NATO HQ 25 June 2003

Video interview with Robert Gregory Bell, Assistant Secretary General for Defence Investment Q: You're at the head of the new Defence Investment Division, which was previously called Defence Support. Could you explain what this name change signifies and why it has taken place at this point in time? ROBERT BELL (Assistant Secretary General for Defence Investment Division): It's a very simple idea. In fact, it's so simple you wonder why it wasn't thought of earlier. The idea is to bring together in one division the policy planning expertise in certain key areas, like armaments and command and control, air defence, air space management, to bring that staff expertise together with the budget expertise at NATO. So that when you plan programs the people who have the ideas about the program talk to the people that tell them what the budget realities are, and the people that are doing the budgeting can talk to the people who have the vision about where the program is headed. So there's a real synergy, I believe, involved in bringing these two functions together in one division. Q: And from what I understand the Defence Investment Division has a greater role to play in ensuring the implementation of NATO's Prague Capabilities Commitment. What's your main objective in the area for the near to mid-future? ROBERT BELL: Well my objectives are the same as the Secretary General's and that's to deliver the capabilities that Heads of State and Government have promised at the Prague Summit six months ago. But you're absolutely right, under the new arrangement of this Headquarters that Lord Robertson took the lead on last year and that nations have approved, this new division that I have the privilege of leading, has the co-responsibility, along with the Defence Plans Division to deliver on the capabilities front. And that means, for example, we are tasked every three weeks with updating the North Atlantic Council on progress in attaining these new capabilities. At those Council meetings my counterpart, who heads the Defence Planning Division, presents briefings on parts of the overall program, and I present briefings on the multinational aspects of the program. That also entails responsibility for travelling to the different places within the Alliance where the capabilities enhancements are being led -- Germany, Spain, Norway are three of the countries that have taken a leading role -- and to play a major supporting role when we have special mini-summits really, what are called reinforced Council meetings here at the Headquarters to take stock of how we're doing on the capabilities enhancements. Q: One of the ongoing problems, it seems, within the Alliance is the growing technological gap between the United States and other NATO members. The Conference on Transatlantic Defence Industrial Corporation: Challenges and Prospects, your division is organizing on the 18th of July, tackles part of this problem, namely the issue of technology transfer and export licensing. What are the key aspects of this problem and how should they be addressed? ROBERT BELL: The key question really is quite fundamental in nature. The American view is that they have the capabilities and the technologies that Europe needs and in many cases they're willing to sell or transfer those capabilities to their European allies, but they want to hold back, for national security protection reasons the knowledge about how some of the key technologies work. It comes down really literally to a question of black boxes and whether the Europeans are willing to buy American equipment that's quite capable, in which there are black boxes into which they cannot look. Or alternatively, whether the United States is willing to open up the secrets of that technology at a very high level and bring the Allies along as partners from the beginning. Now, since neither of those approaches has worked particularly well over the years --Europeans increasingly are saying no to a black box approach, the United States, particularly after September 11th, is more attuned to protecting the technology issues -- the question becomes how much of the technology can be brought forward here in Europe, home-grown, in terms of a European solution. And what you find is that while there is quite a technology gap. There's certainly a great amount of technological know-how in Europe. So we are now trying to focus on ways in which we can promote co-development of key technologies where in effect there's a partnership between the Americans and the Europeans. The Americans will have to decide how much they're willing to contribute to that. The Europeans will have to decide what resources to devote, but if both sides approach it with a positive spirit we should be able to find solutions that avoid the old black box problem or the old non-availability of the top-of-the-line kind of technologies that the Americans have problem. Q: Would you say that the current international context after the U.S.-led campaign in Iraq has hindered efforts to improve transatlantic defence industrial co-operation in anyway? ROBERT BELL: It remains to be seen. It's a different environment to be sure. We've all read anecdotes about how in some cases attitudes have changed in America. Stories about people changing the name of french fries to freedom fries, for example as some sort of gesture of disapproval to the French. And anecdotally you might hear about a case here or there where it looks like some opportunity for co-operation with certain European Allies is not being pursued now where you would have thought otherwise that it would. But at the highest levels, in terms of the policy positions of the United States, particular in the last couple of weeks, since we came through this crisis that NATO faced in the spring and NATO, at 19, with everyone's consent, decided on far-reaching new missions, such as taking the lead role in Afghanistan, or going into Iraq to support Poland in its stabilization sector. Key decisions that were taken just in the last weeks after 19, with everyone's consent on new initiatives on missile defence. My view, and I know the Secretary General's view is, that NATO, in a sense, is back in business. We've shown that we can step up to the challenges of the new security environment and take collective decisions at 19. Now if that message carries across the Atlantic, and Lord Robertson was just on that side of the Atlantic two days ago preaching this gospel, then there's no reason why we can't expect an enlightened and far-sighted American attitude on technology transfer issues to be represented at this conference on the 19th of July. Q: What role will the new Allied Command Transformation have in assisting in greater defence co-operation between Europe and the U.S.? ROBERT BELL: It's really going to be the catalyst for trying to advance the technology and advance the whole concept by which we organize conventional war fighting capabilities. By centralising that responsibility in one command we're putting a real burden on them to be the initiator of carrying these ideas forward, so that they spread beyond, not just the United States' armed forces in terms of their own efforts to promote more jointness in the operations between the navy and the army and the air force and the marines, but spreads, indeed, throughout the Alliance in that capacity to transform war fighting capabilities into the joint arena is common then to whatever coalition of allies that might come together under NATO auspices in any particular mission. Q: European members have started to coordinate their defence efforts, for instance, by improving assets, and by building a more cohesive European defence industrial security policy. But according to what needs to be done to bring these efforts in tune with current Alliance initiatives, you know, such as the Prague Capabilities Commitment, and how much further do you think EU members need to develop co-operation to be military more effective? ROBERT BELL: Well first and foremost I think in many... certainly not all, but many cases, Allies need to find a way to allocate more resources to defence. There's only so far you can go in pooling efforts or being smarter in how you spend money if the total amount being spent is still inadequate to the task. In some cases we have allies who spend quite admirably on defence and they can probably do a better job of reprioritizing how they spend the money. But the basic blueprints or road maps that have been laid down in response to the Prague challenge, particularly in terms of the way ahead for multinational capability improvement efforts, are quite sound, and I'm confident that if the nations can match the level of ambition that they themselves have now set out with the necessary resources, we can meet our requirements. Q: Mr. Bell, thank you very much indeed. ROBERT BELL: Thanks, it's a pleasure.