Search

Begin New Search Journal Connections Publication Year within 25 Years

171. The Institutionalization of Security Risk Assessment

Author:
Hari Bucur-Marcu
Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Connections
Institution:
Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes
Abstract:
When discussing the institutionalization of security risk assessment, the first reference that comes to mind is the NATO initiative that bears most directly on the subject, the Partnership Action Plan for Defense Institution Building (PAP-DIB). In this document, the fourth objective calls for the development of “effective and transparent arrangements and procedures to assess security risks and national defense requirements.” A reader of this objective would recognize that the phrase “arrangements and procedures” stands for the broader category of “institutions,” and that the requirements for such institutions are effectiveness and transparency, for both the process of security risk assessment and the process of defining defense requirements. This article will discuss the significance of these requirements for the creation of institutions to assess security risks.

172. Office of Security Sector Reform (OSSR): Joint Force Command Naples (JFCN)

Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Connections
Institution:
Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes
Abstract:
The Office of Security Sector Reform was established in the Joint Force Command Naples in March 2006, and is staffed by a mixture of military and civilian staff. This article explains the role of the Office and how it operates. Security Sector Reform (SSR) in the Western Balkans is now a major line of operation for the Joint Force Command Naples, a NATO operational headquarters. The Office of Security Sector Reform is focused geographically on the three Membership Action Plan countries (Albania, Croatia, and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) in the region and the three new Partnership for Peace countries (Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, and Serbia).
Political Geography:
Bosnia, Herzegovina, Yugoslavia, Serbia, Macedonia, Albania, Croatia, and Montenegro

173. Complete Issue

Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Connections
Institution:
Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes
Abstract:
No abstract is available.

174. PfP, EAPC, and the PfP Consortium: Key Elements of the Euro-Atlantic Security Community

Author:
Jean-Jacques de Dardel
Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Connections
Institution:
Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes
Abstract:
To many in the wider public, the Partnership for Peace, or PfP, is still more reminiscent of comic strip onomatopoeia than of a serious institution. Yet for anyone accustomed to military and international abbreviations, those three letters and their French equivalent, PPP, are worthy of an AAA rating. Since its inception about fifteen years ago, the Partnership for Peace has developed into a genuine success story, both in the quality and the quantity of its achievements. Although the necessities imposed by the sudden reshaping of the heretofore bipolar world with the end of the Cold War no doubt gave the new partnership a strong head start, it does seem that it quickly not only met all expectations, but even surpassed them. Indeed, the Partnership was widely seen, at first, as a transitional arrangement meant to enable a reorientation of many national security policies to allow nations time to adjust to the prerequisites of NATO membership. Yet the far-reaching concept of the Partnership for Peace, its à la carte principles, and its functional workings have not only allowed it to offer more than a mere stepping stone towards membership in the Atlantic Alliance, they have also ensured that the wider Partnership developed a life and a purpose of its own. In addition, some of its offshoots, such as the Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes, thrived on the spirit of the Partnership in a groundbreaking manner. Why all of this was able to happen is the first question to which we should turn our attention.

175. The PfP Consortium "Community of Experts" Approach to International Security Cooperation

Author:
Walter L. Christman
Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Connections
Institution:
Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes
Abstract:
The Partnership for Peace (PfP) Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes epitomizes a fundamental truth: “Long-term security and stability requires more than the transformation of our military forces in terms of new hardware. It also requires a mental transformation.” This assessment of the Consortium was provided by NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer in his opening speech at its tenth anniversary celebration in Brussels on 18 June 2008, where he issued a call to reflect, take stock of what the Consortium had achieved, and look ahead. Citing it as a model for the future as NATO enlarges its concept of “Partnership,” the Secretary-General situated the Consortium in the context of three phases of the Alliance's own evolution. First was the Cold War, when NATO concentrated on territorial defense and had no formal relations with countries outside the Alliance. The end of the Cold War afforded the opportunity to build an undivided Europe and required an “open community” approach. In this second phase, the Partnership for Peace became NATO's standard “for successful military cooperation between NATO and non-NATO countries, between big and small countries, and between countries with different geographical regions and with different security traditions.” De Hoop Scheffer added that, “PfP not only brought them together—it also brought out the best in them.”
Political Geography:
Europe

176. NATO and the South Caucasus: Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia on Different Tracks

Author:
Martin Malek
Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Connections
Institution:
Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes
Abstract:
In 2002, NATO Secretary-General Lord George Robertson stated that, “for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the Caucasus is of no special relevance.” Up until now, this attitude has not changed fundamentally, even though the region obviously attracts the Alliance's attention more than it did in the 1990s. NATO's stance toward the South Caucasus has always provoked much more and stronger reactions in Russia than in the political, media, and public realms of the Alliance's member states.
Political Geography:
Russia, North Atlantic, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia

177. The Challenges of Being Ten: Reflections on the Uniqueness of the PfP Consortium

Author:
Sean Costigan, Ernst Felberbauer, and Peter Foot
Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Connections
Institution:
Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes
Abstract:
The PfP Consortium is “unique” in the security studies field. But might that uniqueness, embodied in the institution's creation in 1998—the fiftieth anniversary year of NATO—explain its struggles to see a future for itself as NATO turns sixty?

178. The PfP Consortium as a Change Management and Integration Tool: Ten Years of Experience

Author:
Velizar Shalamanov
Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Connections
Institution:
Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes
Abstract:
The PfP Consortium was born in 1999 at NATO's Fiftieth Anniversary at the Washington Summit, although the idea of the Consortium was first tested in 1998 at ISF in Zurich. Bulgaria had the privilege of hosting the Second PfP Consortium Annual Conference in Sofia—the first gathering dedicated to the new initiative to define the roadmap for the future “troika council” that had been established to provide continuity between the annual conferences.
Political Geography:
Washington, Bulgaria, and Zurich

179. Whence and Whither the PfP Consortium?

Author:
Frederic Labarre
Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Connections
Institution:
Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes
Abstract:
The PfP Consortium is already a full ten years old. The time has come to look back on the road it has traveled, and to anticipate what lies on the road ahead. This essay will dwell upon the most significant achievements of the Consortium (in my eyes), as well as upon some shortcomings.

180. Initiation of the Consortium by US Secretary of Defense William Cohen during an intervention at the meeting of the Euro - Atlantic Partnership Council Defence Ministers (EAPC-D) in Brussels, Belgium, on June 12, 1998.

Author:
William Cohen
Publication Date:
06-2008
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Connections
Institution:
Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes
Abstract:
Our ultimate goal for the 21st century should be a cooperative security network of Allies and Partners, with PFP as the cornerstone. Therefore, we must remain steadfast in our commitment to PFP's evolution as an independent framework for European security, worthy of membership in its own right, as well as its preparatory role for Alliance membership for those who desire it. While PFP will remain a primary vehicle for preparing aspiring NATO members for the military obligations that Alliance membership entails, it is not just a stepping stone and should not be portrayed simply in these terms. In other words, PFP is not a means to an end. It is an end in itself. As we continue the process begun in 1991 of recognizing that new challenges mean new missions for the Alliance, we should always look for opportunities for Partner participation in those missions. Thus the increasing role of Partners should be reflected in the updated Strategic Concept.
Topic:
Security and NATO
Political Geography:
Belgium