| Abstract [eng] |
Since 1949 NATO’s key purpose remained the same. Otherwise, over the years the Alliance’s objectives have been changing. Every organization must constantly adapt in order to remain relevant and useful. Organizations that fail to adapt run the risk of being inadequate to the threats they are supposed to tackle. From this perspective, changes of the Alliance’s objectives could be explained as a normal process corresponding to changes of the security environment. However, adaptation is likely to create unintended consequences, which in the end may increase the vulnerability of the institution through maladaptation. In this regard, it is important to analyze the broader security architecture in which NATO operates and cooperates with other entities in the perspective of adaptation. NATO eastern flank countries besides participating in NATO also participates in few different, but intertwined military formats such as 3B cooperation, NORDEFCO, Northern Group, European Intervention Initiative and Joint Expeditionary Force. These defence and security institutions in the Baltic Sea region are impacting NATO eastern flank’s security and vice versa. The object of this Master thesis is to analyze what kind of impact military cooperation formats in the Baltic Sea region have on NATO eastern flank’s security. It raises the question whether defence and security institutions in the Baltic Sea region enhance or disrupt NATO eastern flank’s security. The following conclusions were presented. First of all, 3B, NORDEFCO, NG, EI2 and JEF create political and military effects by positively impacting NATO eastern flank’s security. All defence and security institutions besides JEF create the bigger political than military effect by sending strategic message to allies and adversaries and emphasizing unity, solidarity and common position of the particulate format. Regional formats also help participating nations to coordinate their positions before NATO meetings, implement small projects and operate in the same operational environment. The biggest impact on creating military effect materialize by developing capabilities, generating units, synchronizing defence plans and participating in military exercises. It is concluded that the most effective format is JEF. It is followed by 3B, which was significantly more important before the Baltic States joined NATO and EU. NORDEFCO even by having a huge military potential, because of operating in very wide areas, at this moment remains political forum for consultations and discussions. NG and EI2 are the most informal formats. The ultimate goal of the NG is to remain an informal club for strategic discussions, so its possibilities are well known and accepted. However, EI2 have much bigger ambitions for creating a military effect, so its operational mechanism should be revised. Despite many positive effects, there are some limitations, which limit effective operation of military cooperation formats. The biggest challenges come from the lack of political will to act in the interest of particular entity, limited financial and human resources dedicated to these defence and security institutions and the differences in participating nations’ law systems. It all comes to the fact, that the Baltic Sea region countries prefer their own national interest over regional ones, which in the end neutralize or even negatively influence NATO eastern flank’s security. All in all, all military cooperation formats show potential from both political and military perspectives and are relevant actors in the security environment. Defence and security institutions in the Baltic Sea region are a starting point in understanding NATO and its broader security environment in the process of NATO’s adaption. |
