montenegro's accession to NATO show that there is no change in positive way.

Implementing REACT for the fifth time ALPHA Centre intends to contribute to citizens' education about the concept and the importance of regional cooperation and joining the collective system of defense as NATO is in order to raise public awareness in Montenegro, as well as in other countries in the region.

At the end, I wish to thank to all of them who understood what our ideas and intentions are in this area:Embassy of the United States of America in Podgorica, Royal Norwegian Embassy in Belgrade, Embassy of the Republic of Slovenia in Podgorica, German Embassy in Podgorica, NATO Public Diplomacy Division, Brussels, Government of Montenegro, Municipality of Mojkovac, “Tara” industry, restaurant “Kozak”, TV “Atlas” and others.

03www.reactmontenegro.me


Duško MarkovićDeputy Prime Minister for political system

foreign and interior policy, Montenegro

WELCOME NOTE

Stability is the key word of responsible politics. Both nationally and internationally, it is a goal we must always strive for: to achieve it, held it and improve it. From stability as a general political commitment there are more strategic, mutually connected and depending sub goals like: political stability in narrow sense, economic or financial stability and of course security stability.

Does the security have price? Of course not.

If there is no security, there is no democracy, economic development, welfare, human freedom- shortly said, there is no peace and stability.

This is shown best illustrated example of European countries, which are after World War II, seeing the depth of the disaster continent on two occasions during the first half of the 20th Century, decided that as a first step in establishing a sustainable peace under the control of transitional put two basic raw materials of war, establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, as a nucleus from which evolved today's European Union. In parallel with the construction of European unity, flowed the Euro-Atlantic integration, the establishment of NATO i n 1949th. In this matter, after the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community formed assuming internal stability, European countries by establishing NATO – created the conditions of external security.

Our experience at Western Balkan is hard and meaningful. If there are any European region which has marked past with instability, it is certainly our region. On the other hand, it seems that from this tragic experience, unfortunately, sometimes not drawn historical lessons.

Montenegro, still in the bloody breakup of the former Yugoslavia showed how to maintain internal stability, on one hand, and how to contribute, so far as could be, mitigating the effects of the conflict and regional stability, on the other hand. In the early nineties our country has been a haven for thousands and thousands of refugees, regardless of their nationality, religion and origin. So it was in the late nineties during the Kosovo conflict. Entire decades, Montenegro, at the risk of their own internal stability, provided safe shelter to those who are because threat before the war left their homes in Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo.

After independence we didn't forget our responsibility to contribute to the regional stability, as a key issue for overall stability of European Union. With full awareness of own responsibility we have brought significant decisions, not only for regional stability, also a decisions which contribute to the global goals of stability. Among all, there are decisions about recognition of Kosovo and involvement of our army in ISAF mission in Afghanistan. Our interest is not only to contribute achieving global goals of stability, democracy and prosperity, but also to share responsibility for the challenges of the modern world.


Among other things, that is a reason why Montenegro is in the process of development of the 3rd Annual program under the Action Plan for NATO and a candidate for membership in the European Union on which negotiations have already begun.

We live in a world that is rapidly changing. In these changes, “new necessity born new emergency powers”, as said in ninety century Montenegrin ruler and lord Petar II Petrovic Njegos. Today's modern democratic world faced with the dangers and risks that come with multiple pages are usually unpredictable. They are already reflected in terrorist threats, sabotage, weapons of mass destruction, disruption of supply essential resource flows, cyber attacks, organized crime and of course the undemocratic and dictatorial regimes.

These are global security challenges and response must be strong and mutual. So, response on these challenges lay in cooperation based on the principle of collective security and so-called “smart defense”. The safest form of collective security is NATO, under whose umbrella we will not stop just to make it part of the competences delegated security but to its entire members share the responsibility of preserving the values of the modern world: democracy, the rule of law, respect and promotion of human rights and international cooperation.

Respected participants of REACT:

I believe that your six-day long debate will result in strengthening the awareness of regional and international cooperation as a mechanism with no alternatives when it comes to combating the security challenges of today.

A multidisciplinary approach and the list of speakers, panelists and participants guarantee the success of the Fifth Regional Euro-Atlantic Camp. I use this opportunity to graduate ALPHA Centre from Niksic at the organization of this event.


REACT2012YEARBOOK


William EnglishColonel

British Defense Attaché, Belgrade, Serbia

Different Ways andCooperation in NATO and

EU in the Area of Security

Relationship between UK Working with NATO and the EU within the CSDP

* European security policy is a complex and at times contentious set of issues. It embraces both the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) activities of the EU, and NATO, as well as the Alliance's activities further afield in support of Europe's wider security interests.

* NATO remains the cornerstone of the UK's defence and security arrangements. But CSDP can also offer an extremely valuable complementary tool set that can be used to further enhance European security. The effective working together of NATO and the EU in terms of European security is fundamental to the ongoing effective security of Europe.

* As a nation that is a European member of NATO, the Alliance remains the UK's primary defence organisation. It offers a range of tools which allow Allies to support NATO's Core Tasks of Collective defence: crisis management and co-operative security (as laid out in the 2010 Strategic Concept).

* But CSDP has a unique and complementary role to play. When successful, we have seen that EU action can achieve impressive results where others find it difficult to act or chose not to do so.

* As has previously been set out by the UK Foreign Secretary and Secretary of State for Defence in the 18 November 2011 letter to Baroness Ashton the UK's vision for European defence policy is simple. The UK wants the EU to build stability, tackle crises as they emerge and respond to conflict. The unique spectrum of political, military, development and economic levers available to the EU need constant application in an increasingly complex security environment. The political will is needed to allow Member States with military and civilian capabilities to act together to achieve a common goal. This Comprehensive Approach to crisis management should be the hallmark of EU CSDP.

* The UK wants to capitalise on CSDP's great variety of tools and ensure that Europeans provide a targeted crisis management response that plugs the gap between hard military intervention and longer-term stabilisation and development initiatives. For us, putting the Comprehensive Approach to work requires three things: Smarter missions and operations; Harnessing the EU's crisis management potential; and Working better with NATO to avoid wasteful duplication and pointless institutional rivalry.


* The UK's vision for European defence relies on both the EU and NATO working together effectively. Complementarity is vital.

* For the vision to be implemented the right tools are required. Efforts must be redoubled to sustain and strengthen military and civilian capabilities. Given the current financial pressures, we must ensure that EU Pooling & Sharing initiatives and NATO Smart Defence are mutually reinforcing or at the very least do not undercut one another. We should develop deployable and inter-operable capabilities, which adhere to NATO standards that address Europe's defence capability needs be they used via NATO, the EU or any other format.

* The different toolsets offered by the EU and NATO needs to be embraced and used in a tailored response to any prevailing situation. The need to avoid duplication cannot be overstated and the need to ensure value for money needs to be a constant consideration. The ability of NATO to undertake military operations, as demonstrated in Afghanistan, and the ability of the EU to undertake a broad spectrum of operational activity, as demonstrated by activity in the Horn of Africa and the Balkans, ensures that between them the full spectrum of potential activity can be undertaken – from high intensity operations, through policing to training and development. Whilst potential duplication is a constant threat, the ability of the EU and NATO to complement each other to deliver greater security for all European nations and their neighbours offers a great opportunity that we must continue to work at.


THE CHALLENGE

The successful response of the Alliance to the crisis in Libya, has reconfirmed the utility of NATO, in delivering military force in a coalition, and serving the needs of international security.

NATO provides a ready structure for joint and combined operations which it is impossible to replicate quickly elsewhere. Members can contribute to operations using existing protocols and structures; Other partners outside the Alliance can be swiftly and effectively accommodated, as both the Libya operations, and ISAF operations in Afghanistan show. That is why NATO remains the most powerful alliance in the world, and the most successful tool for collective defence ever invented.

SUMMARY

NATO remains the cornerstone of the UK's defence and security arrangements. But CSDP can also offer an extremely valuable complementary tool set that can be used to further enhance European security. The effective working together of NATO and the EU in terms of European security is fundamental to the ongoing effective security of Europe.



Harald HiorthColonel

Deputy Commander of NATO HQ SarajevoBosnia and Herzegovina

The Role of NATO inBosnia and Herzegovina

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation's (NATO) fundamental purpose is to safeguard the freedom and security of its members through political and military means. NATO brings together 28 member countries from Europe and North America, consulting and cooperating in the fields of security and defence. In this respect, NATO provides a unique transatlantic link for political and security cooperation. Although much has changed since its founding in 1949, NATO remains an essential source of stability in an unpredictable geopolitical environment. NATO members confront a broader spectrum of security challenges than in the past. Threats such as the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile technologies, cyber attacks and terrorism know no borders. In response, NATO is developing the means to react quickly to the most demanding and complex crises. NATO is modernising its defence and deterrence capabilities, promoting a comprehensive approach to crisis management involving political, civilian and military instruments. NATO is also pursuing a cooperative approach to security through greater interaction with a range of partners, countries and international organisations. While the nature of the threats faced by members and the way in which NATO deals with them are changing, the basic tenets of solidarity, dialogue and cooperation remain true to the principles of the founding Washington Treaty.

NATO has been committed to building long-term peace and stability in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the wider Western Balkans, since it started supporting the international community's efforts to end the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. NATO played a key role in implementing the Dayton Peace Agreement and in securing this peace through peacekeeping deployments over a nine year period. In December 2004, primary responsibility for military aspects of Dayton was handed over to the European Union. NATO retains a military headquarters in Sarajevo with the mission of assisting the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina with reforms and commitments related to the Partnership for Peace (PfP) and NATO integration.

Since Dayton, NATO's relationship with Bosnia and Herzegovina has evolved tremendously. Bosnia and Herzegovina joined the PfP in December 2006. Democratic, institutional and defence reforms are a key focus of cooperation. The country has been engaged in an Intensified Dialogue with NATO on its membership aspirations and related reforms since April 2008. BiH is also fully engaged in PARP and IPAP.Engagement in NATO programmes widely covers political, defence, security, economic and legal issues. Significant progress has been made.


Welcoming progress made in its reform efforts, in April 2010, Allies formally invited the country to join the Membership Action Plan (MAP) with one important condition: the first Annual National Programme under the MAP will only be accepted by NATO once a key remaining issue concerning immovable defence property has been resolved. NATO Headquarters Sarajevo assists BiH in these programmes.

NATO programmes are proven mechanisms producing credible candidacy for membership – this is shown by previous enlargement and the recent membership of Croatia and Albania. And, Allies are committed to keeping NATO's door open to Western Balkan partners that wish to join, share its values and are willing and able to assume the responsibilities and obligations of membership. Euro-Atlantic integration is the best way to ensure long-term, self-sustaining security and stability in the region. However, Bosnia and Herzegovina needs to continue to pursue far-reaching democratic and defence reforms, not just because this will further its aspirations to join NATO and the European Union, but because such reforms are essential for the country to become a fully functioning democratic state. The Allies remain committed to supporting the country's wider reform programme, particularly in the area of defence. But, ultimately, the initiative has to come from domestic political leaders.

The benefits of NATO membership are many; not least at first-hand securing inclusion in the most influential international collective security organisation – this also offers effective help in cases of emergencies or other natural or manmade disasters. However, there are many other benefits that extend beyond direct security. Membership carries with it implications for the political and economic viability of a state. Membership gives a country a voice in Euro-Atlantic policy making and the status of equal participant in security issues and within the consensus decision-making process. In particular those joining NATO have found that this has facilitated further steps toward complete Euro-Atlantic integration. NATO membership constitutes recognition of political stability and a stable security environment: this encourages foreign investment, which leads to jobs and increased economic prosperity. However, membership does confer both rights and obligations – and being capable of fulfilling these is much more than just about defence capabilities. The NATO accession process itself provides a framework to conduct internal political, social and economic reforms. Although these benefits are not quantifiable, they are real.


It should also be remembered that Allies and Partners gain benefits from sharing costs; no single country has to finance a complete defence system of its own, and instead members can specialise in particular areas. The current Secretary General calls this “Smart Defence” - using joint development and acquisition programmes, and focusing on affordable capabilities that work together to provide necessary capabilities across the Alliance. Consequently, NATO members can keep defence expenditures at a reasonable level while still providing for their security. Allies can spend defence budgets in a smarter and better manner; getting more defence for the same money. This approach is encapsulated in the NATO Strategic Concept. This approach ensures that a country obtains more while investing less.

Furthermore, although NATO membership itself offers the collective security benefit, militarily there are many benefits from the process that a country must pass through in order to become a member. NATO programmes are specifically designed to enhance capabilities so that not only a country benefits from these, but also the Alliance as a whole benefits when these capabilities are pooled together. And to use an Aristotelian analogy, in this sense NATO is greater than the sum of its individual parts; it is this pooling that makes NATO what it is today.

Based on common values and common interests, the transatlantic Alliance must be “fit” for its fundamental purpose: safeguarding the freedom and security of its members while addressing 21st century security challenges. Citizens of the NATO countries rely on the Alliance to help defend their countries, to deploy robust military forces where and when required for their security, and to help promote security with our partners around the globe. While the world is changing and NATO is evolving, the essential mission is unchanged: to ensure that it remains a united community of freedom, peace, security, and shared values.



Blagoje GrahovacGeneral retired

analyst of geopolitics, Montenegro

Geopolitics & Organized Crimeand Corruption in the

Early 21st Century withReference to the Balkans

Introduction

On the world as a global village one can draw today various conclusions. I single out four that may have high importance in considering geopolitical processes. First, the new technologies have made accessible to almost all humanity the civilisation's achievements in all areas. Second, various achievements in the field of democracy are inspiring and intriguing to all, whatever the actual value of the given democracy. Third, the side effects of globalization expand and network faster than anything else. Typical side effects of globalization are organized crime and corruption. Fourth, once we had role models that were somewhere in our area or field of vision. Based on the aforementioned, I post the thesis of the article: Organized crime and corruption are becoming the top geopolitical factors, and will more often be used as a geopolitical tool.

Geopolitical intersection

Non-democratic regimes, organized crime and corruption and big businesses are coming together and are increasingly overtaking geopolitics from the official states, including those of the great powers. Mafia, as the army of organized crime and corruption, will in the future be the biggest manufacturer of both wars and terrorism.

Organized crime and corruption, as one of the side effects of globalization, is not bypassing the United States. The speed of change in globalization is such that U.S. foreign policy no longer has enough power and resources to follow the chain of revolutionary processes. For the United States, one can say (in a strategic sense) that it has a democracy, but that it will soon lack important natural resources.

South American civilization has natural resources, but underdeveloped democracy. Organized crime and corruption from this area are ncreasingly transnationally networking the planet. European Union (along with NATO) is the best product of civilization. The EU is doing its best to democratize the old continent, to develop it, to make it safer for people and to integrate it in accordance with best democratic standards. We can safely say that no one is more threatened from organized crime and corruption than the EU. In a strategic sense, EU has a democracy but that in the future it will be lacking resources.

Highest price for globalisation might be paid by the citizens of Russia. When these (traditionally closed) systems begin to open, this usually happens through civil wars. I do not exclude that Russia could face this soon. Russia has a great scarcity of democracy, but its resources are abundant.

Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand are, by level of development and democracy, the desired lands for many. But the Eastern Hemisphere, as a whole, can be assessed as a space with abundant natural resources, but lacking democracy.



Indochinese space has always progressed through history in a specific evolutionary way. This will be the case in the near future, as well.

Due to its rich natural resources and the scarcity of democracy, the African continent will undergo globalization through chain revolutions. And organized crime and corruption in the African region will be a geopolitical factor and geopolitical tool which will be used to resolve many things.

In a strategic sense, the Arctic and Antarctica (due to global warming) will become very important areas.

Possible recommendations

It can be concluded that the relations and geopolitical changes on the planet in this century (and probably longer) will depend on the balance of power in the triangle: democracy, resources and organized crime and corruption. The lack of only one of the first two of these, or the excess of the third, can destroy any country and any people. In order to prevent a global threat, it is necessary to start redefining the political theories of international relations. Accordingly, it is evident that we should redefine the theory of geopolitics.

By joint struggle against organized crime and corruption it is necessary to preserve at all cost the Euro-Atlantic partnership. The integration of western democracies and Russia's resources, coupled with a resolute fight against organized crime and corruption, would have a gigantic significance.

Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand have all what is necessary to integrate the Eastern Hemisphere on the basis of a similar formula.

All this can be inspiring for a specific civilizational transition of the indochinese area. It is inevitable that the African space will have a multi-layered chain of revolutionary transitions. But that will not endanger the mankind.

By preserving state sovereignities, sufficient statism and national specificities, and through creation of regional associations, preconditions would be established for the mastering of Arctic and Antarctic area as a common good. Otherwise, the global warming (as a future geopolitical factor) could lead to cataclysmic changes for humanity. On which, any (now valid) policy or geopolitics, would have no effect.

Yugo region in the globalism turmoil

Mafia tends to place under its influence a large number of politicians prior to their coming to power. They certainly affect the composition of the political scene in the Western Balkans, primarily in the states of the ex-Yu area. This is the first way of addresing their problem. Another way is the most dangerous, and is reflected in the fact that mafia knows that it must not leave the political space. So mafia can very skillfully stun the state with the most serious political problem for any government, which is terrorism. In addition to the traditional concept of terrorism, in the future it will primarily be in the service of the organized crime. War is the best environment for corruption and organized crime.

By term Yugo region I comprise the state-political space of seven states formed from the former SFRY. Reconstruction of Yugoslavia, in any form, would be a historical mistake, but formation of a Yugo region within the EU would, in my deep conviction, be the most significant EU project since its inception. Yugo region within the EU, is the best barrier to the re-opening of big nation-state projects in the Balkans. The formation of a joint military brigade of ex-Yugoslavian states and its inclusion in the composition of KFOR in Kosovo, and joint control of the airspace could be inspirational projects.

Let's do it as quickly as possible, so that the Balkans will never again be either a geopolitical, religious or national story.


Conclusion

Market competition has been replaced by lobbying, which has become the most dangerous act of corruption. Corporate giants are increasingly engaged in competitive showdowns. These showdowns can produce wars and terrorism. The possibility of terrorism should not be viewed merely as a product of globalization; it should be seen partly as a form of response to globalization. Mafia, as an army of organized crime and corruption, can very effectively coordinate them.

Without a complete integration of the Western Balkans in their structures, the EU will be a living being that stands on one leg only. Due to this, it will always be in an unstable condition and in a geopolitical risk. Yugo region will be inter-connecting much faster than can be concluded at first glance.

However, it should be noted that some politicians in the Western Balkans, which are in the network of organized crime and corruption, are very trained to noisily advocate Euro-Atlantic integration. At the same time, beneath that story, together with Russian tycoons, they are actively working to take over economic resources of the Western Balkans. For this, they have developed a very strong intelligence and lobbying network in the U.S. and the EU, which are successfully spreading the story that political integrations should not be rushed, and that it is only important to achieve the standards. While in reality, they are not interested at all to reach those same standards.

Because of all this, organized crime and corruption are becoming a more dangerous geopolitical tool than the nuclear one. U.S and EU officials should be aware of that.


REACT2012YEARBOOK


Montenegro's Dilemmasabout Membership to NATO

Aleksandar DedovicExecutive Director of ALPHA Centre

The issue of Montenegro membership of NATO is increasingly substantial and the public discussion thereof has started to be a hotter one. Montenegro had demonstrated its relations with NATO as a part of the former Socialistic Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, in the earlu 50s. Later on and in a different form, Montenegro developed a special relationship with NATO. The fall of the Berlin Wall which denoted the simultaneous end of the Warsaw Pact, changed greatly the political map of the world and designated the new directions of foreign and national policies of all the states in the region. Clumsy attempts to stay within the block of non-aligned countries were not sustainable since the geopolitical map of the world was greatly different.

By reclaiming its independence in May 2006, Montenegro entered a new stage in its accelerated approach to NATO. The following year, Montenegro opened its Mission to NATO, as well as an office of the military representation to the SHAPE in Mons. An accelerated reform of the military resources started and the Ministry of Defense of Montenegro was established. The new Ministry and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs have been recognized as the major and the sole entities responsible for adapting to the requirements for a membership of the Alliance. Several member states of NATO offered their assistance that was accepted selectively. The Army of Montenegro has been systematized so far. Serious activ ities, such as mandatory destructions of excess arms, building constructions , filling of vacancies in and modernization of the Army and adaptation to the NATO standards, have remained under the shadow of rather suspicious affairs as regards to trafficking in military properties and in obsolete arms , and reflects in in- a – hurry copied laws that most frequently have not been adjusted to the real situations in Montenegro or in the laws enacted by the Parliament very quickly (and often without a reading). The signing of a Status of Forces Agreement(SOFA) was disclosed to the public not earlier than 6 days thereafter, which was, again , a practice copied and inherited from the State Union. The Communication Strategy of Euro- Atlantic Integrations of Montenegro has been implemented for a year so far and it has resulted in the drop of support by the citizens of Montenegro.

It seems that a general consensus has been reached in Montenegro as for entering the EU, whereas the membership in Nato has had both their opponents and their followers since the very beginning thereof. Political factions and parties, as creators and the holders of the opinion of a great majority of disinterested citizens, incorporated overnight the issue of a membership of NATO in their programmes.



They are, of course, different and depend on a number of factors. The ruling parties, i.e. Democratic Party of Socialistics and the Social Democratic Party are , naturally, FOR membership of the North Atlantic Treaty Organizations,albeit for unclear reasons. Namely, individuals from the said parties, as distinguished figures and holders of public functions within the power structure, use unclear and imprecise data in their public statements, as well as in their attitudes to this issue. Their statements often confuse the public additionally.

The opponents of a membership of NATO are mainly members of the political parties with a Serbian prefix, as well as non-governmental organizations dealing with the protection of either environment or human rights, as well as same certain associations of citizens (veterans, civilian casualties who survived and alike).

Various attitudes of political parties are reflected in observing Montenegro membership of NATO in different ways, and one of them is so called “Iceland Model “, i.e.the “demilitarization” of Montenegro –the model suggested publicly by the Liberal Party. The notions of nonviolence, peace, social welfare influence numerous non-governmental organizations in their attitudes towards the issue of NATO membership.

A huge number point out a those that do not or, even, do not want to express their attitudes to this important issue. The basic reasons that characterize the latter group's disinterest are, most frequently, uncertain financial status; the issue they struggle with in their everyday life; their being tired of solving “important” political issues. Again ,all those reasons result from the contemporary North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The acronym NATO symbolizes, to some of nowadays generations in Montenegro, a sort of a danger and something that should be avoided and that should be avoided and that should, a priori, be abandoded as undesirable. It is understandable then display animosity, since it is a burden that has been inherited from the history of these regions and something that cannot be uprooted quickly.

Over the previous decades of so many separations on various bases , the major attitude in Montenegro was “ Whoever is not with us should be considered as against us”. The citizens have been used to take the attitude as a rule and made their minds upon reading , in the newspaper , statements by their favorite political leaders . Regardless it should not be expected so, the narrow-mindedness is not reflected only in the attitude towards Montenegro membership of NATO. The attitude of an average citizen to Montenegro membership of NATO does not depend solely on political affiliation , national feeling , language, religion, profession and alike. The opinion is entrenched among the public that the opponents of Montenegro membership of NATO are, as a rule, ecologist, members of political factions and parties with “Serbian “ prefix in their names, for- tourism businesses, veterans, veteran associations, the associations advocating for the rights of the woman and alike. At the same time , the remainder portion of population is considered as the sole advocates of Montenegro membership of NATO due to various political reasons. Among the latter group , the most distinguished position belongs , naturally, to the Government. Nowadays, the situation is quite different. It has not been set in the stone that those that disagree with the Government and the Government's activities do not support Montenegro membership of the NATO.

Besides , a great number of citizens observe Montenegro membership of the Alliance as a sort of service to NATO or , even further, NATO is observed as if it will suffer from a huge loss if Montenegro does not start to be a member of the broad family of modern and developed countries.


Having in mind that the ruling coalition and the Government, by all their strategic documents, have been clearly dedicated to Montenegro membership of NATO and, as a signatory of the Partnership for Peace Program , they have been building , via a series of activities, primarily their own capacities and, only after that, a mechanism that would ensure a complete and , only after that, a mechanism that would ensure a complete and a high quality preparation and accession to NATO, the task to inform the public of all the aspects entailed by Montenegro membership of NATO is not the responsibility of public administration authorities only, but also of the former ones.

It can be a concluded that all stances that have been expressed so far are actually in the function of daily politics and that they are often reduced to daily opposing the work of the Government. Not a single party of those having the NO attitude has expressed seriously grounded argument in favor of their positions so far. The complete task of advocating NATO membership has been born by the Ministry of Defense, often in a bit unorganized manner. It seems also that the promotion of benefits stemming from Montenegro membership of NATO is presented mostly to Washington, Brussels and other NATO member state and representatives that have been accredited to Montenegro, whereas clear and simple information is withheld from our citizens. It is up to the state administration authorities to use the simple glossary and to acquaint the citizens of Montenegro with clear information on this Organization,economic and security stability,exchange of scientific and tehnical achievements (know-how) , opportunities, open trade possibilities, the future investment and all other benefits that Montenegro membership of the family of most contemporary and most developed countries entails. The Government approved the Plan of Action for the Implementation of the Communication Strategy of the Atlantic Integrations with participation of representatives from all public authorities, private and civil sectors and individuals. The Government established also the Coordination Team for the Implementation of Communication Strategy of Euro- Atlantic Integrations of Montenegro, which has implemented two six-month Action Plans with certain number of activities.

The goal of the Communication Strategy of Euro-Atlantic Integrations of Montenegro is , of course, to offer the citizens more information of the characters of the North Atlantic Treaty organization and, therefore, what most important for them is: which benefits they will have from such membership?, and at the same time,what could be of negative effect on Montenegro? The method of informing the citizens that have been followed so far is obviously inadequate to us ,that have been followed so far is obviously inadequate to us , as well as to out mentality and social chart of our citizens.



It is a problem that, instead of conversation, we practice the agitation at the state administrati on level for and propagating NATO by exactly the same ones that, ten years ago, opposed fiercely to the war against NATO and the EU. That is what decreases the persuasiveness of such propagating.

At the major challenge now, we see that the citizens of Montenegro are to understand the importance of Montenegro membership of the Alliance and to realize that such membership of the family of the most developed countries brings a more certain and a better future. Simultaneously, it is eqally significant to strengthen capacities at the state administration authorities level primarily, and then of civil sector, educational institutions, media houses and all other entities in order to make them undertake their respective roles in the processes and to fulfill their respective responsibilities. Here to emphasize that also the reform of defense and security sector has been launched, as well as activities at national and international levels and other activities relating to the Montenegrin road to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation in general, which all link closely the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. A challenge and a need is reflected to serious cost benefits analyses to be done in all line authorities in the Government, with reference to both positive and negative implications of such membership with entail. The challenge is in reforms that are underway and that are required to meet the prescribed criterions for obtaining the invitation to membership. The reforms that are needed in all segments and all the levels must not stay of just a formal character. A more serious challenge is to implement them and to introduce them as practices in the real life. The challenge is to select and respond to a justifiable modality of participation in the Alliance. As you can see, challenges are numerous. Montenigrin challenge is to get used to and to accept higher standards, modern and wealthier partners, more serious fights against corruption and organizes crime, a higher level of democracy and the rule of law, safe life in which the young will have all the opportunities to be educated, advanced trained and life and career development oriented.

The announced participation of the members of the Government of Montenegro in a Peace Mission was a top theme among the public and in the Parliament of Montenegro for a long time. The Law on the Participation in Missions was approved in the late 2008 and the participation of the first medical team (one physician and two medical technicians) in the said Mission has been announced for August of the current year, to Kabul.

Finally: the European Commission Report says explicitly about the overall situation in Montenegro which is at the very edge of the concern due to a high degree of corruption at all levels, the presence of organized crime, and simulating fight against corruption and criminal, and alike. This being viewed through a NATO integration prism, we can note that almost on daily basis the same context is used to utter the EU and NATO, i.e. the derived notion of “Euro Atlantic Integrations” is intended to emphasize interacting and interwining of these processes. The advocates of the road to NATO, from the ruling power, highlight the “indenticalness” and the “equality” of these two roads, very often and present them sometimes as the requirement: “to be a member state of the EU, we must be a member of NATO first”.

Montenegro membership of NATO is a chance, which must not be missed. The road to Montenegro's place at the Brusseles's table should be taken advantage of by the Montenigrin society in order to strengthen the level of democracy and the rule of law, as well as to make Montenegro to get closer to the standards in force in the member states, via an in-depth and comprehensive reform, and to become a factor at the world policy stage.


REACT2012YEARBOOK


New Geopolitical Challenges ofWestern Balkans in

the Second Decade 21-th

Oliver AndonovProfessor

MIT University of Skopje, Macedonia

Islamic issue - a new challenge geopolitical influence

The main problem Balkan countries is the hidden support of various forms of religious radicalism and for purely political "business" reasons.

Waiting for their entry into the EU, as a very important member of NATO and on its southern flank, Turkey has managed to recover and become an economic, military and political factor. Turkey is a bridge between Europe and Asia, which is the energy of strategic importance, but the route of a large organized crime with narcotics. Turkey all over again enters into the Balkans and to economically and culturally, while the Islamic tradition it is used only as auxiliary factor, primarily through the Turkish minority. Entering the Middle East, Turkey threatens the interests of some Arabic countries, primarily Saudi Arabia and Iran, the actors who will dictate some conditions in the world politics.

It is such a player is Saudi Arabia, which has no traditional religious or ethnic influence in the Balkans, but has in the Middle East that is increasingly blended Turkey. Trying to push Turkey to the Middle East, and reviewing the global importance of Turkey to NATO, Arabia intensified its influence in the Balkans. This influence is primarily found its way through to Islam and that Islam is very different here than what we know and what we are all more or less permanently living and well met him through everyday life and people who are our neighbors. Another way is Islam again, this time looked the economic aspects of direct cash assistance to which you rarely know the origin. Iran is the second actor who tries to grow into a nuclear power and its influence in the Middle East where he was with the U.S., Izrael big hurdle, transferred to the Balkans and to just working through Islam.

In the Balkan countries, particularly Macedonia, Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, Kosovo, Bosnia, and to some extent in Bulgaria and Greece, legal or not there are a large number of population of the Islamic religion. In Albania is 50% of the population Muslim religion, in Macedonia it is 30% or 80% belong to the ethnic Albanian community in Kosovo to 99%, then Bosnia, Sandzak and South Serbia, Montenegro and Bulgaria or Greece, which is not recognized other minorites, but there are many illegal groups. It is this distribution of population in the Balkans attracted the interest of Saudi Arabia. The result of this influence is the emergence of radical Islamism as a Vahabistic movement.

Saudi Arabia is likely to expect so pressed Turkey to the Middle East, but also to simultaneously be a little close to its influence in the Balkans as the second link road to Europe. In this game its important place organized crime and corruption, without whose help it will hardly be able to enter the circulation is suspected of very much money. We must bear in mind that the Western Balkans is the main transport route of heroin and opium from Afghanistan to Europe, which is an inexhaustible source of illicit money is laundered through the best religious and humanitarian organizations.


The case of Macedonia

Macedonia is a society which is already a long time in the state expressed ethno-political conflict process. Classic process of ethno-political conflict between Macedonian-Albanians and takes on a new character to religious. In pursuing their goals above all, the leaders of the ethnic groups are less or not at all interested to escalate conflict process. The main problem is the personal and public safety or the impact of crime on social security, and it basically has nothing to do with ethnic and religious orientation.

In the Middle of last year began to realizing new strategy in working the destabilization of Macedonia and to using the ethnic Albanian community through faith. First, it prevented the museum building church on the Skopje Fortress (Kale) where there was violence. Then he asked to be in the center of Skopje, reconstruction of mosque which was destroyed during the Balkan Wars and First World War. Earlier this year, started the events related to faith issues, and to the waves disfunctionally Macedonian society. These events were extremely biased organized with a unique view to the primacy of radicalism in the Islamic Religious Community of Macedonia, and it tried to use the Albanians as the largest ethnic group with the Islamic faith.

The municipality Vevcani traditional and ethno-cultural event Vasilicarski carnival where there were a variety of masks, parody, humor and satire, act Struga mufti in Macedonia, calling on Muslims to defend Islam, which was threatened carnival masks of the Prophet Muhammad. As a result of this action is the first protest in Struga could see that the combined Islamic and Albanian flags and burned the Macedonian flag. The next event was associated with a trivial conflict of police officers and two young Albanians in Gostivar, which ended in the murder of two young men, and then again in the protests that took part in the Islamic Religious Community and hooligan and criminal behavior of the protesters.

Then on Good Friday occurred most strong waves and to the literal execution of four boys Macedonians (of children aged 18-20 years) and one middle age man in the immediate surrounding area of Skopje, while at the lake fishing. Radical reactions of Macedonian police quickly solve the, dismantling the demonstrations on the second day of Easter and penetration of demonstrators in the city where the higher part of the population lives Albanians.

Police arrested a group of Islamic radicals with whom was found a large quantity of arms and ammunition, as well as the radical origin of the material from the Middle East. The reaction of the Islamic Religious Community was unexpected for the Macedonian public. Some of its activists and believers have called the faithful to prayer in the mosque after Friday protesting en masse. That's what happened, where the protest at about 3000 believers.


Several waves of violence in the spring of this year indicate that in Macedonia conducted a trial phase of the impact of Islam on politics and security. It is possible that we can now plan another provocative theme and go into another phase. In Macedonia, it is very possible as it can be easily starting social unrest, and recruitment for religious purposes for peanuts is very easy. In addition, the state of crime, there is still a large number of illegal weapons and drugs smuggling the existence of criminal gangs linked to Kosovo very affecting the possibility of an escalation of religious conflict.

Conclusion

In short, we can say that Islamic radicalism in combination with the use of organized crime and the support of Saudi Arabia and Iran will be a new challenge for the Western Balkan geopolitics during the second decade of the 21st century. This new challenge will not be oriented and limited them solely on the Balkans, but will apply pressure to the countries of Central Europe, and will use the traditional inter-state relationship between tradition and Cyril and Methodius Slavic countries in the Balkans and the countries Middle Europe, especially Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Poland. The goal should be the penetration of radical Islam as a geopolitical factor in the heart of Europe. The attempt to penetrate far into the relatively Christian clean environment directly from Arabia and Irina is almost impossible, but through indirect and peripheral action is very possible. As a good foundation and the impact of this breakthrough is the tendency for membership in NATO and the EU all the Balkan states, which represents the legal door open for the appearance of new challenges.

In addition to this global understanding, we can conclude that these challenges have a strong religious influence on the grouping and trends of organized crime, particularly in relation to the illegal trade in narcotics, arms and human trafficking. As a second effect appears to strengthen the ethno-political conflicts, which will take one additional factor is certainly a strong religious convictions, and time will resolve these conflicts become more complex and very between and ethno religious conflicts. The solution in such a combination there of and multi is very difficult and will bind the additional burden of NATO and the EU to act on its internal security until now the territory.



My reasons Contra

Jovan SubotićNOVA political party, Montenegro

There was plenty of time over the past twenty years for military experts and political and social scientists to debate on the need and necessity of keeping NATO alive and going. Differing opinions collided as plenty of case studies where there to be examined, new policies have been agreed on and new strategies implemented. All thought through, the questions arise, what is NATO of today, and what it will become tomorrow? What is the argumentation for Montenegro to join NATO today, and how relevant it will be tomorrow? What can it contribute, and what does it get back.

The consensus among the main opposition forces in Montenegro is that popular will needs to decide whether or not to join. This is the most democratic way of deciding, and we hope that the talk about joining NATO should bring more democracy, not less. This is why we undoubtedly support initiatives such as REACT, as well as all kinds of panel discussions, round tables and presentations. If the people should decide, then they need to be well informed.

This being said, I am here, as a political scientist, to present my opinion and inform the people of Montenegro that they should not pursue NATO membership, as they do not need it.

Primarily, Montenegro is a very small country with absolutely no external threats. Montenegro is a country already surrounded by two NATO members, a predominantly Orthodox country that harnesses good multicultural relations with Muslim and Catholic world, and that has not been involved in any modern-day international conflicts. Montenegro is not a target in today's world, and it should not fear retribution from anybody, nor a terrorist attack. This all changes with joining NATO, thus I argue that joining would not be a step toward in enhancing its security system, rather a step toward its exacerbation.

Secondly, Montenegro practically has no army. Ask yourselves, what is going to be its contribution? Are two soldiers in Afghanistan a determining factor of any kind? Are they indispensable for any mission NATO hopes to undertake? Sure they may be of use, and I am sure someone found some kind of job for them over there, however there is a significant difference, and you all as young politicians and scientists should know that, between useful and necessary. If they are not necessary contributors, why send them there and risk their lives?

The only contribution Montenegro can provide is its strategic location and its land that would be wide open for NATO for its bases and stations. The same question arises, does this alleviate or exacerbate the security situation in Montenegro. We live mostly of tourism, and I do not buy the argument that a nuclear base is going to make me feel safer when I visit Montenegro. It will rather make me feel uncomfortable and it will put a target mark on this country, as I mentioned before. Finally, the nuclear warheads would still be owned solely by the United States of America, and potentially used against a threat that the USA has a number off, and thus bringing the unwanted war to this country.


Coming up to the United States we touch upon the main issue in this debate. What is the NATO of today? It was established as a response to the Eastern threat during the Cold War period, and now it has lost its archenemy. Is there a need for its existence? NATO had redefined its mission a several times since the Cold War, and has established the strategy of military humanitarian missions, some sort of the New Military Humanism, as Noam Chomsky would call it. What organization would Montenegro be joining? The American-led NATO, or the Franco-German view of it, or perhaps some third stream…? Very few words have been said in Montenegro about the discrepancies between the NATO members in 21st century. Very few words have been said about the attempts of emancipation of European security system… NATO has undertaken two missions in Afghanistan and Iraq without all of its members on board, some of them being explicitly against. So I ask one more time, what organization would Montenegro be joining?

Let's look at this from the scientific standpoint, putting all the emotion to the side. Does a country, any country, really want to join an organization that has shown that it does not respect the UN Charter, the Security Council and even its own Treaty? I am talking specifically about the Washington Treaty, its founding act, and the articles 5 and 7, which endorse the use of force only in the case of armed attack against a member country and which binds its actions to the UN Charter, and which were both breached in the case of the intervention against Yugoslavia. What is the next rule that NATO will be ready to break? The answer is simple, any!

What NATO and its changing mission has shown us in the 21st century is that it is an organization with unstable strategy policy, and that it has been a vessel for solving American needs all over the world. What a country like Montenegro could contribute to those needs is geo-strategic location and international legitimacy. What we have witnessed for the past decade is much liberal talk to gain realistic goals. I am talking in terms of political science here. Public speeches about human rights, solving poverty, feeding the hungry, liberating the oppressed and bringing democracy to the world, were all liberal excuses for realistic goals such as strategic positioning, establishing a dominating role in the world, solving the energy crises, gaining more power and selling over four times more weapons in the past year than Russia, earning more than 60 billion dollars to the industry.

This is a country with the aching past with NATO and economically unstable present in the midst of economic crises and EU integration. It does not need military involvements at this time nor in the near future. It is already a member of the Partnership for Peace, and it has shown good will and readiness to be a part of the collective system of security. With no external threats, a stabile internal situation, and good neighboring relationships, Montenegro seems pretty secure to me. Our soldiers have much work to do here, at home, and all the help our partners would need from us will be available for them without the obligation and expense that NATO membership would bring.


To conclude, I salute your initiative, and I am grateful for your readiness to listen to me and to learn what I have to say. The decision on NATO membership needs to remain with the people which will express their free will in a referendum. This is also the message that we receive from Brussels and Washington. Ours is the mission to inform them, and subsequently to conform to the will of the majority, because whatever the decision, the future must be in togetherness and fellowship.



Homeland Security andCritical Infrastructure

Protection

Nikitas NikitakosProfessor

Department of Shipping Trade and TransportUniversity of the Aegean, Greece

The problem of security of critical infrastructure has become nowadays very compelling. In a brief article that follows will be an attempt to describe the main characteristics of critical infrastructures, the threats they face and the different methodologies for managing the risks that occur mainly in European Union level.

According to Directive 2008/114/EC the definition for Critical Infrastructure (CI) is Critical Infrastructure means an asset, system or part thereof, essential for the maintenance of vital societal functions, health, safety, security, economic or social well-being . Its destruction or disruption would have a significant impact as a result of the failure to maintain those functions.

The critical infrastructures are classified in the following sectors: Banking and Finance, Defense Industrial Base, Energy, Food and Agriculture, National Monuments and Icons, Healthcare and Public Health, Water, Chemical, Commercial Facilities, Communications, Critical Manufacturing, Dams , Emergency Services , Government Facilities, Information Technology, Nuclear Reactors, Materials, and Waste, Postal and Shipping, Transportation Systems.

The risks and disruptions of CI are classified in two major categories namely: Natural Disasters such as Hurricane, Flooding, Blizzard / ice storm, Earthquake, Tornado and Fire and Manmade Incidents including Terrorist threat, Nuclear power plant compromise, Hazardous materials release and Oil spill. Recently has appeared cyber related attacks and disruptions?

In order to describe Risk Assessment process in CIP area we need to have the following definitions• Asset is something of value that may be subject to harm or hazard. In security terms, assets are broadly defined as people, information, and property • Threat is any event or incident that can potentially cause harm or even total destruction of an asset • Vulnerability comes into play as a measure of how easy it is to affect a particular asset with a specific threat. When an asset can be very easily affected by a threat we say that the asset is vulnerable to it.• Vulnerability assessment is an integral part of any risk assessment framework. In fact, understanding the weak spots in a given system or network is the first step towards enhancing its overall security.

There are many standards, practices, and methods available for addressing security risks. Selecting the right option(s) for an organization depends on the range of laws and regulations, organizational goals and objectives, management practices and organizational policies that define the parameters by which the security risk management process must abide., there are many methodologies that address individual parts of an organization's risk management needs.


Risk is defined as a measure of potential harm that encompasses threat, vulnerability, and consequence. That is:Risk (R) = f(C, T, V)where an asset's risk is a function of the likely consequences (C) of a disruption or successful attack; the likelihood of a disruption or attack on the asset, often referred to as the threat (T) to the asset or the asset's attractiveness; and the asset's vulnerability (V) to a disruption or attack. ,A variety of approaches are used in the CI that apply this widely accepted risk management principle to assess risk.

The specific elements or tasks associated with each assessment phase can be tailored to meet specific assessment objectives. Although the methodology has incorporated unique elements that leverage the expertise of the experts, the methodology can be adapted for self-assessment.

To assist the risk assessment there are a series of software package some of hem are listed below• CRAMM stood for the CCTA Risk Analysis and Management Method (where CCTA = UK Government Central Computing and Telecommunications Agency). . CRAMM is a method developed to assist with the following: undertaking a risk analysis of information systems and networks, identifying security requirements and possible solutions , identifying contingency requirements and possible solutions, and tracking and measuring progress against deployed or proposed countermeasures.

•QinetiQ MS Access Security Risk Register. The main requirements for the Risk Register were: to make precise the descriptions of risks; to make precise the descriptions of requirements to mitigate risks; to provide a systematic and objective mechanism for calculating an overall 'risk level' for risks so that risks could be prioritized for the purposes of mitigation, to be relatively easy to maintain.

Using as an example the VAP (Vulnerability Assessment Phases) . It is easily depicted that the methodology is divided into three basic phases: pre-assessment, assessment, and post-assessment. Each phase consists of a series of elements or tasks that have been designed by the VAP team of national experts. Lessons learned have been captured and used to enhance and, when appropriate, expand the methodology.


VAP


• CORAS Risk Assessment Method and Tooling: it is a framework made up of four components; A Method/Process, A Risk Modelling Language A simple tool using the Risk Modelling Language to generate diagrams and models for each stage of the assessment. A CORAS tool to help the end to end process of following the CORAS Method

• CARVER2 is a tool developed by the US NI2 Centre for Infrastructure Expertise in order to serve the needs of critical infrastructure analysis mostly from the policy maker point of view. A stand-alone PC tool and a server/client version (CARVER2Web) have been developed for the implementation of this methodology.

Among the challenges related with CIP in European Community includes, the electric grid interconnected network for all EU counties, the Infrastructure for EU space sector ( Gallileo, EUMETSAT etc.),the communication network and the volcanic ash cloud (as per last Icelandic's case) .

In EU level there are several research program related with CI protection. Two of them where Center for Research Studies (KEMEA) is participated are briefly described in the next paragraphs.

STARTRANS (Strategic Risk Assessment and Contingency Planning in Interconnected Transportation Networks ) which main vision was to develop a comprehensive Transportation Security Risk Assessment Framework for assessing related risk and provide coherent contingency management procedures in interconnected, interdependent and heterogeneous Transportation networks.

STARTRANS


SERCSIS (Semantically Enhanced Resilient and Secure Critical Infrastructure Services) which main objective were to exploit agile service oriented architectures and semantic models and reasoning technology to dynamically compose and manage ICT for the air traffic sector.

SERCSIS

The issue of Critical Infrastructure Protection is very wide and could not be analyzed in a short article. The effort made in this presentation is to analyze some aspects and give the incentive for further research and analysis.

REACT2012YEARBOOK


Montenegrosince 2006.

Milo ĐukanovićFormer Prime Minister, Montenegro

Way of ending the process of dissolution of former Yugoslavia was much different than at the beginning of the process. This was followed by the clash of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Serbia and Montenegro, as well as the rest of the time the common state of Yugoslavia with NATO in the finals as I said, in 2006, 21 May the demokcratic refendum, Montenegro has decided that, after almost a whole century of waiting independence, provided its independence as a result of the state of Serbia, which, I think, among other things, talks about a very dynamic maturation process in the Balkans.

That maturation , unfortunately, as I said a moment ago, had a very expensive price through heavy material damage and loss of human life, through the lost time that we could take advantage of smarter development. Maturation was followed by intensive engagement of the overall international community, particularly the EU and the U.S., but regardless of all that in just 20 years we've been put on the decisions which were followed by wars, to decisions taken in the perfect order of stability with respect strict standards of democracy, that the rules under which it was organized in a democratic referendum in Montenegro. When we were a few years ago articulated the idea of a democratic referendum of independence as a national policy priority, it would cause many doubts in Montenegro, the region and the international community. We are trying to be persuasive on the grounds that it is not another national-romanticism movement, typical of the Balkans, but it is a responsible attempt to take responsibility for our future in our own hands. Distrust were everywhere. Starting in Montenegro, therefore Montenegro as a traditionally fragmented society, I would say that the essence of the division of Montenegrin society precisely on the issue of the democratic resolved in a referendum on 21 May 2006th year. Distrust was in the region, I would say, first of all in Serbia, as our partner in the last binominal common state which is, I would say, not too rational, quite emotional, experienced before Montenegro's intention to restore its independence.

Distrust was present in the international community, first in the EU with double suspicion looked at this idea. First it was a question whether the Balkans able to make such a demanding decision without threatening still fragile stability established after conflict we went through in the last decade of the 20thcentury and the second question was, whether the Montenegro is able to ensure its economic viability and whether there is enough capacity to build a democratic and stable functional state. In the six years that we live in independence, I think we are very far reassure all the skeptics who,I can say, have long tried to distract us from our plan. I think we got the full satisfaction of public policy commitment to the restoration of independence. Montenegro is now stable, civil state, with dynamically growing functional capacity of institutions. Montenegrin society is a democratic society, or, I can say, a society in deep maturation democratic, multiethnic society, which shows a greater capacity than any other in the region to adopt a very dynamic standards, implementing reforms that modernize and adapt our society to live in the associations in which we want to be a full member of, especially in the EU and NATO. And, Montenegrin economy is one of the fastest growing economies in Europe. Let me remind you that during 2006, 2007, and 2008 years Montenegro's economy grew at an average annual rate of about 9% and was the fastest growing economy in the region and among the three fastest-growing economies in Europe. These are the reasons, , I think, very convincingly substantiate my claim that we have in the past 6 years to get the satisfaction of our determination to restore the independence of Montenegro.


Today Montenegro is a state that is not inherited only internal stability, but, I can say, is an important factor for strengthened regional stability and Montenegro is now the leader of the European and Euro-Atlantic integration of the Western Balkans. After a long time, Slovenia is already a member of the EU and NATO, after Croatia and Albania and NATO members, and Croatia completed the negotiations with the EU, today Montenegro is the head of the column for the rest of the Western Balkans, that share the same European and Euro-Atlantic aspirations, I would say the best pace to overcome barriers to full European and Euro-Atlantic integration. Do not underestimate what I said first of all, on the contrary, I'd say I was right since it started, and it's sort of the essence of European and Euro-Atlantic idea, and that is especially stable region, good cooperation, good neighborliness in the region and I proudly say that Montenegro is the smallest part of the region, the smallest state, a state that is a very multi-ethnic, succeeded during the breakup of former Yugoslavia only in its own space for peace, not to allow the transfer of ethnic and religious conflict in their own space and today because probably the best credentials to build good relations with everyone in the region.

When we talk about our European and Euro-Atlantic goals, they never fail to say that membership in the EU and NATO, not an end in itself. We primarily perceived as a symbolic confirmation of a job well done on the economic and democratic development of their own home. That's why we have during previous periods were actually very diligent in the implementation of those obligations is a young country and a society which is, I think, went on stage democratic maturation that we had to do to verify not only declarative commitment to adopt the European and Euro-Atlantic standards, but to show that we really know to responsibly manage the own house.

What are the limits and what are the limits to which I want to warn you? I see them in three planes. I see them again, in Montenegro, I see them in the region and see them in European politics. In Montenegro, it seems to me, that would have faster, higher quality work, more current work on establishing the fuller social consensus on these fundamental issues of development of the state and society. However, Montenegro, as I said, was not only the least developed but also deeply divided by the historical foundation of the giveaway. I would say that the process of overcoming the division in the first years after the referendum went a little more intense. I think the crisis deepens, it is reasonable to slow down that process because the consequences of the crisis as less good arguments to make people more easily freed from the delusion that they lived in previous years or decades.


I think it is necessary to further the political skills to try to quickly overcome the division because, I think, an important condition for solvingone of the key problems that Montenegro faces at this stage of its economic and social development, and that, to the capacity. I'm just talking about increasing capacity, but in no case of sufficient capacity. So, Montenegro still has a lack capacities in all areas. They are more missing when we are divided, because it is very important to overcome divisions, to harmonize capacity and to create conditions for Montenegro relies on its own wit, and relies on its own resources, quickly go the way of economic and democratic development. Economic development, I would say, the condition of all the requirement to be able to provide a dynamic, dynamic economic development back what we had, in addition to overcoming the global crisis is sure to further improve the system. We are very much done on the normative revamped system, institution building, strengthening the capacity, but I think that they would face a lot of serious work, therefore, not only because it warns us of our European and Euro-Atlantic allies when it comes to the legal system and simply because they themselves, without any warning we realize that it is indeed a necessary condition if we want to create a sense of security for our citizens and for tourists, because we are a tourist destination, and investors that are necessary for dynamic economic development.

So, part of that story is the fight against corruption and crime, which I believe, is to be much more common, and I would say in local political contests, so I would say in some international messages being used as a whip and replacement the political arguments, but it is such a dominant issue in Montenegro or in the region compared to other parts of the world. When it comes to the region, I think it is very important that as soon as possible close the remaining open issues in the latest Balkan crisis. Unfortunately, and today we found that Bosnia is still non-functional state, which gives it a problem with the pace of its European and Euro-Atlantic integration. We are still poor relations between Serbia-Kosovo, Belgrade and Pristina, and that's something that makes it difficult, therefore, not only bilateral relations but regional cooperation, and it is fair to say the European and Euro-Atlantic path and each other and all the region. So I think it's really important to focus on, with the help of the international community to rapidly close the remaining open issues to the whole region could continue through the dynamic of European and Euro-Atlantic integrations. For me there is no doubt that it is, I think, the most important interest of the region and NATO integrations in the European Union. All our previous experience away from the recent past and confirms a statement. We in this region do not have enough reliable self-regulating mechanisms of stability, and what we witnessed on our extensive experience,, capabilities, in a very regular cycles, I can say, we renew our own instability. And the third question is the question of Europe, which I have just spoken.

I think it is important for Europe to capital as quickly as the fog clears European Sky and to define their own vision. Europe's problem today is not lack consinstent Balkan policy. I think the primary problem today is Europe's European strategy is problematic, troubled vision of Europe. It is not true that the European crisis and economic or financial or institutional. I think that Europe has long been faced with an inconsistent vision. And that vision must be defined and part of that will be, I think, inevitably, the integration of the Western Balkans as Europe can not have a different vision of the unity of their resources, so they will only provide it to compete on the global stage with the existing and growing forces, such as the U.S., China, Russia, India and Brazil.



And second, as a way to symbolize during the 99th year. as we know, Montenegro is a warrior state, it is much more than the history of the war with what worked and developed. These wars have often been justified, liberating, but sometimes were, even, and quite ill, emotionally. 99th montenegrian society faced with such a challenge. Then the head of the former common state of Yugoslavia decided to bring in a conflict with NATO. Montenegro was part of Yugoslavia. So, bearing in mind the heritage of this warrior, the warrior tradition, Montenegro's then found the strength to say: This is not our war, we do not want to participate in it. We have different national interests. I would say the major formulation of national interest is something that perhaps for the first time in recent political history of Montenegro, then clearly articulated.

So, I am convinced that Montenegro is now a stable society on the right path, the path of economic and democratic development, and will be, say, in the near future, after overcoming the European crisis, restored the ability to show Montenegro to dynamic economic and Democratic wins new growth stage of the full European and Euro-Atlantic integration.

REACT2012YEARBOOK


Political and EconomicReforms - Lessons Learned

Georgi PetrovJunior Expert

Diplomatic Institute to the Minister of Foreign Affairsof the Republic of Bulgaria

The path that Bulgaria took to become a full member of NATO was not an easy one. It was accompanied with full scale military reforms to adjust to the new standarts and structures of the armed forces of the Alliance. But the reforms in the Bulgarian army were not the only changes which the country had to make to join NATO at that time. The Euro-Atlantic membership of Bulgaria was possible only after the democratization of the Bulgarian political system, institutions and civil society. Back then the country was still a member of the Warsaw Pact and still under the influence of the USSR. This is why when in 1990, during a session of the Great National Assembly of Bulgaria a young member of the Parliament suggested for a first time that Bulgaria should integrate into the NATO structures nobody thought that this is possible. A few years later in 1994 after long political disputes Bulgaria became one of the first countries to join NATO's Partnership for Peace program and applied for NATO membership in 1997. During November 2002 Prague Summit Bulgaria was one of the seven former socialist countries invited to join the Alliance. Than Bulgaria became a full member of NATO in April 2004. During that time the young member of the Parliament who first suggested that Bulgaria should join the Alliance was already a Minister of Foreign Affairs of Bulgaria and had the opportunity to sign the documents of accession himself. Joining NATO was possible after the completion of many reforms that have shown the willingness and the ability of Bulgaria to assume the responsibilities and the obligations of membership in the Alliance. These reforms also helped the process of accession of Bulgaria to the EU and marked the return of our country to the European family.

To join the Alliance Bulgaria had to transform its armed forces and to make them suitable for the new challenges that stood before them as a part of NATO. All the changes in the Bulgarian army back then were taken in order to make our military personal and equipment compatible with the NATO standards and prepared for joint military exercises and missions. This was a great challenge not only for our Ministry of Defense and the institutions dealing with the security issues of the country but also for almost all sections of the Bulgarian administration because they had to find the most suitable way for Bulgaria to coop with the NATO requirements. One of the first major changes that Bulgaria made in this regard was to reduce the number of its military personal and to abolish the conscription. During the Warsaw Pact membership of Bulgaria the country kept 120 000 soldiers in order to protect the south-east border of the Soviet Block. In NATO the Bulgarian army has a different purpose. It should be maneuverable, well equipped, adequate to terrorist threats and ready for action outside the country.


This is why today Bulgaria has around 30 000 professionally trained army personal which perfectly fulfills its tasks in the international missions of NATO and maintains the global and regional security alongside the aligned forces:

- The country has made significant contributions to NATO-led International Forces for maintaining security in Afghanistan (ISAF). Now this operation enters into its decisive phase where the NATO forces will give the responsibility of maintaining the peace and security in the country to the Afghan government. After the withdrawal of the Alliance forces from Afghanistan in 2014, our main priority will be the establishment and the training of capable military and police afghan forces where Bulgaria is already taking very active part.

- From the outset of Operation KFOR Bulgaria maintains a firm commitment and contribution to the security and stability in Kosovo. There as a member of NATO Bulgaria is interacting with all other relevant international organizations, the EU and the local institutions which have a crucial role in maintaining Kosovo democratic, multiethnic and able to protect and secure the rights of its citizens.

- Bulgaria also participates regularly in the anti-terrorist naval operation of NATO in the Mediterranean "Active Endeavour" (UAE). As a result of the operation the overall level of security in the Mediterranean was increased, the control against the possibility of illegal transfer of weapons of mass destruction was strengthened and the threat of terrorist attacks at sea had been reduced.

Now the question whether or not to follow the Euro-Atlantic way no more exists in Bulgaria. Our membership in NATO is based on and reflects the shared values of the Euro-Atlantic community of freedom, democracy, human rights, rule of law and good neighborly relations. NATO membership of Bulgaria provides guarantees for its defense, security and stability, which allow our society to focus on the economic and social development and the implementation of important internal transformations. Our country pursues a consistent policy in order to be a predictable, stable and reliable ally, aiming to promote the unity of the Alliance, strengthen its military capability and strengthen the transatlantic link. In Bulgaria a lot of governmental and nongovernmental organizations work to make the NATO's role better understood among the society thus promoting furthermore the benefits of our membership in the Alliance and making its policies more clear.

For me as a representative of the Diplomatic Institute to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Bulgaria the obligations and the responsibilities of the country in NATO are of a great importance. In this regard our Institute is helping by maintaining contact with the young Bulgarians in order to improve their knowledge of NATO. The Diplomatic Institute is organizing annual national essay competitions for university and high-school students on topics related to NATO issues. The Diplomatic Institute also conducting Course in Defense Diplomacy for Bulgarian



The Institute is also organizing public lectures of prominent Bulgarian and foreign politicians, diplomats and experts who speak about the most current issues related to the work of the Alliance. After each lecture there is a discussion between the speaker and the audience and this is how everybody has the opportunity to express their opinion and to exchange ideas with high-level decision makers involved with NATO.

Today the most important issue regarding the security of our region is the Euro Atlantic integration of the Balkan states. This is essential for the regional development, because it is a guarantee for a long-term stability and security, economic prosperity and good relations among the neighbors in the region. This is also a way for the Balkan states to forget the prejudices of their past differences. The transmission of experience from the latest member states of NATO and EU to their neighboring countries is an important condition for the success of this endeavor. This is way Bulgaria is ready to share its experience with the countries from the region which would like to join the Alliance if they need our assistance. Supporting each other in the NATO and EU integration is an important condition for the better future of the region and this is why the Regional Euro Atlantic Camp in Montenegro is really valuable initiative which presents an opportunity for further steps in this regard.


Euroatlantic Perspectivesof the

Republic of Macedonia

Jana IlievaSecretary General

MIT University of Skopje, Macedonia

Republic of Macedonia is a country located in the middle part of the Balkan Peninsula. It is a relatively young state having declared its independence through the act of succession from former SFR Yugoslavia in 1991. Since the very beginning of its establishment as sovereign, independent, democratic and social state, Macedonia demonstrated its firm determination to become an EU and NATO member country. The integration into Euro-Atlantic structures as a top strategic interest of the state was clear imperative for its willingness to reform the entire social system according to the rules and standards of the two organizations and to contribute to the achievement of peace and stability in the world, protecting the common values and promotion of freedom, democracy and respect for human rights.

Macedonia and NATO

Republic of Macedonia considers the membership in NATO as a permanent obligation. In terms of membership in this organization, there is a broad political and social consensus. Membership decision is result of strategic determination of the state to actively participate in creating wider security architecture in the Euro-Atlantic area. The governmental policies, officials' statements and program of actions clearly show that the country believes the future of NATO to be a solid guarantee for the overall European security and stability and fundamental basis for the new European security architecture.

Macedonia's membership in NATO provides long-term guarantees for peace and stability in the region i.e. in the Southeastern Europe. The fact that this region throughout history has been a "region of contention" of great powers, region without “policy of peace” as well as region of numerous wars, conflicts and changing borders, reinforces the need for a permanent presence of the North Atlantic Alliance, not as a generator of stability but as the only alternative that can affect to abandonment of the nationalistic “big-state” ideas and enhance the collaboration and progress in all key areas and in all countries.

However, the road of the Republic of Macedonia towards NATO was long and filled with many challenges and energy. It was launched with the Decision for Accession of the Republic of Macedonia in NATO, in 1993, which was adopted by the Macedonian Assembly with unanimous vote. At the beginning, the public perception of NATO membership for the Macedonian citizens (similarly like all the other people from former Yugoslavia), was originally conceived as a necessity of replacing the Eastern manufacturing military equipment with one from western origin, which was totally wrong impression and retreated to a true picture of the benefits and advantages.


In fact it was quite a long and complex process of reform, which in addition to the equipment, covered all other sectors and areas of military and civilian aspects:- professionalization of the army structure and changing the strategy and tactics of action as well as the use of force,- rationalization of the over-employment and writ-off of non-essential and wasteful parts of the military and civilian defense complex,- strengthening the democratic control of the armed forces and development of democracy and civil society and especially reforms in the judiciary, fight against organized crime and corruption, etc.

In order to accelerate the above reforms, in 1995 R. Macedonia became an active member of the NATO program "Partnership for Peace", with a firm commitment to contribute to the building of new security architecture on the continent. In 1999, on the Washington Summit through the Membership Action Plan mechanism, the country was enabled to begin the accession talks by meeting the set forth criteria in the near future.

By 2007, Macedonia met the criteria of the Action Plan, but unfortunately at the Bucharest Summit in 2008 the entrance in this international organization, although widely expected has been blocked and vetoed by Greece, due to the name dispute between the two countries. Namely Greece using its veto power in NATO, changed the conclusions of the Bucharest summit and blocked the Macedonian entrance despite the Interim Accord between the two countries which explicitly prohibited such hostile action. Greece undertook not to object to the Republic of Macedonia's membership in international, regional and multi lateral organizations and institutions of which Greece was a prior member, however under the provisional reference “the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM)”. Hence, any opposite action is thus clear violation of the international law.

The Republic of Macedonia initiated proceedings before the International Court of Justice (the 'World Court'), asking the Court to adjudge Greece's actions as illegal. In its judgment, the ICJ accepted the argument of the Republic of Macedonia that Greece violated the Interim Accord when it objected to the Republic of Macedonia's membership of NATO 2008. However, instead to observe the world's most authoritative court's ruling and hence change its course towards Macedonia and thereby correct the injustice inflicted on the country, NATO remained on its original decision. As expected, it had huge repercussions onto the public and the previous high support it gave to NATO membership. It ruined as a “house of cards” when the alliance once again reiterated the conditions for admission of Macedonia: NATO nations agreed that the country would receive an invitation upon resolution of the Macedonia naming dispute. It appears that despite the NATO's alleged policy of open doors, NATO has a “barbed network” in front of its doors.


As for the name dispute nowadays despite the Macedonian efforts for its final resolution this process is being totally ignored and marginalized by the Greek side mainly due the economic crisis and the over-indebtedness and recession of Greece. Regarding the NATO perspectives of Macedonia, despite the Greek opposition to Macedonia's membership in NATO, Macedonia continues to be a stable partner of the NATO alliance. Macedonia participates and contributes to three NATO missions: Althea mission in Bosnia, Freedom for Iraq and ISAF mission in Afghanistan. Declared commitment of the state is that in future it will continue to support the NATO activities and will contribute to strengthening the stability in the region (by creating positive climate for development and investment), co-operation and exchange of information in many areas of interest as for Republic of Macedonia and the other countries in the neighborhood.

Macedonia to European Union

Having acquired the EU membership candidate status in December 2005, the Republic of Macedonia embarked upon the key stage in the European integration process. It is the first non-EU country in the Balkans to sign the Stabilization and Association Agreement in 2001. This was a historical step forward in advancing the EU, because it activated numerous processes in the political life: harmonization of national legislation and practices with the EU legislation and practices, commitment to strengthen relations with country's neighbors and cooperation with the EU on certain issues.

Today, Macedonia has met all preconditions for EU membership. This position can be confirmed by the positive country report and annual recommendations (in 2009, 2010 and 2011) of the European Commission for staring the accession negotiations for full-fledged membership of the Republic of Macedonia. Unfortunately, the recommended start three times has resulted in Council's conclusion with identical content: maintaining good neighbor relations and mutually acceptable solution of the name issue as a key condition for joining the EU family. It seems that the Stabilization and Association Agreement, meeting all additional indicators set by EU, the EU rules and policies, and in particular the Copenhagen criteria for aspirants i.e all EU legal framework that has been built on for decades and which is based on the universal values: freedom, democracy, rule of law and respect for human rights "falls" before the abused principle of solidarity. Once again, hiding behind the principle of consensus, the EU countries tolerate the violation of basic rules of the international law. As for the EU perspectives of Macedonia, the country remains dedicated to fully implementing the acqui and other EU practices and standards while at the same time, it begins the high-level accession dialog with the EU - another precedent in the current expansion of this organization. The start of the high-level accession dialogue between Macedonia and the EU is not and cannot be a substitute for the start of accession negotiations. However, the dialogue gives special opportunity to improve processes with the EU and to give new encouragement in reforms in spheres intended to be discussed, so that that when the official negotiations begin they will be considerably shorter.


CONCLUSION

Republic of Macedonia is successfully heading towards full Euro-Atlantic integration, regardless of the obstacles created by one of their member states - Greece. NATO and EU bodies have already seen the benefits and impact that Republic of Macedonia has over the positive trends in the region. In order to give positive impulse to a further successful integration of Macedonia, and thereby circumvent the unjustified Greek veto, additional programs and ways of cooperation are already taking place. In the field of EU perspectives, Macedonia has already received a series of recommendations for starting of negotiations. The calls and the pressure coming from the representatives of many NATO member states are being amplified, resulting in an open opposition of the veto-and-ban principles as means for demonstrating power of coercion.

Finally, the Euro-Atlantic perspectives of Macedonia are nowadays facing the following challenges:- Public support for NATO and EU membership significantly weakened and there is a serious downward trend. The initial 80-85% support for Euro-Atlantic integration in 1994, the same in 2008 (after the Bucharest summit) is reduced to 60-75% support, while in 2012 (after the Chicago summit) is reduced to 50-55% support of joining the NATO and EU. The trend of decreasing support had the biggest drop when despite the International Court rulings in favor of Macedonia the supreme NATO bodies did not correct the injustice of Bucharest.- The need for reform of these organizations in the decision making process and prevention of possibility to abuse the benefits of the membership. There is no reasonable justification and argumentation for any state to block the system of “win-win” situation and politics – the case of Republic of Macedonia is already pragmatic in this regard. NATO and EU must find mechanisms and political will to overcome the injustice and that might become practice in other similar cases which will lead to loosing the deep sense of these two institutions. EU and NATO must ensure that full respect of their own rules (the one contained in their basic documents) and the international laws are observed. On a contrary, it will lead to misconceptions in the public thus will violate the public trust enjoyed among the aspiring member countries.


REACT2012YEARBOOK


Military Reforms inDefense Sector and Partnership

Process with NATO

Jasur Mammadov SumerinliDirector of “Doctrine”

Journalists' Military Research Center, Azerbaijan

Military reforms in defense sector and partnership process with NATO

Azerbaijan's IPAP covers the development of strategic documents, ensuring the correspondence of Azerbaijan's military education system to NATO standards, the development of relevant documents and training of personnel on transparent budget planning, preparation of one mobile unit, development of a National PfP Training Center for the armed forces, modernization of naval vessels, upgrading one airbase and the NCO academy according to NATO standards, establishment of a simulation and modeling center, and other areas as well.

It there have not been sufficient improvements in the administrative system of the defense ministry staff (both military and civilian). The current command staff and command control procedures have not been examined and evaluated. The process of separating the general staff of the armed forces from the defense ministry has actually failed. Attempts have been made to mix the J (Joint) and G (General) systems, which has led to inefficiency in the reform process. A number of changes that actually did take place as a result of the reforms have not been reflected in the country's military legislation. Human rights problems are on the rise in the Azerbaijani armed forces. The material and technical support of the armed forces is at a low level. And one of the most significant—is that access to the process of drafting and adopting conceptual documents has been extremely limited.

Various groups of Azerbaijani civil society did not participate in the development of Azerbaijan's Military Doctrine and National Security Concept. For this reason, there is a perception in Azerbaijani society that contents of these documents are temporary. One aspect of the drafting process was quite obvious to outside observers: the fact that there are significant areas of difference between the Military Doctrine and the National Security Concept. The NSC was adopted before the Russian–Georgian war of August 2008, while the Military Doctrine was drafted after that confliict. While the NSC places a priority on achieving integration into Euro-Atlantic security structures, the Military Doctrine reflects a shift in orientation toward a more “balanced” policy on the part of the Republic of Azerbaijan. The NSC mainly focuses on harmonizing the nation's military with NATO standards in connection with IPAP and other documents. But the Military Doctrine declares that Azerbaijan prefers to create an army based on mixed standards—on historical tradition and modern experience, not relying solely only on NATO standards.The final and most pressing concern is that Azerbaijani society is in the darkabout the program of reforms in the armed forces. Azerbaijan-NATO cooperation documents and the text of the IPAP have still not been freely circulated. This level of secrecy makes it very difficult for civil society to support reforms within the military.


Should be noted that the reforms carried out in the first, second and third stages of IPAP relate to the transparency of the defense budget and issues of civilian democratic control over the military. One of the tasks set forth under IPAP is implementing structural changes in the MoD, increasing the involvement of civilians in the defense ministry apparatus, identifying posts that can be occupied by civilian staff, and codifying the necessary changes and addenda to legislation related to the defense system in order to ensure that these changes remain in place. However, studies show that Azerbaijan is in no hurry to honor its obligations in this regard, or to appoint civilians to leadership positions in the defense ministry. The stated reason for this delay is the fact that the country is at war with Armenia.

There are serious problems related to the staff of the Azerbaijani armed forces, since most of the officers holding top positions in the military are still Soviet-educated. Although Azerbaijan has joined NATO's program for military training and education in the armed forces, no significant reforms are being carried out in this field.

In the middle of 2009, a number of staff and structural reforms were carried out in the central apparatus of the defense ministry and in the general staff of the armed forces, and new departments were set up. However, these reforms did not result in the implementation of the main goals reflected in IPAP: the defense ministry and the general staff were not separated, and the defense ministry unit engaged in strategic planning was not staffed with civilians.

The most significant contradiction relates to the compliance of reforms in the upper echelons of the army with the joint and general staff systems. What is striking here is that the defense minister in Azerbaijan still dominates the general staff, and it is possible that people who hold top positions in law enforcement are creating obstacles to reforms in this field.


What NATO can to do?

Some of Azerbaijan's neighbors (most notably, Russia) are opposed to close cooperation between Azerbaijan and the Alliance. In our view, NATO should take these realities into account, and support for Azerbaijan's defense and security sectors should be increased. This support should cover a number of areas: legislation, supplies, and the updating of weapons and military hardware. NATO should increase its expert support for Azerbaijan in military reforms, especially in terms of military legislation. Servicemen should be given material support, and their rights should be protected.

One of the biggest problems facing post-Soviet countries in adopting NATO standards relates to the issue of weapons and military hardware. Since the weapons, munitions, and military hardware used by the Azerbaijani armed forces are of Russian origin, there is clearly a serious dependence on Russia in other military areas. For this reason, NATO should carry out specific work to involve countries like Azerbaijan, which are spending vas sums on armaments, in a preferential arms and military hardwaremarket.

At the same time, it is possible that individual officials are creating obstacles to the implementation of NATO standards in the Azerbaijani armed forces, and therefore I believe that the process of adopting NATO standards in Azerbaijan should also involve the general public. This can be done only if the full essence of documents like the Partnership for Peace and IPAP are disclosed to the people. Cooperation will only succeed if it has the full support of Azerbaijani society.

As a whole, NATO should prioritize seven key issues going forward:- A concrete strategy for the South Caucasus and Central Asia must be determined.- The thesis that potential NATO membership should be the primary goal that drives cooperation with the Alliance must be eliminated.- Bilateral agreements should be signed between NATO and partner countries that cooperate actively with the Alliance.- A new structure must be established regarding partner countries. A "safety zone," similar to the European Union's "Neighborhood" policy, should be created to engage countries which do not have priority for membership but wish to have a security guarantee.- NATO must be given the competency to act as a potential mediator in the settlement of frozen conflicts, including within the South Caucasus region.- It is necessary to increase the participation of NATO in the security of energy projects within the South Caucasus region.- The content of existing partnership agreements must be modified with the goal of achieving better implementation of plans in a more timely fashion. Agreements that should be reviewed include: Partnership for Peace (PfP), Individual Partnership Action Plan (IPAP), PfP Planning and Review Process (PARP), and Membership Action Plan (MAP).



The Story of theEuro-Atlantic Integration

of the Slovak Republic andthe Role of its

Civil Society in the Process

Jan CingelDirector for Partnership Development

Slovak Atlantic Commission, Slovak Republic

The story of the Euro-Atlantic integration of the Slovak Republic started right after the fall of communism in the Central and Eastern Europe. Slovakia managed to struggle successfully for its freedom in the year 1989 and then independence in 1993 via peaceful division of Czechoslovakia. Having been part of the Eastern Block and the Warsaw pact it wished to belong to the community of prosperous and democratic countries. This desire was transferred into the foreign policy priorities – integration into the EU and the NATO (ever since 1993). But the our way was not that easy, nor straight. It was pretty bumpy and full of „stones“ along way.

The Armed Forces of the Slovak Republic had to undergo huge military transformation. From the initial 45.000 troops we decreased down to current almost 15.000, changed the military structure of forces, adopted NATO doctrines, new strategic documents and standards in many areas including the defence industry or protection of the classified information. We trimmed down the command and control structure of the Armed Forces, because we had too much officers for relatively small number of non-commissioned personnel. Just for the illustration we had almost 400 colonels and we went down to less than 70 as of today.

More problematic was the fulfillment of the political criteria, however. Slovakia for the most of the 90s was a bad pupil in the European classroom. Madeleine Albright, former Secretary of State (the US) called Slovakia in the year 1995 „the Black Hole in the Central Europe“. We had huge problems with corruptions, wild privatization of basically all state-owned property, problems with division of power and non-functioning democratic control mechanisms. Even political murders – mafia like execution of the former minister of economics, extortion, state control of media. Misuse of secret service... prime minister that time had so bad relationships with ou,r that time president, that the secret service, which was under Prime Ministers command, kidnapped President's son and took him in car trunk to Austria, as he was wanted there for prosecution on economical charges. One of the agents who dared to speak about the issue and who revealed to independent media about the case, died in an explosion in his car under suspicious circumstances. Nobody was ever sentenced for any of these crimes. The government was manipulating parliamentary proceedings, even referendum.

This everything must have led to consequences and indeed it did – the EU pre-integration talks with Slovakia had been put on hold and at the NATO summit in Madrid 1997 it was decided, that only Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland will join NATO in 1999 - within the first wave of the post-Cold war NATO enlargement. Slovakia has been left outside and had to wait 7 more years and work very hard to get the invitation and entered the NATO in March 2004. That time NATO was still a big fan of wave approach towards the enlargement.


NGOs played a key role in the process of political transition in rough 90s in Slovakia. Without their persistence, control and support of few independent media Slovakia would not manage to overcome the rule of strong hand after the fiasco in Madrid in 1997. New, more democratic government was elected in 1998. New government cooperated closely with NGOs on democratic, economic, social and other reforms.

Important role in the process of informing about the NATO integration had the Slovak Atlantic Commission (SAC), which was founded in the year 1993 by Slovak diplomats, as an organization, which main goal should be to work with the public, explain Slovakia's foreign policy and reason for joining both NATO and the EU by providing qualified expertize - not propaganda. SAC also became a member of the international umbrella network – the Atlantic Treaty Association. The other very active organization was the Euro-Atlantic Center, which soon became member of the Youth Atlantic Treaty Association and was working mostly with young people and university students – helping them to understand better the NATO and EU accession processes.

The communication with public about the NATO integration was in accordance with the Communication Strategy on the NATO accession, which had been drafted after 1998 by the inter-ministerial committee, composed of members from Ministries of Defence, Foreign Affairs, as well as Economics, office of the Prime Minister and some other institution. Subsequently the strategy was implemented and an overall information campaign on NATO had been launched. The public support for NATO membership was slowly rising until 63% in the time of the accession. Public support for the EU membership was of course somewhere else. In the obligatory referendum on Slovakia's accession to the EU, which was the only valid referendum in Slovak history, 52% of the population came to vote and 91% voted for the EU membership, making Slovakia one of the most Euro-optimistic countries in the Europe. On the other hand, Slovak government chose not to organize a referendum on the NATO accession back then. Though there was relatively strong support for the case, government was afraid that the referendum will not be valid. According to the Slovak legislature, referendum is not valid until at least 50% of the eligible population participates. And as we are quite famous for low level of political participation, out of 7 referendums organized throughout the history only mentioned one – on the EU accession - was valid id est - successful.



Actually the NATO accession was quite popular especially among young people, because it meant the end of conscription, which was not very much popular back then among the young male population. That time minister of defence chose quite a good public relations move and announced the cancellation of the obligatory conscription at the biggest music festival in Slovakia in front of tens of thousands young people having fun. The obligatory conscription ended by the January 1, 2006. On the other hand, the strongest argument against NATO among the Slovak population back then, was paradoxically bombing of the Former Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999. Though Slovakia was not yet in the NATO that time, due to strong social and personal ties with Serbia and Montenegro, Slovak population mostly did not agree with the strikes. The issue was a cause of a bitter interpolitical debate back then, but the support for NATO and pros prevailed over contras after all.

With the help of NGOs and our partners from abroad, especially from our Visegrad 4 neighbors, Slovakia embarked on the path of political and economical transition. Thanks to which Slovakia got nickname „Central European Tiger“, because of high influx of the Foreign Direct Investments – especially automotive industry and electrotechnical industry. Within these processes Slovakia successfully finished its accession to the NATO in March 2004 and managed to be prepared for the EU accession along with its partners from the Visegrad 4, who preceded it to NATO at the end of 90s. We have joined the EU along with 10 other partner countries on May 1, 2006. Later on, Slovakia fulfilled conditions and joined the European Monetary Union on January 1, 2009 and accepted Euro as its currency.

We can stipulate that thanks to the work of NGOs and independent media in late 90s, Slovakia managed to get on the path to democracy and thanks to the civil society it managed to change the political culture. Many might disagree with this declaration, however if we compare the situation in Slovakia in mid 90s and nowadays, the improvement is obvious. There is a lot to do, of course, but basically is our story a success story.


Civil Control over the Military:NATO and

MD Partner Countries

Jelisaveta BlagojevićMember of MB, ALPHA Centre, Montenegro

Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia are the members of NATO's Mediterranean Dialogue. Stability and security of this region is in close connection with the security of Euro-Atlantic area. Thus, NATO developed the number of cooperation and funding instruments in order to ensure stability of this region.

The Role of Military in Arab Transitions

The most of MD Partner Countries are the part of Arab spring, i.e. have faced with transition process from non-democratic regimes since the end of 2010. In this process, the role of military is very important because military has monopoly over the means of violence, so its support for authoritarian regimes determines transition results.

The role of military in transition process varies from country to country. In some countries soldiers support rebellions, whereas in other countries they support regimes that are determined by the position of military in a non-democratic regime. If the military was de-professionalized and politicized in dictatorship it is very likely that it will be a problematic factor in transition process, as shows the case of Egypt transition. After fall of Mubarak regime, the military became a political actor and a self-proclaimed leader of transition.

On the other hand, if the military was under the civil control in non-democratic regimes, it is very likely that it will be a democratic factor of transition, as we can see from the example concerning transition in Tunisia. During Ben Ali dictatorship, soldiers were not involved in the decision making process and allocation of national resources; their mission was focused on national defense. In this context, establishing the civil control over the military in the post-transition period largely depends on the position of military in the transition process.

Taking into account that Arab spring has touched each of NATO's partner countries in the Mediterranean Dialogue and that we do not have democracy without civil control over the military, NATO should give contribution in the development of this democratic aspect considering all transition dimensions. In other words, considering the level of military involvement in political life in these partner countries, NATO can take action by facilitating the development of civil-military relations, which would in a long way ensure a stable and secure region.



Conceptual Analysis: Civil Control over the Military

There are different theoretical determinations of the concept of democratic control over the military. Samuel Huntington in the book The Soldier and the State, put forward objective civilian control and subjective civilian control, as two contrasting models of democratic control. Objective civilian control aims at maximizing the military professionalism by separating the political and military decision-making process. The political leaders do not interfere in military operations while military commanders do not intervene in the political process. On the other hand, subjective control aims at maximizing the power of the governing political party. Political leaders try to control the armed forces by appointing high-ranking generals who are “political friends”.

NATO Contribution to the Establishment of the Civil Control over the Military

In order to contribute to the establishment of one of the mentioned models of democratic control in transition countries, NATO, throughout a political dialogue can pave the way for practical cooperation with them.

Through partnership, and, notably, through its Building Integrity Initiative, NATO has developed expertise over the years, has promoted good practices in respect to the both, the civilian control and the oversight of the military. Partnering with nongovernmental organizations NATO experts are able to provide assistance in developing transparency, accountability, and integrity in the security sector.

In addition, this is the best moment for NATO to give the opportunity to present and future leaders of partner countries to participate in internship programs in order to ensure the acquirement of democratic experience and knowledge in NATO countries. This way they can learn what is democracy in ways that they could later implement in their home countries.Also, through different education and training programs NATO can provide its partners with assistance from professional educators in order to develop their cadres in the armed forces, thereby assisting in the design of their own curriculum so that they can teach their military and security forces.

Good way to support partner countries in attaining their goals of reform and democracy is organization of summits between NATO countries and partner countries in order to oversee the transition process and discuss the ways of further improvement.

At the same time, NATO can build military bases in one or two partner countries, specifically used as learning centers for security and defense methods. These would only exist for as long as the partner nations need NATO's support in this regard.

We must be aware that the operation in Libya will likely have far-reaching consequences on the Alliance's ability to develop a genuine partnership with countries of North Africa and the Gulf region. Also, in many ways, NATO's image south of the Mediterranean is close to the perception prevailing in Russia and essentially plagued by a fundamental lack of trust.

Chicago Summit

The 2012 Chicago Summit was the opportunity to engage in “smart partnerships”. In the context of the Arab Spring, smart partnerships would argue for reaching out first to countries in North Africa and the Gulf region that have not yet shown any interest in joining the MD or Istanbul Cooperation Initiative but that may find an interest in joining a broader dialogue in support of Arab countries facing political transition in an effort to avert military intervention.

Smart partnerships would pursue new cooperative avenues in bringing NATO and the EU closer together in an effort to help Arab countries transitioning toward new political systems and reform their security sectors, should there be an interest on the part of these challenged governments to reach out to Western institutions to assist in their reform process.



The Role of the NGOs in theEuroatlantic Integration Process

Stefan PižuricaSecretary General

Youth Euro-atlantic Association, Montenegro

NGOs as civil iniciatives are one of the most powerful driving forces of the society.

Improvement of living conditions was cornerstone for foundation of NGO „Euro-Atlantic Youth Association“, organisation which I am in charge of. The aim of this NGO is to motivate people to fight for better life.Aware of the fact that without security and stability, prosperity and happiness of human society can not be achieved, we share the same mission to secure safe life tommorrow.

Without an educated and informed person, there is fruitful decision. To make right decisions, we must perceive and examine every aspect, every view and every consequence of it.

When it comes to the future of young people, we must be ready and informed about future of our country, because decisions which are made today are what determine our life, not decisions of people who are facing the past, and who are persistent in their unfounded and unrealistic opinions.

The main role of the NGO sector in Euro-Atlantic integration process of Montenegro is to bridge complicate aspects of NATO to the ordinary citizens , and what he gets, as an individual, from integrations of our country - what does it mean for him. In Montenegro, public support is on low level, in fact - unsatisfactorily. At some point it seems Government pulling and implementing this process for own personal needs, and people are left without proper explanation how they can benefit from integration with other member countries of North-Atlantic Treaty Organisation. Here we found crucial the role of the NGOs, as organizations which are aware of what ails the citizens, and which can easily present consequences of integration to NATO objectively and indifferently.During the last year, from the high scale officials, Montenegro has received signals just like those. “Integration must be the project of citizens for citizens and without strong support there is no integration to the system like NATO is.” NATO wants democratic decisions, regardless what they are, and our role is to secure that decision is the right one. If NGOs don't finish their part and convince people in all advantages and disadvantages, about need of integration - state institutions are putting people on pressure, and they do not have proper support and understanding.

There are about ten NGOs in Montenegro which are dealing with those topics. NGO I am representing today, as the name says, targets youth, whose quality of life will be determined by today's decisions, their obligation is to fight for best conditions. I emphasis fact that Montenegrin youth is aware that without safe life there is no prosperity, they are aware of all mistakes made by people in our past and they clearly understand that only integrations can bring safeness and our future never be questioned again.



During the previous period, NGOs which support NATO integrations in Montenegro have been working a lot. But, was there any impact on public opinion?

Without any doubt, the answer is: insufficiently. Citizens still consider NGOs as part of the Government, and think that pro-NATO side is prioritized. Also, there are attitudes that only members of “elite” will benefit of it, and NGOs representatives enjoy in self-promotion and luxury. Unfortunately, there are some organizations which work on similar pattern, and in fact, with their activities don't justify their role in this process, and only encourage the feel of suspicion, fear and indifference over this.

With unselfish help of Alpha center, NGO “Euroatlantic youth association” has approached to our target group very openly, with conversation and strong arguments for our attitude. We have tried, and still trying not to advertise NATO, but to initiate exchange of beliefs and thoughts. One of our biggest projects, which we are very proud of is debate competition held last year where one hundred twenty people from all around Montenegro researched all the benefits and disadvantages of NATO integration process. I am sure with very low budget, without big words, we gave the opportunity to the participants to create their own attitude towards this topic. However, it was much harder to provide arguments against-NATO. That is our goal - to inform and “to force” people to examine and research various topics.

That is the most important role of the NGO sector in euroatlantic integration process. I hope all the organizations will work on such way, because it's sometimes better not to work than threat process and citizen needs.

REACT2012YEARBOOK


Izmir TalićAmbassador

Embassy of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro

Membership to NATOChallenges and Expectations

- Euro-Atlantic integration is one of strategic priorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina's foreign policy;

- Improvement of regional cooperation in different areas aimed at achieving standards for joining the Euro-Atlantic structures, by countries individually and by the region as a whole, is one of the top priorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina;

- Bosnia and Herzegovina actively participates in a number of initiatives aimed at enhancement of regional cooperation in line with principles of equality, mutual respect, and respect of sovereignty and territorial integrity;- Bosnia and Herzegovina attaches great importance to the global security and has the long-standing experience in many UN peace-keeping and police missions and NATO-led missions;

- NATO Integration Process has become an integrative model in the Southeast Europe. Bilateral cooperation among countries of the Southeast Europe has been significantly improved through different multilateral forums;- Bosnia and Herzegovina has been implementing a broad range of reforms with the aim to be integrated into collective security structures;

- Regarding our relations with NATO, Bosnia and Herzegovina has arrived at significant level of cooperation since the formal admission to NATO's Partnership for Peace Program, in December 2006;

- Bosnia and Herzegovina has wasted no time in the PfP. We have taken advantage of available PfP instruments, clearly demonstrating that we are a credible Partner of the Alliance, determined to achieve our goal - and that is full-fledged NATO membership;

- We are fully aware that the membership in NATO does not only mean taking the advantages from membership, but also obligation of country, as well as readiness to contribute to NATO activities;

- The long road to NATO integration process has challenges in many areas, as defence and security sector reform, political, economic, and social reform;

- NATO is the best guarantee for peace and stability, not only in Bosnia and Herzegovina, but in the entire region of Southeast Europe;

- Consequently, Bosnia and Herzegovina welcomes NATO's Open door policy, which has been reconfirmed in Chicago Summit Declaration, May 2012;



Let me remind you of some facts:

- In April 2008, we improved our cooperation with NATO on level of Intensified Dialogue;

- Just one year after, in April 2009, Bosnia and Herzegovina applied for Membership Action Plan (MAP);

- In 2010, at Tallin's meeting, NAC has decided to invite Bosnia and Herzegovina in Membership Action Plan. NAC is authorized to accept the first Annual National Programme of Bosnia and Herzegovina when our country fulfils the condition of recording military perspective immovable property as the state property, which would be used by the BiH Ministry of Defence;

I am glad to inform you that Bosnia and Herzegovina is about to meet the abovementioned condition, set by NATO Foreign Ministers in Tallinn, for commencing our first circle of Membership Action Plan (MAP). Following the agreement between the political parties that make up the majority in the Parliamentary Assembly and decision of Council of Ministers of BiH, on how to resolve question of military property, which was reached on March 9, the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina adopted, on April 21, the Decision on the size, structure and locations of military property of the Armed Forces of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

It is expected that an agreement will be signed on this issue between Bosnia and Herzegovina Council of Ministers and the governments of the two entities. In this way, the legal framework for addressing this issue would be completely established and the process of registration of military property will begin;

In September this year, NATO team of experts will visit BiH in order to create a second evaluation of implementation of IPAP 2011-2013; NATO Committee for Integration Process of Bosnia and Herzegovina also drafted the ANP of Bosnia and Herzegovina;

In July 2012, upon a proposal of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Council of Ministers of BIH took a decision to establish NATO Committee for Integration Process of Bosnia and Herzegovina, to be chaired by Ana Trišić-Babić, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of BIH. The Committee will, inter alias, define priorities in implementation of BIH obligations stemming from BIH's participation in “Partnership for Peace” NATO Programme, in addition to addressing the issue of admission to a full membership in NATO. With formation of this Committee, the Council of Ministers of BIH Coordination Team for NATO, set-up in 2007, ceases its operations;


U.S.-Adriatic Charter, A5

Bosnia and Herzegovina attaches high importance to the U.S.-Adriatic Charter, as an effective mechanism of cooperation and regional integration on the most sensitive issues countries have been facing, such as defence and security. A5 has played an important role in the Euro-Atlantic integration of the region and become an instrument of political, security, defence and military cooperation, as well as an important promoter of the full integration of the Southeastern Europe into NATO;From January to July, 2012, Bosnia and Herzegovina was chairing the US-Adriatic Charter, for the second time. During our A5 chairmanship, a special emphasis was placed on concrete cooperation of member states, particularly in the fields of defence and security, with the aim of establishing synergy of our countries concerning these issues;

BiH's presence in Afghanistan

Bosnia and Herzegovina, as an aspirant country and a participant in the ISAF mission, follows with great attention the developments in Afghanistan. Within our capabilities, we are committed to continue our support to the establishment of peace and stability in Afghanistan;Bosnia and Herzegovina participates with one infantry unit of the BiH Armed Forces (45 soldiers), which has been deployed within Danish contingent in Helmand province on providing security for immobile military facilities. The unit was deployed in October 2010, and its fourth rotation took place in April 2012; In 2009, Bosnia and Herzegovina sent 10 officers of the AF of BiH to Afghanistan (within German and Danish contingents), and additional 4 non-commissioned officers;BiH Presidency on its Session, held on April 22nd this year, in principle agreed to a joint engagement of the Military Police unit made of 26 Military Policemen with the State of Maryland National Guard in the mission of ISAF in Afghanistan;


Mojkovac is on the west bank of the river Tara between the mountains Bjelasica and Sinjajevina,belongs to north-eastern part of the Republic of Montenegro between two national parks Biogradska Gora and Durmitor. It is near the old mining town of Brskovo. During rule of King Stefan UrošNemanjić there was a money foundry there, from which Mojkovac got its name.Mojkovac municipality in 2011 had a population of 8622. As the Tara River is near Mojkovac, there is also white water rafting. The Monastery of Saint George in Dobrilovina is the most important cultural and historic monument; it dates back to 1592.

MOJKOVAC

The National restaurant”KO3AK“ is located in northern Montenegro, only 3 km away from Mojkovac.You will recognize it by its authentic arhitectural features resembling old Montenegrin „savardak“ (a tipe of round mountain cabin with low stone walls,with thatched roof laid on a wooden structure).Here you can taste national cuisine specialties and relay in the fresh mountain air.Besides the breath taking view over the surrounding nature,on the altitude of 1.020 meters, you will also feel the hospitality of your hosts.

KO3AKrestaurant



TARA Group is a modern company founded for military and civil intend, with the general aim to be in the world recognized and important producer pyrocartridges, armament and other military equipment high quality. TARA Group is a acknowledged as the leading independent manufacturer of Pyrotechnical Aviation Cartridge and Rocket Engines for Pilot Ejection seats of Western and former Soviet design of aircraft. The development and production of the TM-9 semi automatic pistol and the TM-4 assault rifle represent the last production platform constructed and produced in Montenegro, by our technical team. Besides, TARA Group is a fully equipped for all the metal processing and treatment. With all these facilities and products, TARA Group can offer complete solution to modern Law Enforcement and Military customers around the world.

TARA Group

react 2012 yearbook

Documents