The expert group set up for designing the strategy, placed under the direction of former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, made its recommendations in May for the new NATO strategy, entitled “NATO 2020”. “The alliance must be versatile and flexible in this time period of uncertainty in the 21st century”, said Madeleine Albright at the presentation of the report. Since then, this has been discussed in NATO and beyond – and certainly quite controversial.

What is foremost noticeable:
The word disarmament does not appear in the paper, and the even more harmless word “arms control” is hidden just once in the text.

The message of the recommendations is clear:

1. NATO considers nuclear weapons as an absolute necessity for deterrence politics. Nuclear weapons should be stationed further in Europe, modernised, and part of the British trident as well as the American for tactical nuclear weapons. All plans for the removal of nuclear weapons from Europe and the stopping of nuclear sharing were rejected.
2. At the core of the new doctrine is the takeover of US plans for an own missile defence system as central NATO project. A missile shield should protect Europe. Only so long as – says Albright – the concept of national deterrence is achieved.
3. The War in Afghanistan is seen as the current challenge for NATO and it should be supported with stronger involvement from civil and military networking until victory is achieved.
4. All member states are encouraged to strengthen their defence efforts and to make them effective. The “safety of the world” should not be jeopardised by a lack of financial resources.
5. NATO does not want to act through its doctrine as a world police, but rather as an intervention power, when the “interests” of its states are jeopardised. This specifically includes the safety of their natural resources and trade routes.
6. A further expansion to the east is formulated- though more cautiously than in previous documents – as an objective. This includes nine partnership alliances with the former southern Soviet republics, as well as Indonesia and Malaysia, but also Australia and New Zealand. Japan will also be integrated into a new collaboration. While emphasizing the regional character of NATO it will solidify its intervention ability and global expansion strategy.
7. EU-Europe will become a partner and second leg of NATO, with which it can act to share burdens and responsibilities, as said in the experts’ paper. This is a clear upgrading of the militaristic policies of the EU stipulated the Lisbon Treaty.
8. It was also was raised in the paper, the increasing of electronic warfare, in the own scope of action and trainin, as well as the reaction possibilities to attacks on computer, communication and energy networks.
9. Emphasized also in the expert paper is the “new role” of NATO, which i supposed to manifest itself, among other things, in the struggle against the climate change and other global challenges. The instruments for the solution of these problems are vague but thoroughly in characteristic of the militaristic style of NATO: security must be ensured.
10. All of these challenges are classified in the “war against terror”. Among other things, this is used for the ostensible legitimization for the world wide interventionist operations of NATO.

If a (first) conclusion of this document is to be drawn, than it can only be: pure militarism, continuing of the wars, especially in Afghanistan and, above all, further nuclear armament. The words are more cautious and vague, but the reality is brutal and war-like. Approaches for greater political cooperation, e.g. with Russia, are foiled by aggressive armament policy (including the missile defence system).

→ Peace activities during the Summit