NATO PSOs (ISAF) and Defence Economics Issues Dr. Szenes Zoltán CSc ZM NDU Department of Security and Defence Policy Conference on Peace Support Operations and Defence Economics. 29 May 2008

NATO: Level of Commitment Afghanistan Iraq OAE Humanitarian Relief Kosovo PPs Bosnia OAE Africa Kosovo Baltic & Slovenian Air policing Balkan NHQ Defence Reform NRF Concept NRF FOC Bosnia 1996 2002 2007

Force Providers to the ongoing PSOs

NATO’s three resource pillars INTEGRATED MILITARY STRUCTURE NATO RESOURCE PILLARS BUDGETS AGENCY CIVIL BUDGET MILITARY NSIP FIXED INFRASTRUCTURE DEPLOYABLE STRATEGIC EQUIPMENT MANPOWER CIVILIAN The three funding mechanisms (common funding, multi-national funding and national funding) are shown on the base of this structure. They are used to support NATO’s three resource areas: budgets, the NATO Security and Investment Programme (NSIP) and manpower. All three resource areas support the integrated military command structure. My briefings will be restricted to the column on the left, Budgets. My colleagues, LTC Duane Padrick and Mr. Wilco Koelewijn will be addressing the centre column, the NATO Security Investment Program or NSIP, and Mr Patch will deal with Manpower, both military and civilian. In its simplest terms, budgets pertain to ongoing or “operation and maintenance” costs, the NSIP pertains to investment or capital costs, and manpower is self-explanatory. Within the category of Budgets, there are three types of budgets . a. Starting from the bottom of the left column, the International Military Budget, often shortened to just “Military Budget”, supports military programmes of the command structure within NATO. b. The Civil Budget is used to support NATO Headquarters in Brussels. This budget is broadly split between civilian manpower, the Science Programme and the Information Programme. c. Agency Budgets include budgets, for example, NATO Procurement and Logistics Organisations such as NETMA, NAPMA, and NACMA. Agency budgets are frequently set up by a group of NATO nations to procure or support a specific programme. NATO Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) Programme Management Agency NATO Eurofighter & Tornado Management Agency NATO Air Command and Control System Management Agency These three Resource Pillars function closely with each other. For example, a HQ would be built using NSIP funds. The daily operating costs are resourced through the Military Budget. And civilian and military manpower requirements although identified together under manpower establishments are funded separately - civilian salaries are funded by NATO budgets and military staff are nationally funded. During this course you will learn that these three pillars come together in “Capability Packages” where all related resources are approached in an integrated way.

National and NATO resources Nations spend: 2.7% of GDP on defence Of this nations spend: 0.44% on NATO (MB 0.17%) What does this buy? The “glue” of the alliance. Integrated command structure Combined exercises NATO Response Force (NRF) NAEW Missions and Operations The common funded resources in the big picture shows that nations spend 2.7 % of the gross domestic product on defence. Of this 0.4% is spent for the common funded resources. To narrow my approach down to my micro cosmos, less than 0.2% is the focus of my briefings and my pillar of the “tempel” I showed you. I will in the rest of my briefings focus on Military budgets. To me this also helps to illustrate what common funding buys the nations. To me it provides the glue that connects the forces and efforts of the nations through Command and Control.

NATO Resources 2007 To give you a rough order of magnitude. The Guesswork on the cost of the military manpower provided to the Nato Command structure is based on the Medium Term Financial Plans and are just a guess meant as an illustration. What this boils down to is: 1 rough estimate (base on cca 13K military posts in the PE)

PSO Military Budget tendency

ISAF NSIP and Military Budget (2007) NSIP 647.5 M€ MILITARY BUDGET 266.4 M€ NTM-I 3% BALKANS 18 % NHQ Sa 2% NTM-I 6% JFC 3% KFOR 10% NSIP > NATO Security Investment Programme ISAF 79% 514 M€ ISAF 78% 206.3 M€

Funding Mechanisms Common funded---NAMSA Funded by NATO nations through established cost-shares (Funding eligibility- Funding principle) Multi-nationally funded (Joint) --- MN Logistics Funded by agreement (CAOCs, NRDC HQs) Trust funding Nationally funded--- Contracting and Outsoursing Funded by individual nations There are 3 funding mechanisms that must be understood: Common-funded means paid for by NATO funding that is provided through established cost shares. I will explain what I mean by cost shares in a few slides. Multi-nationally funded is outside the authority of NATO and occurs when two or more NATO nations agree among themselves to share costs of a programme. An example is the agency, NETMA – NATO Eurofighter 2000 and Tornado Development, Production and Logistics Management Agency that receives its budget from just 4 nations - Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom. Nationally funded means just that – funding responsibility lies with individual nations. For example, salaries for NATO military personnel is nationally funded. NATO funds are not used for military salaries.

ISAF Mission Mission: Desired Military End-state: Assist the Afghan government to maintain security; Facilitate the development of Afghan government structures; Extend Afghan government control; and Assist reconstruction and humanitarian efforts. Desired Military End-state: That Afghan National Security Forces are able to provide security and sustain stability in Afghanistan without NATO support.

Afghanistan Development Rebuilding Afghanistan Afghan Compact 2007 Counter Narcotics United Kingdom Lead Judicial Reform Italy Disarmament Of Illegally Armed Groups (DIAG) Japan Train the Afghan National Army States Train Police Forces EU SECURITY SECTOR REFORM UNAMA-NGOs ISAF OEF INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY

Bucharest Summit Top priority Clear Vision guided by four principles a firm and shared long-term commitment Support for enhanced Afghan leadership and responsibility a comprehensive approach by the IC, bringing together civilian and military efforts Increased cooperation and engagement with Pakistan’s neighbours Political-Military Plan

US CENTCOM CINC Strategic Guidance Set conditions for security and strenghten governance in Afghanistan Working with ISAF , conduct operations, that provide security, stability, and maturing governance to the people of Afghanistan. Through Combined Security Transition Command (CSTC-A) continue to develope and grow the Afghanistan Security Forces (Lt Gen M.E. Dempsey)

ISAF Issues Military Infrastructure development ASF Training Filling CJSOR Counter Narcotics PRTs Security problems (IED)

Current ISAF Infra Projects Kandahar Airfield Demining Airfield Operating Surfaces Airfield Operational Facilities Roads Bulk Fuel Installation Combined Air Terminal Ops (CATO) Environmental Baseline Study Air Traffic Control Tower Waste Water Treatment Plant APOD NATO Support Element Hazardous Material Cargo Pad Theater Map Depot Taxiway D2 reconstruction Role 3 Medical Treatment Facility Real Estate Expansion Domestic accommodations Operational accommodation Water and Sewer system Mazar-e-Sharif Aircraft Operating Surfaces, Patrol Road, Main and Sliding Gates, Morale & Welfare Compound, Runway, Maintenance facility Bagram Rotary and fixed wing Aircraft Operating Surfaces KAIA North & Relocation Mine and UXO Clearance, Aircraft Operating Surfaces, APOD Operational & Domestic Facilities, Environmental Baseline Study, MEDEVAC Rotary Wing Parking Apron, Perimeter road, Force protection

Operational Logistics Support Projects

NAMSA “junction” ties NATO and Nations KAF RLS & APOD Projects KAF NAMSA “junction” ties NATO and Nations to the highway to KAF

Security Issues Talibans’ Long term goal: take over the power Priority: South, East and West Concept: 1. Code of Conduct (attack the people of the goverment) 2. Operation Lesson (ISAF, foreigners) 3. Complex Operations (collateral demage)

Insurgents Use Of IEDs 50 % IED incidents, ISAF casualties- 53 % IEDs are simply the insurgents’ method of achieving their short term military and longer term political aims. Had they access to “conventional” weapons they would use them. When ISAF efforts negate the effects of one type of IED they will seek alternatives. IEDs can be used for “spectaculars” as well as tactical attacks.

Results and Challenges Contribution to Security and Stability (PRTs) Security becomes more and more important New Force Contributions Real Fight with Insurgents Long term mission- huge invesment

Thank you for your attention! Questions?