“Public Promotion of the NATO Smart Defence Model”
21 November 2011, Army Hall, Skopje

Pocituvan minister za odbrana na Republika Makedonija,

Pocituvan pretsedatel na Evro-Atlantskiot Sovet na Makedonija, g-n Elenovski

Pocituvani ekselencii, pocituvani gosti

Dobro utro na site.

Ve molam dozvolete mi da zboruvam na angliski, mislam deka ke bide polesno za mene.

Blagodaram.

Good morning everyone,

Can I first say thank you very much for allowing me the privilege of being able to give few short comments on the UK’s perspective on smart defence.

Firstly, I congratulate the Euro-Atlantic Council for this very first initiative and this first public debate on smart defence. I think it is extremely welcome and I think it underlines the interest in Macedonia on NATO, the NATO Strategic Concept and developments within NATO so that on the day that Macedonia becomes a member of NATO, which the UK would very much like to see happen, Macedonia will be fully prepared and have deep understanding of the direction of travel and deeper understanding of NATO more broadly.

I may repeat a few remarks made in earlier presentations on smart defence. I will try to keep them very short.  They will be about what I think what smart defence means, and where I think smart defence comes from.

Then, to try to connect it more to how the UK has found the experience of smart defence and is proud to have taken the first steps towards operationalising smart defence.

In the introduction you have heard that I used to be the Head of the Sanctions Team at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.  There is a term applied to sanctions which is called smart sanctions. Smart in that context is very much having a laser-like focus on the targets of sanctions. Generally, as the Dutch ambassador said, in a common sense way it means being smarter about the sanctions applied. There are many people today, including in the front row,who know about smart missiles, and smart bombs,in much more detail than I do. And I am sure that ‘smart’ has its own definition in that particular aspect as well. Smart as a concept of smart defence means something different and a little broader I think.

As the Secretary General Rasmussen said at the Munich Conference last year, it is generally about greater security for less money. As we have heard, it is not about imposition. It is about allowing member states the flexibility to adapt themselves. But, it does set out some key important points on smart defence including greater pooling and sharing of capabilities, better prioritisation on how these resources are spent and greaterco-ordination and coherence.

The last point, greater coherence, is very important because as one NATO member statedecides in the wake of the financial crisis to make cuts in a particular area, you can quickly see how other memberstates might potentially end up choosing the same area to make cuts. Then, across the NATO membership generally you loseessential capabilities in particular areas. So coherence is an essential element.

I said that I will talk a little about the UK’s experience and our view. We have had a difficult journey like many other countries in Europe in the wake of the financial crisis. In the UK that has meant big cuts in some Government departments. That has affected our Ministry for Defence in the UK which has had to face a cut in its public money by somewhere between 7 and 8 % over the next four years. As a result of the spending cuts, somewhere around 25 000 civil servants in the Ministry of Defence are losing their jobs. That is a huge challenge for any Government department, not only the Ministry of Defence, but many other Government departments. But, clearly the UK’s view has been not to tradeoff security in any way in making those cuts. As a result the UK will still maintain its 2% of GDP under military spending in terms of our NATO commitment. We are one of the few countries toconsistently meet that threshold. And we will continue to be the fourth biggest military spender in the world. So even if the financial background sounds bleak, with an intelligent approach we can still achieve our military expendituretargets albeit in a slightly different way. That requires more prioritization, it requires more adaptability and it requires us to work much more intelligently with our Allies.

All of these elements sound very familiar in that they are part of a ‘smart defence’.  I would say one thing - there is no one-size-fits-all. You cannot simply apply the three principles of smart defence: pooling and sharing, prioritization and coherence to every area of defence or military expenditure. So, the UK’s view is to take a case-by-case basis look at area where greater coherence can actually be achieved at greater efficiency. That means filtering and prioritising.

There is one area which was mentioned earlier in which we have done this more operationally recently. It is with France. That probably came as a surprise for some people in the UK and I remember the newspaper headlines at the time. Two great nations which most school boys know from their history have at certain historical times had battles against each other are now looking at a strategic defence partnership. That genuinely surprised some people, yet shows the ambition levels of smart defence.  Delivering more security for less money is a compelling argument in favour of such an approach.

In terms of British/French cooperation this was announced almost exactly one year ago, on 2 November 2010 at a joint bilateral Summit. There were two Treaties signed at that Summit. One was on defence and security co-operation and one on joint radiographic hydrodynamics.

The second Treaty, which maybe less familiar to you, is concernedwith the technology involved in assessing the stewardship and care of nuclear stockpiles.  That will involve a centre in the UK providing experience and expertise, but a lot of the work will be carried out in an institution in France. There was also the signature of a joint letter of intent, and that agreed on a number of new smart defence areas between the United Kingdom and France including defence and security with a combined joined expeditionary force. The concept of such a force is being  translated into bilateral training initiatives, bilateral operations and looking at the ways in which UK and France worked together in Libya earlier this year and of course greater interoperability of the two forces which can actually achieve greater coherence and efficiency on the ground.

Another area is in terms of equipment and capabilities and that includes areas such as maritime countermeasures and systems. Also in terms of how we operate unmanned vehicles and unmanned surveillance vehicles.

And lastly, I think it is the one that hit the headlines the in the UK the most is about aircraft carriers. At the momentfor the aircraft carriers that the UK operates, no French or American aircraft can land on them.So the new proposal from the UK/French Summit was for the UK to build two new aircraft carriers which would have catapult and arrestercapabilities so that for the first time French and American planes will be able to land on aircraft carriers.

These are just some of the areas where the UK has tried to take forward the concept of smart defence at a very operational level with our allies in a way that will help us achieve security needs, but also in a way which allows us to efficiently and effectively.

I think that ambition level is something that we would like all members of NATO, and aspirants of NATO, also to explore. Because it has been a very positive experience for us in the UK.  I heard the Minister earlier talking about the Krivolak training center here, and I know a few countries have benefited from that. Also, the regional media training centre and the medical training centre - all underlining the shared use of the capabilities which Macedonia owns. So, I think the challenge now is to look for more ambitious ways to build on those excellent examples, and I wish Macedonia every success in doing so.

Thank you very much.

Blagodaram.