New clout for NATO’s civil arm

Date: 09/10/1997

By Mark Turner

THIS week's annual North Atlantic Assembly in Bucharest could attract more than its usual share of attention.

“This meeting takes on a particular significance at the moment because NATO's decision to enlarge still needs to be ratified in national parliaments,” explained Simon Lunn, secretary-general of NATO's self-appointed democratic arm.

“What happens in this year's assembly will give a pretty good indication of parliamentary feeling. NATO governments will be paying close attention to the debate.”

Such scrutiny would be a welcome ray of light for the body that normally finds it difficult to attract its bigger cousin's attention.

Set up in the 1950s to give the military alliance some level of civil supervision, the assembly consists of back-bench - although often influential - parliamentarians from all of the organisation's member states. But it remains purely a forum for discussion, with no formal power over NATO's actions.

“We are not a policy-making body; we are policy-reflecting and information gathering,” said Lunn.

But since NATO leaders invited the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland to join the organisation in Madrid this summer, it has become increasingly apparent that national parliaments will not rubber-stamp the decision unquestioningly. Without their approval, enlargement will simply not go ahead.

Although ratification should go fairly smoothly in Europe, congressional disquiet in the United States over costs is proving a serious concern.

Four senators (all Republican), including NAA President William Roth, and 17 representatives (also mostly Republican) will attend the assembly, alongside well over 200 other delegates from the 16 NATO member and associated countries.

Lunn is keen to show them that the relatively small price of expansion is well worth the results. “Enlargement costs should be totally manageable and should not be allowed to divert the normal course of ratification,” he said.

The venue for this week's meeting is also symbolic, as Romania is still a fervent applicant to the alliance and was not written off as a viable contender for an invitation this summer until the last minute.

As the first non-western host of the annual assembly, the country is likely to use the opportunity to push its candidature at every juncture. “The location is an indication of just how far we have come in integrating eastern Europe into western structures,” said Lunn.

The enlargement question, however, is only one debate amongst many on the parliamentarians' agenda.

Discussions will range from security in the Balkans and the reform of NATO command structures to information warfare and the so-called 'millennium bomb' - the potential disaster facing computer systems which use two-digit dates in the year 2000.

Perhaps most interesting will be the debate over whether SFOR (the international stabilisation force in Bosnia) should be given a new mandate beyond mid-1998.

Despite increasing pressure from the Washington administration and the office of the high representative in Bosnia, the US Congress is reluctant to commit American troops past their original pull-out date.

If the US abandons Bosnia, the rest of the world will follow. Many fear that could leave the door wide open to a return of anarchy and a resumption of violence.

As to reform of NATO structures, a recent meeting of defence ministers in Maastricht increased the likelihood of Spain joining the military alliance fully by the end of the year, and Greece and Turkey solving their problems in the Aegean.

But France is almost certain not to become a full NATO member for some time to come, as squabbles continue with Washington over who heads the southern command in Naples.

Although the NAA resolutions on both subjects may have little direct effect, Lunn is confident that they will not fall on deaf ears. “For a while at least, we enjoy a little bit of leverage,” he declared.