NATO’s Eastward Shift

In the wake of NATO's historical accord this week that will give Russia equal footing with the alliance's 19 members on several key strategic issues, political observers expressed concern that Europe's clout in the organization is diminishing.

The deal to create a NATO-Russian council came on Tuesday at a two-day meeting of foreign ministers in Reykjavik, Iceland. But for some European member states, criticism of insufficient military budgets threatened to eclipse the Russian development and eastward expansion, which NATO General Secretary Lord Robertson (photo) described as "historic" and "revolutionary."

Europe out in the cold?

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell on Tuesday criticized European members for their shrinking military contribution to the alliance, which has provided security in the North Atlantic region since being founded in 1949.

Emphasizing the drastic shift in international security priorities in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks, Mr. Powell said that NATO’s challenges in the future "won’t always be located in Central Europe," and NATO has to have the ability to move to other places.

"We all need to have highly mobile, sustainable forces with modern combat capabilities," Mr. Powell warned, "forces that can get to the fight wherever it is and carry out a mission with efficiency and precision."

In order to accomplish that goal, he said, NATO members need to increase their military capacities and invest in state-of-the-art communications and navigation systems. Mr. Powell said that before NATO’s member states meet at a November summit in Prague, they should focus on five or six crucial areas on a list of 58 areas that members agreed needed improvement three years ago.

However, no specific proposals were provided by Mr. Powell or his European counterparts at the meeting. Instead, the defense ministries of NATO member nations will draft proposals for consideration at the Prague summit meeting later this year.

A growing divide

Washington’s criticism of NATO’s European members is based on the fact that the U.S. outlays an average of 3 percent of its gross domestic product for defense. In Europe, at least nine NATO members spend less than 2 percent of GDP on their militaries. Spain and Germany, meanwhile, trail with 1.2 percent and 1.4 percent respectively, according to the Associated Press.

And that divide is also manifested in the form of technology and equipment. The United States recently demonstrated success in its war against Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan using high-tech, laser-guided missiles. Germany, by comparison, was required to rent Anatov transport planes from the Ukraine because it did not have its own aircraft to do the job. (Plans by Airbus to build a similar military transport aircraft continue to be the subject of considerable political debate in Germany, despite authorization by parliament earlier this year.)

Cautious support

A number of European foreign ministers, including Germany’s Joschka Fischer, offered cautious support for Mr. Powell’s comments.

Mr. Fischer (photo) warned his European colleagues not to allow the United States to become a disproportionately powerful NATO partner. "The question is how do the Europeans overcome their weaknesses?" He said that Europeans must find ways to increase their significance inside the military alliance while at the same time expanding security and defense policies within Europe. And that is a problem that is baffling politicians in Europe, where many governments are grappling with budget deficits, high unemployment and economic stagnation.

"In the face of the economic situation, that will be anything but simple," Mr. Fischer conceded.

It will also be difficult for German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder to push for an increase in defense spending during an election year in which he faces a tough battle against the opposition candidate for chancellor, Bavarian Premier Edmund Stoiber.

Mr. Fischer’s concerns were echoed by the Spanish and British foreign ministers. "We have to increase our efforts,'' said Spain's Josep Pique, "but it is not very popular to say that." Drumming up popular support would be an uphill battle that would "require a lot of effort by European statesmen to persuade their public to increase military spending," offered Britain’s Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw.

Yet despite such implicit support for Mr. Powell’s criticisms, many in Europe are disquieted by NATO’s eastward trend. To some politicians, the U.S.’s overtures to Russia - an ally it is strongly relying on in its international war against terrorism – are coming too quickly.

On Monday, the U.S. reached a deal with Moscow on the reduction of nuclear warheads, and on Tuesday, it sought to offer Russia a voice in NATO decision-making.

Beggars under a bridge

"For many European Union NATO members, U.S. President George W. Bush’s (photo) full change of course with Russia is happening too fast," says Deutsche Welle’s Bernd Riegert, who covered the September 11 attacks in the U.S.

"The superpower and the former superpower are building a bridge that passes over the Europeans, who will be sitting like beggars under the bridge, some Germans in NATO circles are prophesizing," he says.

However, he notes, "The Europeans can complain about this development, but they aren’t totally innocent. For years they neglected to give the European pillars of the alliance more military weight." And that tendency, he said, needs to change.

As General Secretary Robertson put it: "NATO must change radically if it is to be effective." It must either "modernize or be marginalized."