Criteria for NATO admission shift after 9/11: candidates get extra credit for assisting the United States in the war on terrorism.

When the North Atlantic Treaty Organization convenes in Prague next month, the United States is expected to throw its considerable political weight behind seven countries seeking membership in the alliance.

Although the formal papers endorsing those countries' membership are classified, comments by officials from the Defense and State Departments suggest that the United States will support a "big bang" expansion of the alliance. Invitations are likely to be extended to the former Eastern-bloc nations of Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia.

U.S. support for such rapid enlargement would have been unlikely before the 9111 terrorist attacks, experts said. Observers note that, in 1997, when the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary became the first of the former Eastern-bloc countries to be invited to join the alliance, the standards for admission to NATO were more stringent and the process less transparent.

Shortly before September 11, the United States was not expected to support more than three countries for membership, said Jennifer Moroney, a research analyst at DFI International. But the dynamics have changed, and over the past year, each of the seven aspirants who met minimum requirements in NATO's membership action plan (MAP) also set themselves apart by providing various types of support in the U.S.-led war on terrorism.

In the new security environment, the aspirants' willingness to side with the United States in the war on terrorism, to contribute niche emergency-response capabilities and to share information for counter-terrorism, have set the countries apart as allies of the United States.

The changes in the security environment seem to have diminished the relevance of the Defense Capabilities Initiative, a 1999 agreement by NATO members to boost investments in precision-guided munitions, aircraft, missile defense, chemical-biological defense, strategic/operational lift and mobility, C41 and suppression of enemy air defenses.

Interoperability among NATO forces also was a cornerstone element of the DCI, which stipulated that future aspirants should buy defense systems that are compatible with other alliance members.

The priorities set by the DCI shifted after 9/11. Although NATO moved quickly to invoke Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, which states that an attack on one member country is treated as an attack on all, the United States ignored NATO's offer to lead the war-planning efforts. Instead, the United States organized and began executing since last October its own "global war on terrorism," gathering its own coalition of allies, which now number 68.

The move made it possible for smaller countries, such as the NATO aspirants, to present their niche capabilities to the United States, for use in the war on terrorism. Their help was accepted in many cases. U.S. forces worked, for example, with Estonia's explosive-detection dog teams and Bulgaria's nuclear, biological and chemical-decontamination units in Afghanistan.

These actions tipped the scales toward the aspirants in the membership process, said Moroney. The war on terrorism essentially redefined the concept of NATO membership, she said. Iris now "in the best interests of the allies to capitalize on the assets best suited to support counter-terrorism activities."

The decision by the United States to work directly with the new democracies of the former Eastern-bloc, rather than to focus on improving large-scale defense capabilities, have elevated their status within NATO, changing the focus of the alliance from being capabilities-based to politically-based.

"No one expects much militarily from the current batch of candidates," said Thomas Szayna, of Rand Corp., a think-tank based in Santa Monica, Calif. "The point is to lock in the reform processes. The political motivations predominate," he said.

Earlier this year, U.S. President George W. Bush communicated his desire for a robust enlargement of the alliance. "In Prague, our nations will take an historic step toward removing the remaining divisions of Europe. We will move to adapt NATO'S structures and improve its capabilities, so that our societies and our citizens are better protected against new threats, wherever they emerge," he said.

But experts warned of the potential for pitfalls if the aspirants don't pull their weight once they are invited to join the alliance. The U.S. should encourage the aspirants to adhere to explicit parameters for defense investment, and through the ratification process in the Senate, hold them to specific goals, said Sean Kay, a fellow at the Eisenhower Institute, in Washington, D.C.

"If we don't hold these seven countries to serious pre-September 11 criteria and indeed add post-September 11 criteria, these countries are going to seriously dilute the defense capabilities of NATO," said Kay.

Enlargement Issues

Ian Brzezinski, deputy assistant secretary of defense for European and NATO affairs, told the House International Relations Committee that NATO enlargement will help Europe become more effective in dealing with global challenges, and will help to stabilize relations between the West and Russia. Brzezinski reports to Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith.

In preparation for the summit in Prague, Brzezinski led bilateral working groups with the ministries of defense for Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia and Slovakia. His deputy led similar groups with Bulgaria and Romania.

"Each aspirant brings a different set of challenges, which require different approaches to defense reform," said Brzezinski.

Brzezinski said that most of the work by the candidates involved changes in national strategy documents; improvements in command, control and communications; infrastructure for host nation support; training; logistical support; personnel reform and information security.

"We should not overlook the fact that each of the aspirants has made very real contributions to NATO operations in the Balkans and to the war on terrorism," Brzezinski said. These nations, he added, offered the United States air-space tights for the war on terrorism, and most contributed niche military capabilities. He cited several examples, including Bulgaria, which provided a base for U.S. KC-135 ranker aircraft and sent a 40-person nuclear, biological chemical decontamination unit to Afghanistan.

Romania contributed a military police platoon and a C-130 aircraft for the international peacekeeping force in Afghanistan, in addition to deploying a 405-person infantry platoon. Slovakia sent an engineering unit and the three Baltic states are trying to augment a Danish airfield support contingent in Manas.

"Through such concrete action, the NATO aspirants have conducted themselves as de facto allies," Brzezinski said. "Not only have they demonstrated the military capability to add positively to NATO operations, they have demonstrated the political will to accept the risks and responsibilities of NATO missions."

Assessing Capabilities

In charge of assessing the capabilities of the aspirants was Gen. Joseph Ralston, the Supreme Allied Commander Europe. Ralston testified to the House International Relations Committee that the U.S. European Command studied each aspirant's military posture. He said that resource management, force structure, personnel management and English-language capability were among the criteria for NATO membership.

Ralston reported that some countries have been required to restructure their military forces and bureaucracies. Personnel restructuring, he said, included "knowing what specialists you have and need, a balanced rank structure and effective noncommissioned officer corps, [improved] quality of life and professional education."

The European Command, said Ralston, also assessed the aspirants' defense capabilities. "The bottom line is: Can they deploy a reasonably sized force, sustain it, communicate with it, protect it and fight effectively with it?" Ralston said. Other assessments addressed these nations' ability to fight in varying conditions, to engage effectively and to take on losses. However, one of the most important assessments involved the aspirants' "consultation, command and control capability," which he said is "a NATO term synonymous with the U.S. term command, control, communications and computers [C4]." Ralston noted that the aspirants have all invested heavily in this area.

Ralston said the studies provided by his office "will be combined with other inputs from a number of other organizations both inside and outside of the Defense Department to determine the president's recommendation," he mid.

Political Considerations

The State Department also is playing a role in the recommendation process, said Robert Bradtke, deputy assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs. The State Department is studying the social and political readiness of the aspirants to join the alliance. Bradtke said the countries are "working hard to consolidate democracy and the rule of law, to strengthen judicial systems, to promote good relations with neighboring countries, to improve the treatment of minorities, and to privaoze state enterprises.

Improvement is still needed in the areas of fighting corruption, the treatment of minorities and of the political opposition, property restitution and public education with regard to the Holocaust and public support for NATO, Bradtke said.

RELATED ARTICLE: Ukraine aiming for NATO membership

Ukraine's national security council determined earlier this year that its main goal for the immediate future would be to gain admission into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Ukraine's president and parliament supported the move. An opinion poll indicated that approximately 47 percent of the public favors joining NATO.

Ukrainian officials interviewed in Washington said the country is willing to make the necessary sacrifices to be brought into the alliance, and recognized that a long road of economic, political and social changes must be made, before the Ukraine could even be considered as a candidate for NATO membership. Widespread political problems will first have to be eliminated, said several experts.

"Ukraine is really far from meeting the NATO criteria for level of democracy," said Arkady Moshes, head of Russia-Europe relations at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs, in Helsinki. Aside from problems with human rights, he said, "Ukraine is a country where freedom of the press is far from real, where the journalists get murdered. It is an oligarchic, clan-type political system. Governors are not elected but appointed by the president" Moshes added.

"Ukraine is not in the same league even as other current NATO aspirants, such as Bulgaria and Romania. I say this on the basis of a lot of data in the areas of human rights, political and economic problems," said Thomas Szayna, of Rand Corp.

Ukraine, with a population of 50 million, is situated between Russia and Europe, bordering several current NATO aspirant countries, in addition to sophomore NATO members Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic.

A NATO-Ukraine commission has been meeting in Brussels since 1997, when NATO and Ukraine signed a partnership treaty. The commission meets monthly at the ambassadorial and foreign/defense ministerial levels. The panel will meet in November in Prague at the NATO Summit

The NATO-Ukraine relationship has improved since Russia and NATO established a new "special partnership" this summer, officials said. "Before, we had to balance our views between NATO and the Russian Federation. We use Russian gas and oil sources, so it was not easy to say no to them," said a Ukrainian official who requested anonymity.

Ukraine has made several high-profile military commitments to NATO peacekeeping operations and to U.N. operations. Ukraine operates the Yavoriv military range, a large military test range that NATO uses at least twice a year for exercises. Ukraine also operates some of the largest cargo planes in the world, such as the AN-270, the Mriya, which is manufactured domestically. Ukraine has lent the plane to NATO for numerous airlift operations for items such as aircraft engines, the official said. The planes were used most recently to transport vehicles and personnel to Afghanistan from Europe. In July, NATO signed a memorandum of understanding with Ukraine, to secure the nation's support for strategic airlift missions.

Ukrainian forces currently are contributing to NATO operations in Bosnia-Herzegovina. A Ukrainian-Polish battalion is operating in the region, conducting peacekeeping missions. Ukrainian forces are also active in the U.N. peacekeeping mission in Sierra Leon.

Ukraine additionally provides air space and overflight rights to the U.S.-led coalition war in Afghanistan.

During the past several years, the Ukrainian government has strived to eliminate its cache of former Soviet nuclear weapons, the official said. Through the U.S.' Nunn-Lugar Act for cooperative threat reduction, Ukraine has dismantled its nuclear warheads, and has returned parts to Russia for further destruction. Ukraine is taking steps to prevent the proliferation of nuclear components, the official noted.

Following an air show accident in Ukraine this summer, where at least 80 people died, the president of Ukraine, Leonid Kuchma, increased the country's defense budget to almost 2 percent of its domestic product, one of the prerequisites for joining the alliance.

Secretary-General of NATO Lord George Robertson led a NATO delegation to Ukraine in July In public comments, he said that Ukraine is a modern, developed nation, proceeding along to road of Euro-integration. He expressed NATO's willingness to assist the country in its goal for membership in the alliance.