RSS

Divides within NATO and the deteriorating rel ations between NATO and Russia were at the center of Deutsche Welle's monthly transatlantic talkshow "Capital Cities," moderated by Rüdiger Lentz and Melinda Crane. Mr. Lentz is President USA of the Atlantic Initiative.

Participants in Washington:

• Kurt Volker, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, and
• Julianne Smith, Director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).

and in Berlin:

• Dieter Farwick, a former Bundeswehr general and now editor-in-chief of World Security Network, and
• Jan Techau, Director of the Oppenheim Center at the German Council of Foreign Relations.

Question: Will the upcoming NATO summit in Bucharest it show unity or will it show a split over the inequality of burden-sharing and risk-sharing?

KURT VOLKER: Every ally is making contributions. Yet there is a great disparity in the roles that different allies have taken on, that has created some tension within NATO. We need to give the operational command on the ground as much flexibility as possible.

Let's be more specific: Is it also about the German contribution, which has been criticized by the Canadians, by the British and, especially, by the Americans for not being enough.

KURT VOLKER: It's true that other nations are taking on combat roles in the South that are very difficult and Germany has said that it's not willing [...]. That's the kind of thing that ought to be loosened up a little bit in our view, so we have more political solidarity among all the allies shouldering the burden and more operational flexibility on the ground.

What about solidarity within the Alliance. Kissinger just recently said there cannot be a NATO Alliance "à la carte." What does that mean?

JULIANNE SMITH: We don't want member states to be cherry-picking what parts of the mission they are comfortable with and putting constraints and limits on how their resources will be used.

Is Germany's Chancellor ready to go along with NATO Gen. Secretary Jaap De Hoop Scheffer's wish that all geographical descriptions are removed or is she going tto go head-to-head against NATO and US leadership on this?

JAN TECHAU: I don't think that Angela Merkel is ready to move her position, that she has made very clear again and again But I don't see that this has anything to do with foreign policy. Unfortunately! I wish it was a foreign policy debate in this country which I think we are in dire need of. The issue now is not anymore to convince the Germans that they should do more, the issue is now how can we actually build bridges for the German political leadership that they can get out of their domestic policy quagmire and paralysis which I think is a far trickier issue.

Chancellor Merkel says Bucharest shouldn't be focusing so much on members and geographical limitations as on coordination between the military and civil side. Is that a part of what has been the problem in Afghanistan?

DIETER FARWICK: Troops need to be coordinated and [...] we need more troops. What I perceive in Europe and especially in Germany, our political leaders do not fight for public support. They need to develop more positive narratives about Afghanistan and [...] tell the public what is at stake in Afghanistan. If NATO is going to loose, we all would loose credibility and reliability.

We just have been talking about NATO on the ground but we haven't been talking about the EU which doesn't play a major role in Afghanistan. Should they also try to step in?

JULIANNE SMITH: Absolutely. I also think that we need to look at the reconstruction and stabilization side of the equation. [...] And in my mind, for an institution that heralds itself as the world leader in soft power, this is an opportunity for the EU to play a greater role.

There is the famous phrase that we have heard here from German politicians "defending Germany at the Hindukush." But how much public support is there for that perception?

JAN TECHAU: [...] The Germans are not ready to actually send more troops to Afghanistan, I think there is an 80% ratio in the population that is against this. And we have a grand coalition which increases this dilemma because the two partners in this coalition are not natural allies but natural enemies and they are waiting for the glitch to happen on the other side so that they can play the peace card again.

Let's come back to NATO as an organization. Throughout the cold war, NATO was admired as an organization and about the clout it had in international politics. But now, many people think it is fading away, it is not as important as it was. How do you explain that?

KURT VOLKER: Today's threats are [...] harder for people to perceive - whether it's terrorism, proliferation, failed states, instability.[...] When an organization like the Taliban or Al Qaeda takes over a country like Afghanistan, it impacts our security in very direct ways in Europe and in the US. But I don't think that's perceived as well publicly.

But it still seems true that NATO is very attractive for former states of the Soviet Union and in Eastern Europe. There are many knocking on the door. Will enlargement be a hot topic at the upcoming summit?

JULIANNE SMITH: There are deep divides inside the Alliance about all of the candidate countries right now. I think everyone recognizes the importance of continuing enlargement and that it is a very valuable tool in bringing these countries into Western institutions and folding them in through all sorts of democracy developments and all the rest. But that said, I think there are also some members of the Alliance that feel that NATO has some homework to do right now, that it does have to get to the heart of the questions that could be brought up: Why do we have this Alliance and what will its future role and missions look like?

What about Russia? Should it become a part of the Alliance? Angela Merkel has said that she is definitely opposed to expanding the organization and to take in any country that has internal conflict issues.

DIETER FARWICK: She is right. I think Russia cannot be part of our club because NATO is a club of common values and common goals and objectives and Russia today is more a dictatorship than any kind of democracy.

What about the prospect of a possible NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia?

DIETER FARWICK: I am very reluctant to take them in too early because it brings more problems than solutions.

For the first time there will be a NATO-Russian meeting on the sidelines in Bucharest. What do we have to expect from that?

KURT VOLKER: I think it is interesting that President Putin has indicated that he would come to a NATO summit meeting. [...] We want to work together with Russia, we have made that clear in a number of areas including on missile defense.

Rüdiger Lentz is head of the Deutsche Welle studio in Washington, DC and President USA of the Atlantic Initiative.

The Atlantic Community editorial team shortened the transcript of the Deutsche Welle talkshow "Capital Cities."

Related materials from the Atlantic Community:

• Wess Mitchell: NATO's Unhappy Warriors
• Nikolas Kirril Gvosdev: Rapid Reaction: Moving NATO forward
• Marek Swierczynski: NATO at a crossroad
• Atlantic Memo 1: Afghanistan: How the EU Could do More