Saturday, June 23, 2012

Funding NATO

23-5-2 America Spends $800 Billion on Vets & War Prep - T&P > . skip > .


A certain megalomaniacal, know-nothing US UNpresident was unaware of the facts concerning member nations' financial contributions to NATO

The combined military spending of all NATO members in 2020 constituted over 57% of the global nominal total. Members agreed that their aim is to reach or maintain the target defence spending of at least 2% of their GDP by 2024.

Allies make direct and indirect contributions to the costs of running NATO and implementing its policies and activities. NATO common-funded budgets and programmes are funded by direct contributions and equate to only 0.3% of total Allied defence spending, an equivalent of around EUR 2.5 billion to run the entirety of the Organization, its commands and military infrastructure.

Indirect – or national – contributions are the largest and come, for instance, when a member commits capabilities and/or troops to a military operation and bears the costs of the decision to do so.

Direct contributions are made to finance the NATO budgets and programmes for requirements that serve the interests of all 30 members – and cannot reasonably be borne by any single member – such as NATO-wide air defence or command and control systems.

All 30 Allies contribute to the NATO budget on an agreed cost-share formula based on Gross National Income, which represents a small percentage of each member’s defence budget. This is the principle of common funding, and demonstrates burden-sharing in action.

Common funding arrangements are used to finance NATO’s principal budgets: the civil budget (NATO HQ running costs), the military budget (costs of the integrated Command Structure) and the NATO Security Investment Programme (military infrastructure and certain capabilities).

Projects can also be jointly funded, which means that the participating countries can identify the requirements, the priorities and the funding arrangements, while NATO provides political oversight.

NATO’s budget has strong governance and oversight mechanisms, with Allies deciding together what is eligible for common funding, deciding how much is spent each year, and setting planning figures for the medium term.

The funding process is overseen by the North Atlantic Council, managed by the Resource Policy and Planning Board, and implemented by the Budget Committee and the Investment Committee.

Geostrategic Projection
European Geostrategic Projection ..

Friday, June 22, 2012

Global Military Comparisons - 21st


Great Power Relations

...
22-4-21 Russia–Ukraine war, US–China rivalry, Thucydides’s Trap > .

2021 - Russia - Bal Pow >> .
>> Bal Pow >>

Tuesday, June 19, 2012

Japanese Policy of Pacifism

JEF - Joint Expeditionary Force

.
24-5-8 JEF - Joint Expeditionary Force - Nordic, Baltic | Lithuania Ex > .
24-5-15 Lithuania, Latvia, & Estonia Cooperate On Defence & Security - Lithuania > .
23-7-6 Deploying to Icelandic nuclear bunker with UK-led JEF alliance - Force > .

The Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) is a United Kingdom-led Northern European multi-national military partnership designed for rapid response and expeditionary operations. In addition to the United Kingdom, which initiated the establishment of the force in 2012, it consists of the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden), the Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania), and the Netherlands.

The JEF concept was first conceived in 2012 and announced by the then Chief of the Defence Staff, General Sir David Richards. The JEF arose from the Joint Rapid Reaction Force (JRRF) which disappeared as a result of the UK's focus on operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The United Kingdom element of the JEF consists of personnel and equipment from the Royal Navy, Royal Marines, British Army and Royal Air Force and is designed to provide greater levels of integration than previously achieved especially when combined with other country's armed forces.

Together with the British Armed Forces, the following nine states may form part of the JEF as required.
The JEF has been fully operational since June 2018. It can act independently in its own right, but it can also be deployed in support of NATO or other cooperative ventures, for example as part of a United Nations peacekeeping force. All of its ten member states are also members of NATO, with Finland's and Sweden's applications ratified in 2023 and 2024, respectively.

Comment:
To put this into context. This is a British Project. The purpose of this project is to prepare Britain and the countries it would be helping to defend for a European War. The countries involved are the ones that would participate on the Baltic Axis and the North Atlantic Axis. These are the directions of British contributions. The UK wants to cooperate with and acclimatize to all allies and potential allies in these directions. Hence Sweden and Finland joining in 2017. What Britain gets out of this is good military relations with many smaller countries that it would have to deploy to in times of war. Experience cooperating with those countries. Influence over defence decisions so that collaboration is as easy as possible; e.g. equipment purchases, organizational structure, availability ot tea kettles in all vehicles, stuff like that. 

This also makes it easier for Britain to integrate units from these countries into it's own forces. e.g. Frigates as Carrier escorts, squadrons as part of RAF wings, battalions as part of British led brigades etc. If say, Sweden, wished to participate in a future Iraq War style conflict they could simply send a battallion as part of a British brigade with no special need for training and integration, that work already having been done. This increases British infuence in general. 

What the other participants get out of it. The Netherlands gets to contribute as if it were Britain writ small. The other members are ones that would need NATO, specifically British and Dutch resources to help defend themselves. With all of this being prepared and practiced small countries like Estonia or Latvia are free to make consequential decisions like to not have an air force or corvettes since allies they already are integrated with provide those services. This is uniquely valuable to a small country that couldn't afford more than one ship leaving it at risk of having the ship in repair dock when it was needed at sea; same for expensive aircraft and the even more expensive pilots. 

This is also a good framework for the Iceland Defence Force since all of the common contributing members (UK, Netherlands, Denmark and Norway) are in this partnership. This also enables Iceland, which doesn't have a military, to contribute since every military deployment needs medical and logistical services Iceland can provide.

sī vīs pācem, parā bellum

igitur quī dēsīderat pācem praeparet bellum    therefore, he who desires peace, let him prepare for war sī vīs pācem, parā bellum if you wan...