KGRKJGETMRETU895U-589TY5MIGM5JGB5SDFESFREWTGR54TY
Server : Apache/2.4.62
System : FreeBSD fbsdweb2.web.rcn.net 14.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 14.1-RELEASE releng/14.1-n267679-10e31f0946d8 GENERIC amd64
User : www ( 80)
PHP Version : 8.3.8
Disable Function : NONE
Directory :  /domains/roger.dnai/97Book/

Upload File :
current_dir [ Writeable ] document_root [ Writeable ]

 

Current File : /domains/roger.dnai/97Book/PONCEL.HTM
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//SoftQuad//DTD HoTMetaL PRO 4.0::19971010::extensions to HTML 4.0//EN"
 "hmpro4.dtd">

<HTML>
  
  <HEAD>
    <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
    <META NAME="GENERATOR" 
    CONTENT="Mozilla/4.03 (Macintosh; U; 68K) [Netscape]">
    <TITLE> Jean-Pol Poncelet</TITLE>
  </HEAD>
  
  <BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" BGPROPERTIES="FIXED">
    <CENTER><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+3">New
    Forms of Military Cooperation</FONT></FONT></FONT></CENTER>
    <CENTER><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+3">In
    Europe: the Belgian Example</FONT></FONT></FONT></CENTER>
    <CENTER><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><FONT SIZE="+2">Belgian
    Minister of Defense Jean-Pol Poncelet</FONT></FONT></FONT> </CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Belgium has a long and
      deep-rooted tradition in military cooperation with other countries. My
      country's size and history as well as its geographical location have made
      such cooperation a necessity. I would like to begin by describing the
      different types of cooperation Belgian armed forces have developed with
      armed forces of other countries and then comment on some of the lessons
      learned from these experiences as well as draw some conclusions for the
      future. Because Belgium's participation in the Alliance and WEU is very
      much the same as that of the other member-states, I will focus my remarks
      on Belgium's bilateral and trilateral military endeavors.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">BENELUX COOPERATION</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">After World War II,
      cooperation was first initiated with the other two Benelux countries, the
      Netherlands and Luxembourg. Since that time, Benelux has always been a
      laboratory where cooperation in various fields could be tested before
      being extended to a greater number of states.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">As part of Benelux, the
      Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Belgium share basically the same ideas
      concerning security and the role and functions of the armed forces. One
      basic principle is that the armed forces of each Benelux country must keep
      their own specificities and may decide on some strategic options
      individually according to their own priorities. Belgium, for example, with
      the Luxemburg contingent integrated into the First Belgian Mechanical
      Division, joined the European Army Corps--the Eurocorps--while the
      Netherlands integrated with the German-Dutch Army Corps.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Another basic principle
      that the Benelux countries share is that no specialization of military
      tasks may take place. Specialization would compel each country to make
      harsh choices about who should do what and with what kind of equipment.
      And since all armed forces naturally seek to privilege those tasks
      involving high technology and highly skilled manpower that greatly benefit
      their country's economy, no country would wish to take on the
      less-capital-intensive tasks. Also, specialization would vary the degree
      of risk undertaken during the different types of military operations, and
      we believe that we must all share the burden equally and fairly. Finally,
      we agree that each government and parliament must have full sovereignty to
      decide about military matters--whether or not to participate in them and,
      if so, how. While we believe specialization would hinder rather than help
      military cooperation, a significant segment of the population still argues
      its case, believing mistakenly that it would produce budgetary savings.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Cooperative Ventures</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">My colleague Joris
      Voorhoeve, Defense Minister of the Netherlands, was recently invited by
      the Defense Committee of the Belgian parliament to explain the
      restructuring of the Dutch armed forces. In his talks he confirmed that
      the Netherlands shares the view that their armed forces must be prepared
      to execute both defense and security tasks, which implies the need for a
      great variety of equipment. But how can we effectively ensure our national
      sovereignty within the limitations of our budgetary means? The Benelux
      countries have chosen to tackle the issue pragmatically, and task sharing
      seems the most promising way to cooperate.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">As part of their joint
      efforts, the three Benelux countries' army, navy, and air force identified
      areas where they can complement each other. For instance, since the Dutch
      Air Force has only a few transport aircraft, Belgium can put its fleet of
      12 C-130 Hercules at the disposal of the Dutch army. In return, the Dutch
      Air Force can handle the air-refueling of Belgian fighter aircraft during
      missions and the Luxembourg army can protect the airfields. All Benelux
      country forces are also trying to take advantage of existing similarities
      in equipment to develop common technical and operational capacities and to
      promote training and operations in common. Under the so-called Admiral
      Benelux agreement of 1996, the Dutch and Belgian navies have been brought
      under an integrated command.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Successful Operations</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">How have our bilateral and
      trilateral cooperative efforts worked in actuality? From November 1994 to
      March 1995, a Belgian-Dutch Military Police Monitoring Unit took part in
      the U.N.'s &quot;Columbus Operation&quot; in Haiti. The armed forces of
      the three Benelux countries also took part in peacekeeping operations in
      the former Yugoslavia: Belgian Blue Helmets were present in Eastern
      Slavonia while other Belgian troops took part in IFOR-SFOR operations
      alongside Dutch and Luxemburg troops. This was a unique opportunity to
      test the interoperability of our armed forces. Belgian F-16 fighter
      aircraft joined the Dutch F-16 squadron in Villafranca, Italy, and
      provided air control and close air support to IFOR and SFOR. Belgian and
      Luxemburg troops also worked together in Bosnia-Herzegovina in a transport
      unit, in the BELUGA Group, jointly with Austrians and Greeks in the first
      multinational military unit ever integrated at such a low level.
      Additionally, a Dutch frigate under &quot;Admiral Benelux&quot; command
      was sent to the Persian Gulf as part of the Multinational Interception
      Force (MIF).</FONT></FONT> </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">NON-BENELUX MILITARY
    PARTNERSHIPS</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Belgian armed forces have
      also been involved in military operations without their Benelux partners.
      Belgian paratroopers took part in rescue operations in Congo-Brazzaville
      and a Belgian medical team participated in the Alba mission in Albania.
      The first of these operations was the consequence of the historical links
      between Belgium and Central Africa; the second was above all a political
      gesture of European solidarity. These missions are just two examples of
      the need for countries to be able to act autonomously.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">PROPOSALS FOR THE
    FUTURE</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Like other bilateral,
      trilateral, and multilateral military cooperation efforts developing in
      Europe, the cooperative Benelux military operations are somehow only
      substitutes for credible European military cooperation within the
      framework of WEU. I consider such efforts as only second-best solutions
      because they run the risk of renationalizing security and defense policies
      in Europe. Joint military endeavors are undoubtedly useful and can be
      successful, but they should not remain the only approach.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">From our own experience,
      we see the need for every country to preserve its capacity to act
      autonomously when confronted with crisis situations and to man its
      operational headquarters appropriately and within its means. Countries the
      size of Belgium will need to maintain more operational headquarters than
      larger countries, resulting in higher personnel and equipment expenses
      than larger countries incur. Smaller armed forces do not realize the
      savings that large-scale operations do, but still must provide all
      essential staff functions and departments.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">I also want to stress the
      need for better sharing of Alliance capacities. In a period when the sense
      of danger and imminent threat is perceived by the population as greatly
      lessened, military expenses are rather unpopular. So the means and
      capacities of the Alliance should be used most effectively. Why, for
      example, when facing a crisis, couldn't all member-states have access to
      Alliance intelligence or logistic support? This is the underlying
      philosophy of the CJTF concept, and it seems we should be able to find a
      way to extend it to individual countries or groups of countries.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">I would also like to
      express my concern about the organizing of military coordination in crisis
      situations when no nation can naturally take the lead. During the crisis
      in Za&iuml;re, the Belgian Chief of Defense organized a successful
      coordination meeting between the different operational authorities of the
      countries providing ground troops. This meeting was the first of its kind.
      I would like to suggest that for the future we draw up a list of people
      within each Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Defense who can be contacted
      in a crisis situation to quickly set up steering committees, since
      countries like Belgium do not have military attach&eacute;s everywhere.
      Another suggestion would be that when the need for an evacuation operation
      arises, a joint committee of the countries taking part in the operation
      could meet as soon as possible under the framework of NATO.</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    <CENTER>
    
    <H4><B><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">THE NEED FOR
    APPROPRIATE MULTILATERAL COOPERATION</FONT></FONT></B></H4></CENTER>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">During my relatively short
      tenure as Belgium's Minister of Defense, I have experienced a new
      political sensitivity voiced by both the population and parliament. As
      Minister of Defense, I must govern in accordance with their wishes, and
      that means drastically limiting military expenses but at the same time
      keeping our armed forces ready to take part in all kinds of peacekeeping
      operations--sometimes in different places at the same time--and being
      prepared to conduct Article 5 missions. For countries the size of Belgium,
      this represents an enormous challenge.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">Multilateral cooperation
      is the only solution. But cooperation implies solidarity, transparency,
      and respect for each country's specificities, and smaller countries face
      constraints that are a result of their size. However, no one should
      disregard the contributions that small countries can make. Navies need
      towboats as much as aircraft carriers. In addition, small size can be an
      asset in preventive diplomacy, since small countries are often perceived
      as neutral, not hegemonistic.</FONT></FONT> </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000">To conclude, I quote the
      famous French fabulist Jean de la Fontaine in his story about the lion and
      the rat: &quot;<I>On a souvent besoin d'un plus petit que soi</I>&quot;
      or &quot;One is often in need of someone smaller than oneself.&quot;</FONT></FONT>
    </P>
    
    <P><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><A HREF="PONCEL.HTM">Go
        to top of Page</A></FONT></FONT> <BR><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><A HREF="workshop97.htm">Return
        to Prague '97</A></FONT></FONT> <BR><FONT FACE="Palatino"><FONT COLOR="#000000"><A HREF="../index.html">Return
        to Home Page</A></FONT></FONT>   </P>
  </BODY>
</HTML>

Anon7 - 2021