Libya chaos on the challenges of the NATO strategic culture

Since March 2011, when Western countries in order to prevent a humanitarian crisis on the grounds that Libya has taken military action in this process, NATO's action is very compelling. This is the 1999 Kosovo War and the Afghanistan War , another large-scale NATO military action outside the same time, this is the end of 2010 through the new strategic concept of NATO after the first military action concept since its inception, NATO has formed its own unique strategic culture, this strategy cultural guidance of its defense and security policy, and after the Cold War as the international environment and security situation changes, gradual adjustment. The NATO military action in Libya, can be described as double-edged sword, on the one hand it is a new strategic culture policy practice, but on the other hand, it also made this strategic culture can not avoid the challenge.
Strategic and cultural significance of strategic culture, strategic research (especially the military, security strategy and policy) and cultural studies of the combination so that the strategy is not to deny the unique culture all their own natures, on the contrary, the rise of cultural studies strategy, just shows that people in the history of the development process, the issue of a field, from the unconscious to the conscious use, up to the conscious, systematic and multi-perspective research from the methodology in terms of strategic cultural studies, drawing on sociology cultural research methods, some absorption of the constructivist theory, in order to analyze the formation of a national strategy and evolution of strategic culture method, we can say is stiff and mechanical limitations of materialism beyond, but also opens a new strategic research the window.

American scholar Jack Snyder in 1977, written for the Rand Corporation, 'Soviet Strategic Culture>> this report, the first use of' strategic culture ', he is defined as: the strategic issues on a national All members of the community strategy through mutual professor, and held to emulate or share ideas, emotional reactions and habits of the constraints of the total pattern of sexual behavior in this, the 'strategic culture' began to be more concern to the researchers the United States constructivist school of thought scholars Ken Busi strategic culture is defined as 'the threat or use of force in dealing with the issue of a country's traditions, values, attitudes, behavior patterns, habits, symbols, achievements and adapt to the environment and specific ways to solve the problem.' . Another strategic culture researcher, Harvard University, Jiang Yi Yan believes that strategic culture is a set of macro-strategic concept, the basic content is recognized by national policy makers, and thus long-term strategy to build a national trend. strategic culture studies well-known scholars, British Kaililanghe Manchester in the study of German foreign policy culture has taken her so-called 'strategic culture research methods.' She believes that culture has a long-term collective action for the impact of strategic culture, including the world, bias, beliefs and attitudes on the use of force and a series of conceptual content, and thus she will be divided into three different strategic elements of culture, the basic elements, rules of practice and safety policy stance.

From Snyder to Longhurst, a group of scholars, enrich and improve the study of strategic culture, their ideas are called 'strategic culture school.' The school consensus on the strategic culture include four points: First, is the national strategic culture stresses obtained from the historical experience of the special characteristics of the security policy, and the second, strategic culture is a collective property, enjoy in common attitudes and beliefs, it may belong to the military institutions, decision-making groups or society as a whole, and the third, compared to the changes, strategic and cultural change in time and space to show the continuity of the trend can be judge by people more concerned about the : Fourth, the strategic culture and behavior closely, it is seen as an environment in which information is received, adjustments, and to form an appropriate response.

From the above definitions and studies can be seen, strategic and cultural highlights of the main factors and the resulting concept of decision-making and behavior patterns in the security strategy of the status and role of this subject does not refer to a single individual (though not the historical experience exclude leaders, commanders of individual emotional and cognitive impact of strategic decisions), but homogeneous group, further said that holding based on historical experience and the same or similar intellectual tradition formed, with similar characteristics of strategic cognitive perspective and decision-making model members of society. If you want to further explain this concept can be said that strategic culture is built on the basis of a general assumption that the national security policy has been a cultural materially affected, and this culture factors derived from historical experience, especially with the use of military experience, thus enabling the country to form a special security area of ??the beliefs, values, attitudes and behavior patterns. strategic culture from the three aspects of a country's strategies to deliver Impact: Set basic objectives and security policies and regulations, the formation of the international security environment assessment and the decision for military purposes and to mobilize national resources.

We know from the basic elements of strategic culture within the norms of social interaction in certain circumstances change, the state's response to the reality will inevitably violate at least one of the basic elements of this strategy to ask the culture of different elements conflict will eventually result in some weakening of the strategic and cultural priorities and the basic elements of the transfer, and once this priority ordering changes led to important changes in security policy, then, can be understood as strategic culture has undergone amendments.

It should be noted that the strategic culture change process, often the domestic and international aspects of the result of, usually, when the international situation changes, leading to the basic elements of the existing strategic culture clash between the domestic point of view , while the international community in this country's security policy will be put forward new demands, making the basic elements of strategic culture change the sort order of priority, so that the basic elements of strategic culture is determined by the security policy could be a major, fundamental change.
NATO's strategic concept of strategic culture in the evolution of NATO as a military organization, in the post-Cold War after the Cold War and the changing times, the place of its strategic culture are gradually adjusted in the establishment of the beginning of NATO's strategic culture can be summarized as four characteristics of the first, members follow the principles of collective security: Second, NATO is to safeguard the Western civilization, the former Soviet communist bloc against the threat of military organization, Third, NATO is pursuing a combination of deterrence and dialogue, ideas, Soviet bloc military offensive aimed at preventing, through dialogue and ease tensions between East and West: the fourth, NATO does not seek offensive strategy is a defensive feature-based military groups, mainly limited to defense areas within member states .

Today, NATO is facing a more complex new security environment after the Cold War with NATO expanding its scope than the establishment of collective defense when signed in <<Washington Treaty>> terms, but also broader, mission execution the difficulty is increasing, while the increase in internal members, but also makes the differences more apparent in the threat, although a powerful military bloc from the East no longer exists, but NATO has had to deal with terrorism and regional conflicts, mainly caused by the political and military changes in the environment, especially non-traditional security issues and asymmetric threats become increasingly prominent. Links to free download

Thus, after the Cold War, NATO began to adjust the strategic concept, NATO's strategic concept of strategic culture is an important benchmark. This adjustment reflected in the 1991 first edition of the NATO strategic concept into the new concept of expanding the scope of the threat, From a purely military issues to the broader field of NATO will be a new threat is divided into four main areas of nationalism and ethnic conflict: military (including the arms trade and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction): transnational organized crime (especially the state terrorism), environment (air, water pollution, land degradation, waste accumulation, urbanization, infrastructure development, and radiological threats). Based on this understanding, 1990 <<London Declaration>> started on the North about the strategic concept of reform. Its most prominent feature is to ask NATO to prepare the implementation of <<Washington Treaty>> outside the provisions of Chapter 5 of military missions, including peace operations and humanitarian operations in cooperation partner countries, assisting the United Nations in the former Yugoslavia to implement peace operations that adjustments in the 1991 Rome Summit was officially approved as a new strategic concept to guide NATO's action and the new strategic concept emphasized five points: international dialogue, international cooperation, collective defense, crisis response and conflict prevention as the first post-Cold War NATO's strategic concept document, which establishes the legal basis for NATO's eastward expansion and the overall security of Europe as an important goal.

After the development in accordance with international security situation, NATO strategic concept to further give it a more flexible definition in the 1999 Washington summit, the second version of the post-Cold War strategic concept was introduced which, while continuing to emphasize the concept of the Washington Treaty, to maintain Chapter 5, but also pointed out that effective collective defense requirements different from the Cold War and just after the end of the Cold War that way. The version of the strategic concept of the most notable is clearly put forward the same to its Euro-Atlantic region edge of the region as a whole, NATO's mission is to maintain stability in the region to ensure the security of member states, which also means that the geographical expansion of NATO's legal mandate, which is the so-called 'taken the zone. 'NATO will address all the crises in the region, even if they do not directly affect crisis and its member states.' 9.11 'terrorist attacks, NATO said that according to NATO member states signed << Washington Treaty, 'the provisions of Article 5, NATO will the terrorist attacks on the United States as an attack on all NATO member states, NATO members will individually and collectively, including the use of military force to the United States to provide all assistance, including This is also established 52 years since NATO first began to exercise <<Washington Treaty>> Article 5, to send troops to help the U.S. fight against terrorism after the opened the door.

By 2010, the third strategic concept - <<active participation of the modern defensive>>, '9.11' after the NATO summit and after a series of agenda setting and finalized. This new concept to determine the 'global partner 'strategy, emphasizing through dialogue and cooperation in the global partnership for development within the new concept reaffirms NATO's fundamental purposes and principles of the pointed out that NATO is now the main threat from missile attacks, weapons of mass destruction proliferation, terrorism, extremism, NATO outside the region of instability or conflict, cyber attacks, disruption of international energy transport routes, such as climate change, the new NATO concept further reiterated the need for action outside the region to start and legitimacy.

By adjustment of the NATO strategic concept, we can see, the strategy pursued by NATO along with the cultural elements of the international security situation after the Cold War developed, both heritage, but also to adjust, in particular in: First, adhere to the principle of collective defense, In the new security environment, adopt modern means of defense, and the second, stressed the legitimacy of external use of force authorization, and the third will be threats as diverse as genocide, regional crises, terrorism, the fourth, in order to peace and security, NATO is not only beyond the traditional scope zone area, and began to execute the mission on a global scale, such as invasion of Afghanistan, by the gradual transformation of the local defensive intervention for the global crisis, the fifth, the NATO mission to become multifunctional not only concerned about the traditional security issues, but also increasingly involved in crisis management, peacekeeping, humanitarian and rescue operations can be said that NATO is seeking an ambitious stage in a broader role.
Libya's strategic and cultural issues on NATO's strategic challenges of cultural studies method includes two levels of content, these two levels will be shared by groups such assumptions and norms of 'thinking tends to' act with the possible link and choose the appropriate decision-making up In the first level is the basic elements, including a collective security policy on the basic beliefs of the specifications that come from the formation of strategic culture and security affairs, who revealed the process of defining the abstract goal of NATO's new strategic concept, basically belong to the first level, while in the second level is the security policy stance, the basic elements with close ties to security policy positions on behalf of a group of political elites widely accepted, including the first level in the basic elements to interpret, explain and use, specifically, what kind of security policy.

NATO's new strategic culture demanded that NATO take a broader and critical mission, to perform more aggressive defense policy, participation in multi-dimensional international military operations, however, based on the cultural basis of NATO security policy but then a severe challenges of this intervention Libya, is a good example of NATO within the divergence of interests between the different member states, the overall military capability, the implementation of this strategy will, etc., all the action in Libya in the intervention were revealed.

March 17, 2011, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution No. 1973, set up no-fly zone in Libya, for the protection of civilians and their neighborhoods from the Libyan military threat in France, the United States and the United Kingdom immediately from March 19 Japan began military action against Libya, after which NATO in March 2413 decided to establish no-fly zone in Libya, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen expressed that NATO action was taken 'as part of broad international action.' to protect the safety of civilians Libya. The statement also said that NATO member states are committed to fulfilling UN obligations under Security Council resolutions, 'This is NATO's decision to take responsibility because no-fly zone,' .3 31, the U.S. military formally handed over to NATO's overall military operations the initiative. Since then, a NATO-led military action against Libya kicked off, however, along with the conduct of military operations, NATO found itself faced with a series of challenges.

Links to free download
First of all, NATO's ambitious strategy for culture in the face of real national interests are severely constrained, although NATO is committed to affecting change beyond the scope of the European security organization, but , leading to differences in national interests of Member States on major issues of disagreement, for example, the 1996 Kosovo war, most of the members that the situation in former Yugoslavia constitutes a threat to European security, and thus actively participate in, but in Rwanda massacre NATO and the European countries because of limited interests in the region, and did not make adequate humanitarian intervention. Another example is, although according to <<Washington Treaty>> Section 5, some NATO countries involved in Afghanistan to support U.S. military combat operations, but most countries are reluctant to send soldiers a little with the national interest, but the place is full of dangerous tasks. The military attack Libya, NATO is also facing similar distress: within NATO European countries, Britain, France, Italy, represented by the three countries in Libya, the stakes are complex, and therefore a more active military operations, while Norway, Denmark and Canada participate in air strikes only a few countries, some countries are only willing to undertake patrols, not to participate in military combat operations, the European powers did not want to join the war in Germany and even the face of significantly less effective bombing, Britain and France and other countries called for a broader range of military operations, increase the combat strength, and even suggested to consider sending ground troops. French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe interview mildly criticized the NATO action against Libya 'inadequate.' and British Foreign Secretary William Hague has been urging NATO members to make more in the air campaign contributions to former U.S. ambassador NATO Ambassador Robert Hunter, also called, continued to intervene in North Africa, requires a strong joint, NATO, EU and all its member states must accept the inescapable responsibility of NATO officials, the attitude is reflected 范乌尔姆准将NATO's current internal divisions and helplessness on the one hand, he insisted that the NATO action against Libya 'excellent', 'effective protection of civilians' on the other hand, he said, NATO will be decided on their own Libya's military operations as well as how much force, how will their military resources deployed by NATO commanders. Other members also come from external and internal criticism not satisfied, the Spanish Secretary of State responsible for European Affairs, more than countered the British law, Gary critics said he believes the progress of NATO operations very well, does not require any amendments to the current no-fly zone is also very successful Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini declared that he was for France and Britain demand was 'confused.' surface of such discordant voices in France <<World News>> lamented: 'European Defense: death and was buried in Libya.'
In addition, NATO's military capabilities are still insufficient to meet the mission requirements of the new era of NATO member states, the United States the strongest military power, France, Britain followed, but the United States and other members of the disparity is evident between the The In Afghanistan, the U.S. military basically dominated all military operations, more like the other members play a small role. Even if the European NATO members, there are also difficult to make up for the military gap in some countries limited military force, pursues a defensive defense policy, weak and has no intention involved in military operations in other parts of the world in the process of air strikes against Libya, although the coalition warplanes more than 100 sorties a day, but the absence of accurate intelligence support, it is difficult for government forces cause a fatal blow, accidental injury or even the opposition forces, 'amusing incident.' so France, Britain had asked the U.S. bombing offensive to restore U.S. Army War College Strategic Studies Institute, Professor Shi Diyi Metz pointedly noted that its current form, NATO has proven that it can not be implemented in today's world leaders and a number of complex, long-lasting military action in the Balkans, Afghanistan and Libya, the current NATO war may not be sufficient to leave the stage, but certainly enough to make this question the value problems on the table.

Moreover, the NATO military operation caused by the lack of response to the political consequences of the experience, although NATO to respond to regional crises, transformation of peacekeeping as an important task, but after the military capabilities of NATO not only has yet to be tested, more importantly, is related to how to deal with the political consequences of military operations of NATO faces an unfamiliar area. The intervention of Libya, an important reason is that the people are opposed to Western countries, tribal rebellion, social unrest in the case, Gaddafi regime crumbling, once through the air against its armed forces, armed opposition to seize power to help, but war is not as smooth as expected the West to support Gaddafi's forces are not vulnerable, was presented the warring factions anxious Libyan domestic politics contest between the forces making the situation confusing. high-profile involvement of NATO air strikes probably find it difficult to achieve the desired effect, but because of internal differences, but also reluctance to send ground troops. the war in Iraq as 'regime change' model, NATO is too ambitious, but not the United States as NATO's strength and confidence. even for the limited strength of Libya such countries, NATO would not easily try this high-risk political consequences of the action, fearing Nizushenxian, causing countries to domestic political and social instability. This also resulted in this indecisive within NATO, a lot of controversy this Tanghun Shui bad times, is likely to make its position within the opposition, dismal.

Finally, the traditional defensive, inward-looking strategy for culture in the post-Cold War NATO's transformation process, there are still an important impact on NATO member states, most of the national strength is limited, in their minds, NATO main function is defense, to protect members of the national security, but also as 'free riders', they are more willing to rely on the United States and other powers to provide security support, while most countries do not have a large army, but also do not want a substantial increase in military spending. With NATO defensive strategic culture from the region to global participatory, some Member States do not fully support the new defense policy and many member states have long-term peace, anti-war tradition of .2003 against the United States during the war in Iraq, North about anti-war forces in massive internal member, the United States cringed, it is not hard to understand why, in February of this year's seminar on NATO's strategic concept, NATO, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates could not help but to slow transformation 'fired.' He pointed out that the fundamental weakness of the member states of NATO and U.S. military power imbalance, and in a number of NATO member countries, there is a war over culture ... Europe to achieve demilitarization as obstacle to peace and security, which requires a more thorough reform of NATO.

Continue to exist as a post-Cold War military bloc and highly controversial, NATO's mission and future direction of development as the focus of world attention, while the EU seeks to strengthen the efforts of an independent European defense, but also from the internal challenges of NATO's existence and mission can be said that military action against Libya is NATO's new strategic concept and strategic culture touchstone, no matter the outcome, the future of NATO's strategic concept, destined to not be smooth. Links to free download http://www.

Cultural Strategy Papers