Introduction

The module is organized as follows:

Review of early strategies

The 1991 Strategic Concept
The 1999 Strategic Concept
The New Strategic Concept
Comprehension check
Final page

Review of early strategies

Changes which have been introduced into NATOs strategy since the early years have reflected
major developments and trends in international affairs that have influenced security.

Classified Strategies

NATOs strategic concept was first published in 1991. Until then, strategic planning had
been enshrined in classified documents issued by NATOs Military Committee and
distributed only to authorized national and international personnel.

These documents set out the agreed policy of allied countries for dealing with a military
threat and if necessary responding to it. They were addressed primarily to the military
authorities in member countries rather than the political leadership or the general public.
The overall strategy reflected the view of Alliance member countries, that, irrespective of
the actual intentions of the Soviet Union, its ideology, political behavior and military
capacity represented a potential threat to the West that necessitated a strong defense and
credible deterrent capability.

Although members of a defensive alliance, NATO countries agreed initially to base their
deterrence on a policy known as massive retaliation. Under this policy, any form of
aggression against a member or members of the Alliance would be met more or less
automatically by largescale military retaliation drawing on all the resources available to
the Alliance including nuclear weapons.

NATO Strategy in 1967

In December 1967, the first Ministerial meeting of the Council took place in the Brussels
headquarters.

North Atlantic Council Meeting at the

level of Foreign Ministers Brussels,
Belgium 13 December 1967.

The North Atlantic Council (NAC)
approves the Harmel Report.
In 1967, the North Atlantic Council also approved the
Harmel Report on the Future Tasks of the Alliance. Pierre
Harmel, then the Belgian Foreign Minister, played a leading
role in initiating and carrying out the analysis. This
document, which was to influence NATO policies greatly
over subsequent years, recommended that NATOs future
military posture should couple defense with detente. In
other words, efforts to maintain adequate defense
capabilities should be maintained in parallel with efforts to
reduce tensions and establish a better basis for relations
with the Soviet Union and its Eastern European allies.
Review the Harmel report by clicking the icon below.

The Harmel Report

The Burdens of Defense British Harriers involved in the 1982

ArgentinaUnited Kingdom Falklands
The question of the equitable distribution of the economic Conflict.
burden of defense, and of the roles, risks and
responsibilities of the member nations has long been a
matter of debate between the member countries of the
Alliance. It has been a major concern to the United States
in particular, whose manpower and technology have
continued to support European security. The European
member nations have recognized the need for adjustments
while pointing out that the imbalance is less severe than it
would appear. In terms of forces deployed in Europe, for
example, the great majority have been provided by
European member countries.
NATOs strategy of flexible response remained in place from 1967 to the end of the Cold
War. During that period, numerous regional conflicts dominated international affairs,
including the ArabIsraeli war of 1973, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, and the
ArgentinaUnited Kingdom Falklands Conflict of 1982. NATO nations became engaged
bilaterally as their interests became challenged, their assets were needed, or their
negotiating powers were solicited. However the threat of largescale or global military
conflict had receded and with it the view of the world that had influenced security and
defense policies for forty years. Not surprisingly, in the dying years of the Cold War period,
defense expenditures were therefore radically cut back and military structures underwent
major changes.

Political Issues

During the period in which NATO policy was based on the strategy of flexible response.
EastWest tensions and disagreements continued. Detente was seen as the key to
overcoming these difficulties. US President Nixon and his Secretary of State Kissinger also
regarded detente combined with progress in bringing about arms control agreements as a
means of constraining the Soviet Union.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, Alliance members took a number of bilateral initiatives
designed to improve EastWest relations. The United States began talks with the USSR on
limitations on strategic arms. The Federal Republic of Germany also engaged in
negotiations with the USSR, Poland and the German Democratic Republic and entered into
a series of treaties, each with the goal of improving relations with its closest neighbors.

Arms control issues played a prominent part in the work of the alliance during the 1970s
and 1980s. However by the end of 1983, the Soviet Union had walked away from three
main negotiating opportunities dealing with conventional forces, intermediaterange
nuclear forces and longer range strategic nuclear forces. In 1979, in the face of the
deployment by the Soviet Union of new intermediaterange nuclear missiles, in particular
the SS20, NATO took the decision to deploy its own ground launched cruise missiles
 (GLCM) and Pershing missiles in Europe and at the same time to enter into negotiations
with the Soviet Union which would make the deployments unnecessary. Known as the
doubletrack decision, this was to lead initially to the beginning of NATO deployments in
late 1983, and ultimately, in 1987, to the successful negotiation of the Intermediaterange
Nuclear Force (INF) Treaty, eliminating US and Soviet landbased INF missiles on a global
basis. In the context of longer range strategic nuclear weapons, the United States sought
resumption of talks with the Soviet Union without preconditions whenever the Soviet Union
wished. However formal negotiations on INF and strategic weapons did not resume until
1985.

The 1991 Strategic Concept

The magnitude of the governmental changes that took place at a frenetic pace in Central and
Eastern Europe in the late 1980s, and their implications, gave rise to huge expectations and opened
up prospects for conducting international relations between countries which had long been
adversaries on a completely different basis.

In 1990, NATO Heads of State and Government came together at a Summit Meeting in London to
discuss how best to react to these changes. Their conclusions were published in the London
Declaration, which outlined proposals for developing cooperation with the countries of Central and
Eastern Europe across a wide spectrum of political and military activity, including the establishment
of regular diplomatic liaison between those countries and NATO. Emphasizing that NATO remained, as
it always had been, a defensive Alliance, they announced measures to transform the Organization to
reflect the new environment and extended the hand of friendship to their former adversaries. This
was the start of a process of continuing change and adaptation of Alliance policies and structures. A
year later, the enormity of these changes was reflected in the unprecedented publication in 1991 of
NATOs new strategic concept.

The London Declaration of 1990 is a Declaration on a transformed North Atlantic Alliance issued by
the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council. At
their meeting in London in July 1990, NATOs Heads of State and Government agreed on the need to
transform the Atlantic Alliance to reflect the new, more promising, era in Europe.

The London Declaration

Since 1991 NATO strategy has been based on a much broader concept involving both political and
military elements and explicitly including wideranging cooperation with nonNATO countries.
Breaking with the past, NATO also decided to publish a detailed description of the new strategy in a
document entitled The Alliances Strategic Concept, first published in 1991. The context in
which the evolution of strategy has taken place in the years since the end of the Cold War,
symbolized by the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989, is described in the sections below.

NATOs transformation during the past decade has been characterized by a series of visionary
initiatives. These include launching the Partnership for Peace, taking on a crisis management role in
the Balkans, developing special relations with Russia and Ukraine and formulating the Membership
Action Plan, all of which respond to the new security challenges and opportunities of the postCold
War environment. Much of this is reflected in the Alliances strategic concept, a public document
that provides an authoritative statement of the Alliances objectives as well as guidance on the
political and military means to be used in achieving them.

Publication of NATOs strategic concept in 1991 marked a clear break with the past. Earlier
classified formulations of NATO strategy envisaged largescale operations for territorial defense. In
the mid1950s, the strategy of socalled massive retaliation emphasized deterrence based on
the threat that NATO would respond to aggression against any of its members by every means at
its disposal, specifically including nuclear weapons. In 1967, after wideranging discussions within
the Alliance, the strategy of massive retaliation was replaced by one of socalled flexible
response, aimed at creating uncertainty in the mind of an aggressor as to NATOs response in
the case of a threat to the sovereignty or independence of any member country.

Although flexible response remained NATOs strategy until the end of the Cold War, it was clear
that it was becoming anachronistic as first Communism, then the Warsaw Pact and finally the
Soviet Union itself disintegrated. At the London Summit of June 1990, Alliance leaders declared
that: This Alliance must and will adapt and set about refocusing its priorities to ensure that it was
equipped to meet new security challenges.

The 1991 strategic concept determined that: The risks to Allied security that remain are multi
faceted in nature and multidirectional, which makes them hard to predict and assess. It therefore
defined NATOs fundamental security tasks as acting as a foundation of stability in the EuroAtlantic
area; serving as a forum for consultation on security issues; deterring and defending against any
threat of aggression against any NATO member state as provided for in Articles 5 and 6 of the
Washington Treaty; and preserving the strategic balance in Europe.

The Alliances Strategic Concept of 1991

The 1999 Strategic Concept

In 1999, the year of NATOs 50th anniversary, Allied leaders adopted a new Strategic Concept that
committed members to common defence and peace and stability of the wider EuroAtlantic area. It
was based on a broad definition of security which recognized the importance of political, economic,
social and environmental factors in addition to the defence dimension. It identified the new risks
that had emerged since the end of the Cold War, which included terrorism, ethnic conflict, human
rights abuses, political instability, economic fragility and the spread of nuclear, biological and
chemical weapons and their means of delivery.

Purpose and Tasks of the Alliance New security challenges and risks

The 1999 Strategic Concept reaffirms NATOs
essential and enduring purpose, set out in the
Washington Treaty, that is to safeguard the
freedom and security of all its members by
political and military means. To achieve this
end, the Alliance identified the following
fundamental security tasks:
To provide a stable EuroAtlantic
security environment, acting in the
fields of crisis management and
partnership.
To serve as an essential transatlantic
forum for Allied consultation.
To deter and defend against any threat
of aggression to any NATO member
state.
The Alliances Strategic Concept provides a
common view of the strategic environment and
a joint assessment of foreseeable security
challenges and risks. The Strategic Concept
published in 1999 concluded that, in general
terms, the strategic environment was continuing
to change positively and that the Alliance,
among others, had played an essential part in
strengthening EuroAtlantic security since the
end of the Cold War. However, although the
threat of general war in Europe had virtually
disappeared, Alliance members and other
countries in the EuroAtlantic region faced other
risks and uncertainties, including ethnic conflict,
the abuse of human rights, political instability
and economic fragility. In addition, the spread of
nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and
their means of delivery was a matter of serious
concern, and the spread of technology could
result in sophisticated military capabilities being
more easily available to potential adversaries.

Moreover, in envisaging the global security context and security challenges and risks that the
Alliance needed to be prepared to address in the future, the 1999 Strategic Concept referred to
acts of terrorism and sabotage as potential factors. Within two and a half years, in the wake of the
11 September 2001 attacks on the United States, the emergence of new threats such as terrorism
had assumed unprecedented importance and began to exercise an influence on Allied policy
unforeseen at the time of the publication of the 1999 Strategic Concept.

A broad approach to Security

A distinguishing feature of the Alliances postCold War strategy reflected in both the 1991 and 1999
documents is its commitment to a broad approach to security, encompassing complementary political
and military means and emphasizing cooperation with other states. This comprehensive approach
comprises the following essential elements:

The final part of the 1999 Strategic Concept establishes principles and missions for the Alliances
forces and is thus the translation of its political purpose and tasks into guidelines for NATO and
national military authorities to develop into detailed concepts and plans. It calls for the continued
development of the military capabilities needed for the full range of Alliance missions, from
collective defense to peacesupport and other crisisresponse operations. These include the ability
to engage opposing forces effectively, deployability and mobility, survivability of forces and
infrastructure, sustainability and interoperability.

Flexibility and the ability to generate forces to conduct the full range of Alliance missions is also
highlighted, as is the need to operate in multinational and joint formations. Nuclear weapons
continue to play a key role in preserving peace and preventing coercion and war, even though the
Strategic Concept confirms that circumstances in which they might be used are extremely remote.

The New Strategic Concept

The 9/11 terrorist attacks against the United States brought the threat of terrorism and weapons of
mass destruction to the fore. NATO needed to protect its populations both at home and abroad. It
therefore underwent major internal reforms to adapt military structures and capabilities to equip
members for new tasks.

NATO also proceeded to deepen and extend its partnerships and, essentially, accelerate its
transformation to develop new political relationships and stronger operational capabilities to
respond to an increasingly global and more challenging world.

These radical changes need to be reflected in NATOs strategic documents.

Comprehensive Political
Guidance

A first step in that direction was taken in November 2006 when NATO leaders endorsed the
Comprehensive Political Guidance. This is a major policy document that sets out the framework
and priorities for all Alliance capability issues, planning disciplines and intelligence for the next 10
to 15 years. It analyses the probable future security environment and acknowledges the possibility
of unpredictable events. Against that analysis, it sets out the kinds of operations the Alliance must
be able to perform in light of the Alliances Strategic Concept and the kinds of capabilities the
Alliance will need.

The Strasbourg Kehl Summit

When members of a the Alliance convened in Strasbourg, France and Kehl, Germany for the
60th Anniversary of NATO it was decade since they last agreed upon a strategic vision for the
Alliance. This was pivotal for shaping the future of the organization. At the Summit, Nations
discussed on NATOs presence and capabilities in Afghanistan, the possibility of future enlargement
starting with the status of potential member states Georgia and the Ukraine and how NATO
may contribute to the global energy crisis or develop cyber security programs. There was also
another, much more critical discussion for the future of the Alliance: developing NATOs new
Strategic Concept. In doing so, NATO members answered the question many had been asking,
what is NATOs purpose and role in the 21st Century?

Strasbourg / Kehl Summit Declaration

The Requirement for a New Strategic Concept

NATO formally launched the process leading to the New Strategic Concept of the Alliance at
a Major Security Conference in Brussels. The Conference taking place under the authority of
the NATO Secretary General, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer also marked the beginning of a dialogue with
the wider public.

The event, held at the Palais dEgmont in Brussels on the 7 th July 2009, was attended by the NATO
Secretary General designate, Mr. Anders Fogh Rasmussen, and brought together a broad range of
representatives from Allied and Partner governments, NATO structures, international organizations,
civil society, including parliaments, the corporate sector, NGOs, think tanks, academia and the
media.

The aim of this Secretary Generals conference on July 7 th was to formally launch the
process leading to the New Strategic Concept and begin a dialogue between NATO and a wide
range of experts from the strategic community as well as the broader public. The conference
examined how the Alliance relates to the rest of the world, as part of a wider network of security
actors. It also looked at NATOs role in addressing new threats and challenges.

Brussels Conference 7 July 2009

The Lisbon Summit

The Lisbon Summit concluded on 20 November with decisions that will mean profound changes for
the way NATO does business, making the Alliance more effective, more efficient and more engaged
with the wider world.

During the twoday meeting, Allies decided to develop new capabilities necessary to defend
against modern threats such as ballistic missile and cyber attacks. They made a fresh start in
relations with Russia, with the aim of building a true strategic partnership and decided to reach
out to partners around the globe. Allies also agreed to streamline the Alliances military
command structure and to make NATO more efficient, so that taxpayers get maximum security
for the money they invest in defense. Finally, they launched a process by which Afghan security
forces will increasingly take the lead for security operations across the country.

During the Summit, NATO leaders adopted a New Strategic Concept that will serve as the
Alliances roadmap for the next ten years, reconfirming the commitment to defend one another
against attack as the cornerstone of EuroAtlantic security. Allies agreed that promotion of
EuroAtlantic security is best assured through a wide network of partner relationships with
countries and organizations around the globe, such as the United Nations and the European Union,
and that they will be open to consultation with any partner country on security issues of common
concern. NATO leaders reiterated their commitment to ensure that the EuroAtlantic Alliance has the
full range of capabilities necessary to deter and defend against any threat to the safety and security
of the populations of member countries.

The Lisbon Declaration New Strategic Concept

To this end, they decided to develop the capability to defend European territory and
populations against missile attack as a core element of collective defense and to extend an
offer to Russia to cooperate with NATO in this regard. Together with Russia, NATO Allies
agreed at the NATORussia Council Summit meeting to a joint review of 21 st century
security threats that all countries face in common in a document that will serve as a foundation
for further cooperation.

Allies also agreed with Russia to jointly expand support for Afghanistan, including by
broadening transit arrangements, extending training of counter narcotics officials and providing
equipment to Afghan security forces.

Finally, the 28 NATO Allies were joined during the Summit by the 20 partners who are
contributing forces to the mission in Afghanistan, as well as representatives of the United Nations,
the World Bank and the European Union, and Afghan President Hamid Karzai. Together, they
launched the process by which Afghan security forces will increasingly take the lead for security
operations across the country, starting early 2011.

The NATO Secretary General also signed an agreement with President Karzai on a longterm
partnership between the Alliance and Afghanistan that will endure beyond the combat mission.
With this partnership, NATO will stay as long as necessary to support Afghanistan until it can no
longer become a safe haven for terrorism. With the new Strategic Concept and the decisions taken
in Lisbon, NATO has adopted an action plan which sets out concrete steps it will take in order to
put in place a renewed EuroAtlantic Alliance, ready to meet the threats of the 21 stcentury.