ASIS nov15_ASIS_RiskUK_may15 04/11/2015 10:05 Page 1
Newsletter WINTER 2015
UNITED KINGDOM CHAPTER 208
ASIS NEWSLETTER OF THE YEAR – WINNER 2015, 2013, 2012, 2008 & 2003 – HONOURABLE MENTION 2011, 2006.
The Age of Intervention: Is Corporate Security paying for the backlash? Dr. Chaditsa Poulatova, LL.M. and Peter Houlis CSyP “No State or group of States has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internal or external affairs of any other State. Consequently, armed intervention and all other forms of interference or attempted threats against the personality of the State or against its political, economic and cultural elements, are in violation of international law…” (UNGA, 1970) Since twelve nation states signed the North Atlantic Treaty in 1948 and became the founding members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), an inter-governmental and military alliance formed to counter the threat posed by the Soviet Union and bring peace and stability in the aftermath of World War II, the global security picture has changed dramatically. During the Cold War, the alliance was seen as embodying a wider sense of an ‘Atlantic Community’, as its member states were united by shared values and history and an even more powerful sense of common purpose, which assisted in overcoming disparities in resources and capabilities. Three defining moments that took place at the end of the 20th century, are largely responsible for the shift in global security understanding, the end of the Cold War, the wholesale adoption of the Worldwide Web, and 9/11.
The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989 and the absence of existential threat to member states, previously posed by the Soviet Union, allowed the structural imbalances within the alliance to be displaced, while previously they were carefully contained within NATO. Now NATO had to adjust itself, its goals and missions. NATO’s engagement in the western Balkans, with military operations in Bosnia (1995-6) and Kosovo (1999) despite the existing cuts in defence spending in the US as well as its five largest European Allies (UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain) exposed the European inability to resolve the crisis without strong US diplomatic and military presence. Sadly, the end of the Cold War failed to usher in a new era of peace. Today, we have rising tension in Central Asia, geopolitical changes and redefined boundaries across areas of Europe and a break down in the Middle East. As a result, some former Eastern European countries such as the Baltics and Poland have successfully adopted western economies and are benefiting from this while others have struggled to grow and prosper under their new independence. Meanwhile, Russia moves to re-establish its place as a major power following the demise of the USSR by responding to the Western intervention in Ukraine
and Syria. According to the Russian President Vladimir Putin, the origins of the Ukraine crisis lie in NATO’s decision to expand the alliance eastward. In his televised speech, he stated that, “We were promised that after Germany’s unification, NATO wouldn’t spread eastward. The then NATO Secretary-General told us that the alliance wouldn’t expand beyond its eastern borders”. (2014) Annexing Crimea and supporting pro-Russian forces in Eastern Ukraine, resulting in western sanctions, and supporting Syria’s President Assad as Russian troops fight alongside government forces in open defiance of the West, intent on forcing regime change is causing major political concern, continued page 4
We won again! At the Anaheim Conference in September it was announced that the UK Chapter had won the Newsletter of the Year for the fifth time. This is the sixth time in ten that the Chapter Newsletter has won an award.
Massive thanks to all those who have contributed articles and news, Helene Carlsson and Graham Bassett for their help and Matt Jarvis for making it look pretty. Thanks also to our sponsors and advertisers for the support. Here goes for 2016. MIKE HURST, EDITOR