Empowering itself and countering its rivals: A dual crisis management strategy for NATO

The COVID-19 virus, which is believed to have originated from a wholesale seafood market in Wuhan, China, rapidly spread throughout the rest of the globe, affecting hundreds of countries in an unprecedented manner. While the novel coronavirus was initially identified in December 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the pandemic only in March 2020.[i] Belated declaration of a pandemic by the WHO, which came under heavy criticism,[ii] also demonstrated how critical it is to have effectively functioning international organizations to address international problems.

Although the COVID-19 virus is novel, for hundreds of years mankind has faced many different epidemic outbreaks, including the Black Death, the Plague of Justinian, and the Spanish flu, and has coped with the crises accordingly. While humanity has always overcome such problems, it must also be noted that epidemics continue to have social, political, and economic repercussions even after their ends as they reveal the corruption and incompetence of administrations throughout the globe as well as lead to the erosion of trust in institutions.[iii] As state and international failures in responding to the epidemic are expected to further erode institutions’ credibility, it is safe to say that international institutions should reform themselves not only to provide contributions for dealing with the current global health emergency but also to better prepare themselves for the upcoming challenges in the post-COVID-19 period. NATO was founded to preserve the peace and security of its members. Although NATO’s main responsibility is not to deal with epidemics, if epidemics threaten the peace and security of its members, the Alliance should act proactively in order to eliminate problems jeopardizing the security and stability of its members.

While global problems require global solutions, many NATO countries held quite different positions specifically during the initial phase of the pandemic. This runs counter to past examples of cooperative crisis management between Allies. During the Cold War, when the Communists blockaded all roads, railroads, and water routes enabling transportation of supplies highly needed by the hundreds of thousands of people living in Western Berlin, the United States, together with its allies, heroically started the Berlin Airlift campaign in 1948 and provided more than 2.3 million tons of food, fuel, and other materials[iv] to people in need, a clear demonstration of formidable American leadership during times of crisis in the international arena. The peaceful end of the Berlin Blockade crisis led to the establishment of NATO, in large part under U.S. leadership.

When the Soviet Union broke up and its centrally-controlled economic system collapsed with it, NATO sent teams of medical advisors and humanitarian assistance experts to Russia as well as other former Soviet republics in an attempt to provide relief to the people in need in 1991 within the scope of the Operation Allied Goodwill I and II.[v] NATO’s humanitarian operation not only relieved people in need but also culminated in more positive relations between NATO and Russia as the latter joined the Partnership for Peace programme in 1994 and deployed peacekeepers to support NATO-led peace operations.[vi]

However, when Europe was under the threat of coronavirus, the first thing the U.S. did under President Donald J. Trump was to issue travel restrictions to Europe[vii] rather than developing a unified and coordinated mechanism to handle the health crisis. Similarly, on the other side of the Atlantic, prominent EU countries like France and Germany imposed quantitative limitations on protective medical equipment exports.[viii] In addition, some European countries closed their borders or started to implement disproportionate border checks in an uncooperative manner, which led to criticism by the European Commission.[ix] Given the fact that many NATO members preferred to turn inwards and overlook the needs and priorities of other countries, even their Allies, it could be argued that the COVID-19 pandemic further undermined multilateralism in international relations, which has been already subjected to criticism in recent years. However, this situation should not be entirely attributed to the Alliance or its members, given the fact that countries like China and Russia have conducted unprecedented propaganda campaigns against NATO during the COVID-19 pandemic to mislead the public and to cause fractures among Allies.[x] This article outlines NATO’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, identifying lessons learned and well as recommendations for improving NATO’s crisis management strategy.

NATO and COVID-19

Even though health risks have been referenced in the security environment chapter[xi] of NATO’s Strategic Concept adopted by the heads of the state and government at the 2010 NATO Summit in Lisbon, it could not be argued that NATO was not fully ready when the COVID-19 pandemic hit its member states. Mentioning health risks around one decade before the COVID-19 pandemic does not make this Strategic Concept outdated. On the contrary, it shows that 2010 Strategic Concept is a well-prepared guideline outlining potential risks that the Alliance should prepare itself for in the future. Additionally, while NATO members suffered due to the spread of COVID-19, President Trump was still criticizing European members of NATO for not allocating two percent of their gross domestic product to defense spending and claiming that NATO members owe money to the U.S.[xii] In response to this, some European members of NATO were questioning the reliability of the U.S. as a NATO ally, specifically under the leadership of the Trump administration. Likewise, after expressing some of the pressing problems of the Alliance such as the lack of coordination among its members and Allies’ different priorities and agendas, French President Emmanuel Macron said that NATO is experiencing brain death.[xiii] At this point, it is also important to emphasize that Macron also called for a European army to ensure the protection of Europe against China, Russia, and even the U.S.,[xiv] indicating that even the founding members of NATO are seriously concerned with the reliability of the U.S. in terms of ensuring the protection of Europe. Meanwhile, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey, a vital member of NATO’s Southern Flank, denounced French President Macron’s remarks about NATO and said that Macron should check his brain dead.[xv]

Apart from the lack of coordination, competition, and even confrontation to a certain extent among the member states, when it comes to NATO’s organizational structure, it seems that there are also serious flaws in terms of responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. There were only three staff members[xvi] working in the Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre (EADRCC)—which was founded in 1998 based on Russia’s suggestion and established by the Europe-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC), a multilateral international forum for cooperation among all NATO members as well as non-member partner countries[xvii]—when COVID-19 began to seriously hit NATO allies. Furthermore, it is also tragic to see that the number of staff members of EADRCC only increased to 30 employees[xviii] in an attempt to provide a response and manage the crisis in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. EADRCC is NATO’s principal civil emergency response mechanism and is supposed to provide help to hundreds of millions of people as it not only covers NATO’s member states and Partnership for Peace countries but also several other areas of its mandate, including Mediterranean Dialogue and Istanbul Cooperation Initiative countries as well as the other global partners.[xix] Apart from the staffing problem experienced by NATO’s emergency response mechanism, the Alliance saw a critical decline in its military operations, with around a 30-percent reduction in military training and exercises and a dramatic 80-percent decline in the number of personnel attending these military activities.[xx]

Within the context of military training and exercises, the real blow was taken during the Defender Europe 20 exercises, which were held in large part under the leadership of the U.S. army. Defender Europe 20 was intended to deter Russian aggression[xxi] in Eastern Europe, the Baltics, and Caucasus. Following the annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula in 2014, Russia has clearly shown the international community that it is once more following an assertive and even expansionist foreign policy in the post-Cold War period. Against this backdrop, Defender Europe 20 was initially expected to be the third-largest military exercise in Europe since the end of the Cold War.[xxii] However, with the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe, the U.S. military announced, “As of March 13, all movement of personnel and equipment from the United States to Europe has ceased.”[xxiii] Consequently, Defender Europe 20’s size and scope were reduced. In addition, several other exercises linked to the Defender Europe 20, Dynamic Front, Joint Warfighting Assessment, Saber Strike, and Swift Response, were not conducted.[xxiv] Moreover, Commander of the U.S. Army Europe, Lt. Gen. Christopher Cavoli, was exposed to COVID-19 at a land force commanders conference in Germany.[xxv] While NATO was scaling down its military exercises because of prioritizing public health issues, Russian military continued to conscript more than a quarter million new recruits in 2020 amid the COVID-19 pandemic.[xxvi] This situation might cause concerns about the balance of power dynamics in the region. However, considering that 28,000 troops from 27 nations are currently taking part in Defender Europe 2021 in more than 30 training areas and exercises, including Swift Response, Immediate Response and Command Post Exercise, and other large-scale trainings such as African Lion and Steadfast Defender,[xxvii] one can argue that NATO has learned its lesson from the pandemic. As General Cavoli put it, “No matter what, our nations count on our forces being ready to defend the peace”.[xxviii]

Although NATO and its member states initially experienced some shortcomings in terms of responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, this does not mean that NATO stayed idle. Three days after the Russian military started to “help” Italy, one of the founding members of the Alliance, in order to cultivate closer relations with NATO and the EU in hopes of removing sanctions imposed on Russia because of the annexation of Crimea in 2014,[xxix] NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg activated the Crisis Management Mechanism to monitor the situation of the COVID-19 pandemic and to coordinate efforts for providing help to countries in need in accordance with the severity of their situation.[xxx] On April 7, 2020, Supreme Allied Commander Europe General Tod D. Wolters said, “We will continue to leverage our unique expertise, and precise command and control to facilitate efforts in the fight against COVID-19.”[xxxi] General Wolters also announced that he had designated Lieutenant General Olivier Rittimann as the Commander of the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe COVID-19 Task Force and that he will “continue leading our relentless efforts to defeat this invisible virus, coordinate current and near terms fixes, and better prepare and posture our militaries for future pandemics.”[xxxii] After these developments, NATO countries intensified their efforts to help each other in the face of the pandemic and started to deliver medical supplies, protective equipment, masks, disinfectants, ventilators, and other relevant products to each other as well as other countries in need in cooperation with international organizations such as the EU and UN agencies. These efforts were largely thanks to NATO’s EADRCC, NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA), Strategic Airlift International Solution (SALIS), Strategic Airlift Capability (SAC), and Rapid Air Mobility.[xxxiii]

Seeing fellow NATO Allies doubling down on their efforts to help each other in face of the pandemic was a positive development; however, the figures show us a slightly different picture. As of October 2020, China alone sent more masks than the number of masks sent by the EU and NATO members collectively to Italy and Spain,[xxxiv] the two NATO and EU member states that were hit hardest by the COVID-19 pandemic. China is regarded as one of the main strategic competitors of NATO. NATO allies, therefore, should have taken the necessary steps to remove Italy from a position in which it would want to accept Chinese aid. Even though China continues to distribute propaganda about selflessly rushing to the aid of European nations that were in need, it must be recognized that the Chinese Communist Party conducted this so-called “mask diplomacy” not merely for the sake of humanity but for clearing its highly controversial image as it did not share reliable information during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, was involved in an unusual relationship with the WHO, and followed disruptive rhetoric by claiming that the incapacitated Western democracies cannot effectively respond to the COVID-19 pandemic.[xxxv] Despite China’s intentions with its mask diplomacy, the view of China has worsened in eight out of nine European countries during the COVID-19 pandemic according to a recent poll by the European Council on Foreign Relations.[xxxvi] In Italy and Spain, two European countries that were hit the worst by the COVID-19 and received Chinese medical aid, around 80 percent of the population do not view China more positively. As it has not yielded any solid or tangible results in terms of changing its public image in a more positive direction, it can be argued that, despite its numeric superiority in terms of production and distribution, China’s mask diplomacy has failed.

Recommendations

While the Alliance experienced some setbacks in terms of coordination and rapidity, and NATO’s rivals or competitors tried to politicize humanitarian aid in the COVID-19 pandemic period, there is still hope for the future as NATO has formed a Lessons Learned Steering Group (LLSG) on COVID-19 for gathering data from all of its stakeholders to prepare the Alliance for future health crises.[xxxvii] At this point, it would be logical for NATO to follow a grand strategy by mobilizing the resources and capabilities of all Allies and partners’ public and private sectors to provide a sufficient response to potential health crises in the future. By including private sector components in its grand strategy, the Alliance could benefit from the giant industrial potential of NATO members’ and partner countries’ private sectors. All countries need medical supplies such as masks, hygiene kits, and disinfectants, alongside products like ventilators that require both know-how and large-scale industrial production during health crises. The private-sector industries of NATO Allies have the potential to develop, design, and produce critical health products for satisfying the needs of millions of people. It would be highly beneficial for NATO to encourage private sector institutions in its member states to cooperate and establish alternative supply chain mechanisms that could not be disrupted by the malign influence of other countries. Liberalizing cooperation among private sector stakeholders within the Alliance and commencing multi-directional projects, just like the F-35 project, for producing needed equipment would have significant implications such as minimizing the costs, maximizing productivity, supporting the economic security and livelihood of individuals by increasing employment, which generally declines in crisis periods, and at the same time raising awareness of being part of the transatlantic Alliance.

NATO should urgently reformulate its EADRCC in a way that it should never be caught unprepared. Just like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) members pledged financial support in case of a crisis,[xxxviii] NATO members should pledge funds for the deployment of military and civilian personnel within the EADRCC who are properly trained for coordination and support in the case of emergencies and crises. EADRCC should widen its scope of activities covering various fields, from health to military, as security is a comprehensive field affecting people’s lives in a variety of ways. EADRCC also can coordinate efforts for responding to COVID-19 by sharing the scientific findings of each member state with others by translating significant scientific articles written in a local language into the English language.

NATO should increase the capacity of its “Science for Peace and Security Program” by allocating a sufficient amount of resources and encouraging talented scientists from member states and from partner countries to cooperate within the context of this initiative in order to provide contributions to the security of NATO members and its partners. In addition, for critical military exercises, NATO personnel could use composite military products to prevent them from contracting viruses by ensuring isolation and at the same time not reducing the rapidness of military troops in the field.

While NATO should strengthen its structure via increasing cooperation and coordination among its members, it is also important that NATO counter the malign influence of its rivals as they implemented hostile propaganda campaigns against NATO during the pandemic. Russian propaganda reached a new level during the pandemic as pro-Russian media outlets systematically claimed that secret NATO laboratories located in some countries adjacent to Russia were responsible for creating the COVID-19 virus as a biological weapon.[xxxix] It is important to expose these disinformation campaigns. However, it is equally important to raise the public awareness about NATO’s fight against disinformation campaigns. While Russia uses traditional media outlets as well as social media platforms reaching an audience of millions, a relatively small number of people visit official NATO websites to gain information about malign Russian and Chinese influence by spreading false news. Therefore, it would be logical for NATO members to counter their rivals in the same way they spread disinformation. Developing partnerships with private and public media outlets from member and partner states could be a better idea for directly reaching a wider audience rather than only using official websites as most people prefer to follow news from traditional and, notably, new-generation media platforms. In addition, NATO should more effectively utilize social media platforms, including Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, and seriously evaluate options like cooperating with social media influencers to properly deliver its messages to the relevant populace. Creating synergy by including counter-disinformation efforts into the most watched news bulletins, most circulated newspapers, cooperating with the most watched or followed social media actors, would certainly have positive implications in terms of tackling hybrid threats. So far, there is evidence indicating that the EU is working with private organizations on combating disinformation, but the nature of these partnerships is primarily about veracity of the media sources and fact-checking.[xl] More comprehensive dialogue and cooperation between the public and private sector is required. Also, the results of the cooperation in countering disinformation campaigns should be monitored and evaluated.

Overall, NATO has been seriously affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, just like the rest of the world. Nonetheless, there is still an opportunity for NATO to learn lessons from the pandemic and better prepare itself for future challenges. Following a dual strategy by both strengthening its structure via increasing cooperation and coordination among its members and countering the regional and global malign influence of its rivals could serve as a basic guide for NATO in terms of dealing with the current and potential future crises. Following the end of the Trump period and with optimistic messages from the new American leadership, both from President Joe Biden and Secretary of the State Antony Blinken, about the U.S. commitment to transatlantic security and NATO, it could be argued that NATO members will develop a more unified and coordinated approach to provide peace, security, and stability to the international community.

Notes

[i] WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 - 11 March 2020, WHO, accessed February 24, 2021, https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020.

[ii] Stephen Burayni, “The WHO v coronavirus: why it can’t handle the pandemic,” The Guardian, April 10, 2020.

[iii] Philip Barrett, Sophia Chen, and Nan Li, “COVID’s Long Shadow: Social Repercussions of Pandemics,” IMF RESEARCH Perspectives 23, no: 2 (Fall | Winter 2020): 4-6.

[iv] Katie Lange, “The Berlin Airlift: What It Was, Its Importance in the Cold War,” INSIDE DOD | KNOW YOUR MILITARY, June 25, 2018, https://www.defense.gov/Explore/Inside-DOD/Blog/Article/2062719/the-berlin-airlift-what-it-was-its-importance-in-the-cold-war/.

[v] “Operations and missions: past and present,” last updated October 1, 2020, https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52060.htm.

[vi] “Relations with Russia,” last updated October 9, 2020, https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_50090.htm.

[vii] “Coronavirus: Trump suspends travel from Europe to the US,” BBC News, March 12, 2020, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51846923.

[viii] Amie Tsang, “E.U. Seeks Solidarity as Nations Restrict Medical Exports,” The New York Times, March 7, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/07/business/eu-exports-medical-equipment.html.

[ix] “EU questions German COVID border closures,” Deutsche Welle, February 23, 2021, https://www.dw.com/en/eu-questions-german-covid-border-closures/a-56661661.

[x] Richard Weitz, “The Sino-Russian Disinformation Axis During the COVID-19 Pandemic,” The Jamestown Foundation, China Brief, Volume: 20, Issue: 14, https://jamestown.org/program/the-sino-russian-disinformation-axis-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/.

[xi] NATO, Active Engagement, Modern Defence: Strategic Concept for the Defence and Security of the Members of the NATO (Brussels: NATO, 2010), https://www.nato.int/strategic-concept/pdf/Strat_Concept_web_en.pdf, 13.

[xii] Aaron Mehta and David B. Larter, “NATO’s defense spending targets now ‘gold standard’ all allies should meet, key Trump officials say,” Defense News, October 21, 2020, https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2020/10/21/natos-defense-spending-t....

[xiii] Michel Rose, “France’s Macron: I’m not sorry I called NATO brain dead,” Reuters, November 28, 2019, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-nato-braindead-idUSKBN1Y21JE.

[xiv] Anh Thu Nguyen, “Macron’s Call for a European Army: Still Echoing of Forgotten?” European Law Blog, June 22, 2020, https://europeanlawblog.eu/2020/06/22/macrons-call-for-a-european-army-s....

[xv] Zia Weise, “Erdoğan to Macron: Get your own ‘brain death’ checked first,” Politico, November 29, 2019, https://www.politico.eu/article/turkeys-president-recep-tayyip-erdogan-to-french-president-emmanuel-macron-get-your-own-brain-death-checked-first-nato/.

[xvi] Giovanna De Maio, “Nato’s Response to COVID-19: Lessons for Resilience and Readiness,” The Brookings Institution, October 2020, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/FP_20201028_nato_covid_demaio-1.pdf, 5.

[xvii] NATO, “Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre,” last updated April 2, 2020, https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52057.htm?.

[xviii] De Maio, “Nato’s Response to COVID-19,” 5.

[xix] NATO, “Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre.”

[xx] De Maio, “Nato’s Response to COVID-19,” 3.

[xxi] Jen Judson, “Reforger redux? Defender 2020 to be 3rd largest exercise in Europe since Cold War,” Defense News, October 7, 2019, https://www.defensenews.com/land/2019/10/07/reforger-redux-defender-2020....

[xxii] Judson, “Reforger redux?

[xxiii] U.S. Army, “DEFENDER-Europe 20 modified in size and scope,” U.S. Army, March 16, 2020, https://www.army.mil/article/233715/defender_europe_20_modified_in_size_and_scope.

[xxiv] Ibid.

[xxv] Jen Judson, “COVID-19 dampens European exercise, but US Army chief says all is not lost,” Defense News, March 18, 2020, https://www.defensenews.com/smr/army-modernization/2020/03/18/covid-19-dampens-european-exercise-but-army-chief-says-all-is-not-lost/.

[xxvi] Sergey Satanovskiy, “As Russia battles coronavirus, its military pushes ahead with recruitment,” Deutsche Welle, November 29, 2020, https://www.dw.com/en/as-russia-battles-coronavirus-its-military-pushes-ahead-with-recruitment/a-55763926.

[xxvii] Todd South, “Massive, Army-led NATO exercise Defender Europe kicks off,” Army Times, March 15, 2021, https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2021/03/15/massive-army-led-nato-exercise-defender-europe-kicks-off/.

[xxviii] U.S. army Europe and Africa Public Affairs, “DEFENDER-Europe 21 activities begin this month, include two dozen nations,” U.S. Army, March 15, 2021, https://www.army.mil/article/244260/defender_europe_21_activities_begin_this_month_include_two_dozen_nations.

[xxix] Euractiv, “From Russia with Love: Putin sends aid to Italy to fight virus,” EURACTIV, March 23, 2020, https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/from-russia-with-lov....

[xxx] De Maio, “Nato’s Response to COVID-19,” 5.

[xxxi] SHAPE NATO, “Video: Supreme Allied Commander Europe on COVID-19 Task Force,” SHAPE NATO, April 7, 2020, https://shape.nato.int/news-archive/2020/video-supreme-allied-commander-europe-on-covid19-task-force.

[xxxii] Ibid.

[xxxiii] NATO, “NATO’s Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic,” Factsheet, April 14, 2020, https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2020/4/pdf/200401-factsheet-COVID-19_en.pdf.

[xxxiv] De Maio, “Nato’s Response to COVID-19,” 7.

[xxxv] Janka Oertel, “China, Europe, and covid-19 headwinds,” European Council on Foreign Relations, July 20, 2020, https://ecfr.eu/article/commentary_china_europe_and_covid_19_headwinds/.

[xxxvi] Ibid.

[xxxvii] De Maio, “Nato’s Response to COVID-19,” 8.

[xxxviii] IMF, “IMF Survey: IMF to Double Lending Power as Pledges Top 430 Billion,” IMF Survey online, April 20, 2012, https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2015/09/28/04/53/sonew042012a.

[xxxix] “NATO’s approach to countering disinformation: a focus on COVID-19,” last updated July 17, 2020, https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/177273.htm.

[xl] European Commission, “Action Plan against Disinformation,” European Commission contribution to the European Council, December 5, 2018, https://defense.info/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/eu-communication-disinformation-euco-05122018_en.pdf.

This publication was co-sponsored by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.