"Road Trip" FAO style; Two weeks, Three Frozen Conflicts,
Six Presidents, Seven Capitals

by COL Michael P. Anderson, USA, 48C,/center>

          Over the course of 2 weeks in March 2006, on two successive "road trips" to two priority regions, the Western Balkans and the South Caucasus, I was reminded of the critical role that Foreign Area Officers (FAOs) are playing in helping to integrate these regions into the broader Euro-Atlantic community. I'm a 48C and on both trips I represented US European Command, accompanying Ambassador Victoria Nuland, US Ambassador to NATO, on a trip to the Western Balkans, and accompanying Assistant Secretary of State for Europe, Daniel Fried, to the South Caucasus states and Turkey. At each stop FAOs (48Cs and 48Es), serving as Defense Attachés and Office of Defense Cooperation (ODC) Chiefs were key in painting the "on the ground" picture to the visiting delegations. Whether it was Skopje or Baku, Zagreb or Tbilisi, FAOs with their insights and knowledge of their regions were instrumental in shaping the opinions of these key State Department decision makers.

          The purpose of each trip was different. The intent of the 6-8 March 2006 visit to Macedonia, Albania, and Croatia, the NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) states of the Western Balkans, was to present an honest assessment of their chances for NATO membership. The second trip, from 13-17 March was primarily focused on resolving the "frozen conflicts" of the South Caucasus; Nagorno-Karabakh, disputed between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and South Ossetia and Abkhazia, breakaway provinces in Georgia. Yet the common denominator of each visit was the valued contributions of US Army FAOs, whether accompanying the delegations or serving as the military expertise on the respective Country Teams.

          The "Adriatic Three" (A3) states of Macedonia, Albania, and Croatia are working hard toward their aspirations for NATO membership. NATO as an Alliance, however, is unlikely to open its doors to further expansion this year when its heads of state meet at a NATO Summit in Riga, Latvia in November 2006. This unambiguous message was conveyed by our delegation to the Presidents, Prime Ministers, National Security Cabinets, members of Parliament, and media in each country.

          This type of NATO "road show" was also done in 2002 as the United States gave a frank, final look at the then seven NATO candidates prior to their invitation to the Alliance at the Prague Summit. For today's candidate states, the real work remains in the hands of the nations themselves. Each President and Prime Minister was reminded of just that, and reminded that the Alliance is a "performance-based" organization.

          Albania's biggest challenge to NATO membership remains crime and corruption, with a worrisome "road of drugs" running thru the country, corrupt prosecutors, and a world corruption index of #126, lower than Burkina Faso's.

          Croatia has different challenges with extremely low public support for NATO membership -- only 35% support -- being the most prescient. Croatia as a nation must decide if it wants to be a European neutral state similar to Austria or Sweden, or a Balkan NATO-member state like Slovenia or Romania.

          Macedonia seemed to me to be the nation most ready for NATO membership. They have made significant progress, militarily, politically, economically, and inter-ethnically. Their Prime Minister spoke to us of the "Miracle of Macedonia", and he now wants to share Macedonia's multiethnic success throughout the region.

"Frozen Conflicts" of the South Caucasus

          I accompanied Asst SecState Fried and Ambassador Steve Mann, Special State Department Negotiator for Eurasian Conflicts, on a trip to the South Caucasus, 13-17 March 2006. Less than one week after the previous trip to the Balkans, I was struck by the similarly important role that FAOs in DAOs and ODCs played in informing the State Department delegation of the current military state of affairs in Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Armenia.

          Visits such as these begin with an initial orientation briefing at the US Embassy by the US Country Team. In each case, the strong FAO teams provided essential background information helpful in understanding the complexities of Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as the "frozen" situations of Abkahazia and South Ossetia in Georgia.

          Nagorno- Karabakh (N-K) remains since 1994 an unresolved conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. N-K and seven provinces of Azerbaijan are occupied by Armenian forces. Our delegation sought to spur progress in resolving the conflict by meeting with both President Aliyev of Azerbaijan and then President Kocharian of Armenia in a type of "shuttle diplomacy". As presidential elections loom in 2008 for both nations, 2006 is seen as a potential "window of opportunity". Positively, Ambassador Mann said that as a result of the separate Kocharian-Aliyev talks that we held, "real progress for the first time in more than five years" was achieved. Similarly, we met with Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvilli and conveyed the absolute necessity for him to endeavor to peacefully resolve both South Ossetia and Abkahzia.

FAO role

          The breadth of issues discussed on these trips; from relations with Iran, to energy pipelines, to NATO membership, to Black Sea and Caspian Sea security, to potential Membership Action Plan (MAP) status for Georgia, to the presence of Russian forces on Georgian and Armenian soil, to troop contributions to international missions, and defense reform, were all areas where essential input from FAOs was sought and welcomed. Each delegation, both Ambassador Nuland's NATO mission, as well as Assistant Secretary Fried's Caucasus mission, acknowledged the criticality of military experts serving in the region. Those experts are Foreign Area Officers.

Conclusion

          The importance of regional military expertise is an affirmation that should resonate with all FAOs, but

especially junior officers. Our regional studies, in-country training experiences, language proficiency, cultivated host nation contacts, and cultural skills are all essential tools. You will be turned to and your expertise, your awareness of current developments, your "tools", will all be relied upon by key US Government decision makers. Our input on such matters such as NATO membership and melting "frozen conflicts" matters. At each point along the way of your FAO path, you should keep this thought firmly in mind; each of our experiences builds upon the previous one to make us the invaluable foreign area experts that we strive to be.

          Assistant Secretary Fried asked that I, as a FAO and the uniform-wearing member of his delegation, convey to each President the futility of a "military option" in resolving their respective frozen conflicts. Doing so, in direct, unmistakable language, in private settings with heads of state, is an example of the trust placed in FAOs. In these most delicate of discussions, FAOs, experienced in the region and steeped in the issues, serve as true "soldier-statesmen".

Editor's note: COL Mike Anderson, 48C, has more than 20 years of FAO experience and assignments. He serves as the senior Army FAO on Gen Jones' EUCOM staff as Chief of the J5 Europe Division, responsible for the countries noted in this article as well as those of the rest of Europe. His email address is: andersmi@eucom.mil

          

          

2006, Foreign Area Officer Association
Mt. Vernon, Virginia
Maintained by LTC Steve Gotowicki.
http://www.faoa.org