Concern growing over possible cost of NATO expansion

Date: 11/12/1997

By Mark Turner

POLISH, Czech and Hungarian membership of NATO by early 1999 will move one step closer next week when all 16 of the alliance's foreign ministers are expected to sign new accession protocols.

But the organisation's democratic watchdog, the North Atlantic Assembly, is expressing increasing concern at the lack of transparency in the debate over the costs of enlargement. “At this rate, national parliaments will have to ratify the new treaty with almost no discussion of the issues,” said one NAA spokesman.

While supporting NATO enlargement in principle, the assembly is particularly intrigued by the enormous downgrading of previous US cost estimates by the NATO secretariat in a recent report.

Earlier this year, the Pentagon suggested that the alliance would need an extra 10 billion ecu over the next decade to pay for new members. NATO now claims that the cost will be closer to 1 billion ecu: almost ten times less.

An alliance spokesman said the difference could be explained by the fact that “the Pentagon assumed an enlargement to four or five countries and underestimated the readiness of eastern infrastructure for NATO use”.

That, claims the NAA, appears rather suspect given that the US has kept extremely close tabs on the eastern bloc's capabilities for years.

Assembly officials suggest that the lower estimate may have more to do with American reluctance to enter a damaging budgetary battle with its European allies, and preparations for future military operations in Bosnia.

Although NATO members will not decide whether to leave troops in the country beyond the current mid-1998 cut-off point until next year, it is already fairly certain that some kind of 'dissuasion force' (D-FOR) will be maintained.

But the NAA is not convinced that these considerations justify the pall of secrecy surrounding enlargement. It is therefore calling for NATO to make its cost study public in its entirety, including specific details on where and how the money will be spent.

“Why can't the alliance release a public study on this?” said a spokesman. “What are these projects that we are expected to pay for?”

But insiders fear that little more information will be released in the short term, given reluctance among both existing NATO commanders and the new members to lay their cards on the table.

Whichever way the alliance chooses to play it, it now seems inevitable that the three countries invited to join NATO in Madrid this summer will be members in time for the organisation's 50th birthday celebrations in 1999, when Slovenia and Romania are also likely to be invited into its ranks.

The big question now is whether the alliance will also be willing to accept the Baltic states - a move still opposed in Washington. “I expect some serious transatlantic battles on this,” said an NAA spokesman.