1. No category

Welcome Letter From The Secretary General
Kadir Has University
Model United Nations
08-11 May 2015
www.hasmun.org
Welcome Letter From Secretary-General
Distinguished participants and guests,
It’s my distinct honor and utmost pleasure to welcome you all to the second edition of Kadir
Has University Model United Nations Conference, HASMUN, which will be held from the
8th to the 11th of May 2015 at our Cibali campus located at the heart of Istanbul , Turkey.
For the past year, along with my wonderful colleagues ,we put a great effort on making the
first ever HASMUN conference a remarkable experience for future editions. Last year, we
held our first HASMUN conference successfully with over 200 high school and university
participants. As the second year of HASMUN begins, we push the limits even further and
expect to welcome more people from all around the world. HASMUN’15 Team would like to
bring a higher quality of Model United Nations we seek for to participants and at the same
time provide with a life-changing 4-day memorable experience in our charming campus
located on the shores of Golden Horn.
This year’s theme is “ Challenges facing the 21st century diplomacy and encouraging
diversity fellowship” and HASMUN’15 offers four UN committees including United Nations
Security Council, North Atlantic Treaty Organization ,Economic and Social Council, Social
and Humanitarian Committee. Delegates of the United Nations Security Council and North
Atlantic Treaty Organization will be chosen from experienced appliants and they will focus
on international politics.On the other hand, Economic and Social Council will be consisted of
high school students only because we strive to provide high school students with a better
understanding of the inner working of the United Nations to foster skills and compromise.
Social Humanitarian Committee are appeal for newcomers and experienced delegates.In addition to
these four UN Committees, this year we have set up Justice and
Home Affairs Council under the umbrella of European Union and additionally
International Court of Justice.Law students are kindly welcomed to Justice and
Home Affairs Council and the court whichwill tackle with law-based issues and
try to have deep insight to human rights related problems.
HASMUN’15 Team member have been chosen meticulously and we are working
tirelessly to make your experience at HASMUN’15 one to be remembered.
On behalf of the Academic and Operations Team, I kindly invite you to participate in the second
edition of Kadir HasUniversity Model United Nations
Conference, HASMUN’15.
Warm Regards,
Ecenur ORTAÇ
Secretary-General
HASMUN’15
[email protected]
Kadir Has University
Model United Nations
08-11 May 2015
www.hasmun.org
Welcome Letter From Under-Secretary-General
Distinguished Delegates,
It is my honour and privilage to serve you as the Under-Secretary-General responsible for the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization. On behalf of the administration of the conference, I would like to
welcome you all to the second annual session of the Kadir Has University Model United Nations
Conference which is HASMUN’15
In this committee, we will be simulating the supreme decision-making body of the organization which
is the North Atlantic Council to deal with two agenda. The first topic is Missile Defence and it is
relevant to the very foundation aim of the organization to defend its allies from any further attacks.
Since the proliferation comes to a level that give the parties to purchase the missiles cheaper, the treat
become bigger for the alliance. So the Alliance needs to deal with this issue with an insurance policy
like Missile Defence System but for further economical burdens of the system, the alliance must take
bold steps. In this regard we are going to try to find solution to this matter in this conference. The
second topic is NATO-Russia Relationship which is always at diary. After the Ukraine Crisis, NATO
decided to end all the relations with the Russia as a response. The NATO-Russia Council also affected
from that crisis by terminating its acts. But these acts are not seen sufficient from the international
community, so in this conference, with the light of the events we are going to try to come up with a
comprehensive propositions.
The following study guide will provide you with the basic information not only about the conflicts but
its sources and structures. We think that after reading this guide and make further research about your
countries that you have assigned, you will be ready to debate fluently in this committee.We hope that
this conference and the oppurtunity to debate a very controversial issue like this will help you to
deepen your knowledge about the committee and the topics but also equip you with various useful
skills such as leadership, cooperation, lobbying, self-expression and public speaking.
For the preparation period of this study guide, I would like to mention and deliver my sincere thanks
to Kutlu AKSU who is the academic assistant of the committee and also has contributed as much as he
can to the guide and to our Secretary-General Ms. ORTAÇ for giving me this oppurtunity.
We are looking forward to see you in Kadir Has University which has a beautiful breat-taking golden
horn view.Please do not hasitate to contact us for your further questions via: ( e-mail adresses)
Göksenin GÜNGÖR & Kutlu AKSU
USG-NATO
/ Academic Asistant-NATO
Table of Contents
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................15
1.INTRODUCTION TO THE COMMITTEE
a) Foundation of the Committee
After the World War II, the peaceful coexistance
between communist East and the Capitalist West that
happened for a comman enemy has given its place to
the cold war in 1948, just 3 years after the end of the
war. In February 1948, the communist party of the
Czechoslovakia which was backed by the Soviet Union
overthrew the demoratically elected government. In
addition to this event Soviets blockaded Allied-controlled West Berlin. The rage in the Europe has
come to an end with the aid provided by the Marshall Plan and the other means increased the volume
of economic flow and fostered the degree of the stabilization economically. In the light of these
events some of the European democracies decided to form various projects for more comprehensive
cooperation and collective security. After few serial discussions and debates between countries, the
North Atlantic Treaty was finally signed on the 4th April 1949.
b) Member Countries
NATO consist of 28 members today. Those are;Belgium(1949), Canada (1949),Denmark (1949),
France (1949), Iceland (1949), Italy (1949), Luxembourg (1949), Netherlands (1949), Norway (1949),
Portugal (1949), The Unıted Kıngdom (1949), The Unıted States (1949), Greece (1952), Turkey
(1952), Germany (1955), Spaın (1982), Czech Republıc (1999), Hungary (1999), Poland (1999),
Bulgarıa (2004), Estonıa (2004), Latvıa (2004), Lıthuanıa (2004), Romanıa (2004), Slovakıa (2004),
Slovenıa (2004), Albanıa (2009), Croatıa (2009).
c) Partners
Dispite the member states, NATO work with several partners in worldwide.

Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC)
This Council consist of both all NATO member states and the following partner countries; Armenia,
Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Finland, The Former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, Georgia, Ireland, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Malta, The Republic of Moldova,
Montenegro, Russia, Serbia, Sweden,Switzerland, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan.
-NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue
These countries of the Meditarranean region are currently involved; Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan,
Mauritania, Morocco, Tunuisia.

Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI)
Four members of the Gulf Cooperation Council have joined the alliance as the partners; Bahrain,
Qatar, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates.

Partners Across The Globe
These partners are the ones which is not an element of the other structures, so the alliance called them
the partner across the globe. These countries are as follow; Afghanistan, Australia, Iraq, Japan,
Pakistan, Republic of Korea, New Zealand, Mongolia.

International Organizations
Addition to these partnerships that listed above, The Alliance also works with several prestigious
international organizations such as; United Nations, European Union, Organization for Security and
Co-operation in Europe.
d) Structure
NATO’s structure divided into to departmants as
Civil and Military Structure as seen above. The
Military wing’s supreme body is the Military
Committee(MC). This body has established by the
first Secretary-General of NATO to adress the
upcoming wars just after the establishment of the
Alliance such as Korean War. The Civilian wing
represents the political side of the Alliance. The
North Atlantic Council is the supreme decision
making body of this wing and also it is the
committee that we are going simulate in
HASMUN’15.
e) Decision-making System
The Decisions in a comprehensive organization like this holds a strength. The system must be clear
and quick enough to respond the conflicts when they are happening. So the allies, decided to have the
North Atlantic Council’s system that depends on not on voting or the decisions of the majority but the
basis of the unanimity and common accord. This means that the decisions made by the North Atlantic
Council is symbolizes the common and collective will among the nations. This council is chaired by
the Secretary-General of NATO and also it is one of the principal duties of him. In which level the
council meets, the decisions are equal and have the same status and validity. In additon to the duty of
deciding the acts of the organization, since this body is the only one that was established by the North
Atlantic Treaty, it also carries the duty to establish subsidiary bodies, as it sees fit. As seen next, The
Nuclear Planning Group has the comparable authority to the North Atlantic Council but it focuses to
the spesific matters as nuclear policies, planning and the consultation procedures. The subjects which
has debated by the bodies of the Alliance are written down to a paper called “Communique”. It carries
a different form that you may be familiar from ModelUN conferences. Instead of the startings with
phrasal verbs, they start with the “We” that reflects the common will and collectivity as seen in an
example below;
“We confirm today the preparedness of our Alliance to support, on a case-by-case basis and in
accordance with our own procedures, peacekeeping operations under the authority of the UN Security
Council, which has the primary responsibility for international peace and security. We are ready to
respond positively to initiatives that the UN Secretary-General might take to seek Alliance assistance
in the implementation of UN Security Council Resolutions . We have asked NATO's Secretary General
to maintain in this respect, under the guidance of the Council in Permanent Session, the necessary
contacts with the Secretary-General of the UN regarding the assistance that the Alliance could
provide.”
f) Evaluation of NATO’s Success With Its Interventions
In this part, we are going to study NATO’s intervention to find out how successful the Alliances are in
its missions. In this regard, we will have 3 different mission examples; Afghanistan, Kosovo and Gulf
of Aden. The reason which we have chosen these missions are the missions are in different forms and
different but current types.
-Afghanistan Intervention
The story begun with the 9/11 attacks that has been
made in New York. USA called NATO for an
emergency meeting and for the first time in the
history of the Alliance call for the article 5. After
some debates, in the Bonn Conference that was in
December 2001, the ISAF1 has created. As known,
Afghanistan was in the rule of the Taliban who said to
have launched serial terrorist attacks worldwide so for
the Alliance’s point of view the peace and security
must be restored. On October 7th, air strikes began by
British and American troops. Taliban was defeated by the Alliance and ISAF began to establish
military bases in the whole country to establish peace and security for the people. Today, it is called as
an international level conflict and more than 70 countries are involved in the conflict in different
ways. If we want to look at the outcomes, we may face with some consequences. Firstly, in 2004,
Taliban was defeated in general elections. Secondly, ISAF forces established police forces to become
the country safer place and the main point of the ISAF mission is now disarming military and search
for terrorists. Lastly, the mission have caused many civilian casualties since this its nature as a
controversial mission. When it comes to evaluating the mission, the results will be as follow; many of
problems remained as unsolved, military attacks by the Taliban fighters are still going on and they
need to be pushed back, their own fights must not cause excessive civilian casulties, the military
assistance and securtiy is essential for the civillian reconstruction, the farmers in Afghanistan are
begining again to drug cultivation and also high corruption becoming as a dramatic problem for the
Afghanistan’s future.
Kosovo Intervention
1
ISAF(International Security Assistance Force) was one of the largest coalitions in history and is NATO’s most challenging
mission to date. At its height, the force was more than 130,000 strong, with troops from 51 NATO and partner nations.
Originally deployed to provide security in and around the capital Kabul, ISAF’s presence was gradually expanded to cover the
whole country by the second half of 2006. As ISAF expanded into the east and south, its troops became increasingly
engaged in fighting a growing insurgency in 2007 and 2008, while trying to help Afghanistan rebuild. In 2009, a new
counter-insurgency was launched and 40,000 extra troops were deployed. For further information:
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_69366.htm
The supression of the Kosovo Albanians by the
Serbians led to the problem. In 1996, Albenian
Liberation Army decided to resist with the goal of
independence from Serbia. In the following years,
Albanian Liberation Army begin to action with the
attack open Serbian police. Outcomes of these actions
were the systematic massacre against the Albanians
especially women, children and mostly civilians and
Albanians expelled from the country. In October 1998,
observers of the OSCE declared these actions as ethnic
cleansing. In these regard, all of the efforts of the
international society stayed unsuccessful. NATO
threats with a military intervention also. But in 24
March, NATO’s intervention begun with the bombards. First attempts were eleminate the targets and
secure the important areas of mineral resources. The strikes were directed to the key areas like bridges,
roads, airports, factories and military targets to prevent any movement of Serbian Army. Outcomes of
the intervention by the KFOR2 are the refugee problem that consist of 1.2 million civilian that were on
the run, regime change in Serbia and the infrastructre of the Serbia was harmed hardly when the
conflict happens and still the Serbia suffers economically from the war. The evaluation of this
intervention is that firstly NATO attacks were named as illegal by the United Nations Security Council
because there was no permission and before the intervention the Albanian paramilitary organization
supported and used by NATO to legitimize the intervention.
-Gulf Of Aden Invervention
2
Today, approximately 4,500 troops from the NATO-led Kosovo Force (KFOR), provided by 31 countries continue to work
towards maintaining a safe and secure environment and freedom of movement for all citizens and communities in Kosovo.
Throughout Kosovo, KFOR is cooperating and coordinating with the United Nations (UN), the European Union (EU) and other
international actors to support the development of a stable, democratic, multi-ethnic and peaceful Kosovo. In April 2013,
Belgrade and Pristina reached an Agreement on Normalisation, which is helping to improve relations between both parties
while giving momentum to the Euro-Atlantic integration of the Western Balkans. NATO and KFOR stand ready to support the
implementation of this agreement within its means and capabilities. For further information:
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_48818.htm
In 2008, gulf of Aden hosted many piracy events.
Many merchant ships were attacked in multiple
acts(120 pirate assaults, 35 stolen ships, 600
hostages). With the light of those events, UN
Secretary-General Ban-Ki Moon requested NATO to
involve the crisis for faster response. Because, the
aids that has sent from UN to Somalia which has
suffered in these years a lot are stolen, the UN World
Food Program has seen as endangered. NATO shared
this point of view and also some of NATO’s member
countries citizens are also taken as hostage including
USA and Turkey. So the NATO Defence ministers
agreed on UN’s request and run 2 operations: “Operation Allied Provider” 3 and “Operation Allied
Protector”. On 5 October, Standing NATO Maritime Group 2 has crossed the Suez Canal, 3 ships of
SNMG2 permanently patrolled the Gulf of Aden. As the outcomes of this intervention, 30.000 metric
tonnes of humanitarian aid delivered safely to Somalia, any piracy has not recorded to the ships that
carry the WFP food since the escorting starts, NATO is now working on new emerging for the
comprehensive solutions also emerging cooperation between the international actors on piracy acts. If
we want to evaluate the mission, fisrt thing t say is the success of this mission and it was recorded as
one of the most succesful mission in the history of the Alliance, and the mission brought trade stability
to the region in term of the ensuring the international trade but on the other hand, the roots of the
piracy problems stay unsolved since the most of the pirates’ are Somalian and the intervention is not
for the mainland of Somalian mainland, so the conflict of piracy and the poverty still remaining in the
region.
3
Over time, the operation has evolved to respond to new piracy tactics: the March 2012 Strategic Assessment, for instance,
highlighted the need to erode the pirates’ logistics and support base by, among other things, disabling pirate vessels or
skiffs, attaching tracking beacons to mother ships and allowing the use of force to disable or destroy suspected pirate or
armed robber vessels. With Operation Ocean Shield, the Alliance has also broadened its approach to combating piracy by
offering, within means and capabilities to regional states that request it, assistance in developing their own capacity to
combat piracy. This capacity building contributes to a lasting solution to piracy and is in line with regional ownership. NATO
is not a lead actor in regional capacity building, but it provides added value in niche areas such as military training,
command and control, and coordination in complex situations which can benefit countries in the region. NATO is therefore
taking advantage of port visits to provide training and conduct ship-rider programmes for the local population. For Further
information: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_48815.htm?selectedLocale=en
AGENDA ITEM 1: MISSILE DEFENCE
INTRODUCTION TO THE TOPIC A: MISSILE DEFENCE
Missile DefenceBefore we begin to the introduction to the topic, understanding the classification of
missiles is vital point. So we eould like to start with the classification of the missiles to answer all
further questions in your minds as the differences between each other.
a)
Classification of Missiles
Missiles are commonly classified according to their types, launch modes, range, propulsion, warhead
and the guidance systems. The main classification is the one which on the basis of their types. There
are two types of missiles as, Ballistic Missiles and Cruise Missiles and the rest of the classifications
listed below;
Launch Mode:
-Surface-to-Surface Missile
-Surface-to-Air Missile
-Surface-to-Sea Missile
-Air-to-Air Missile
-Air-to-Surface Missile
-Sea-to-Sea Missile
-Sea-to-Surface Missile
-Anti-Tank Missile
Range:
-Short Range Missile
-Medium Range Missile
-Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile
-Intercontinental Ballistic Missile
Propulsion:
-Solid Propulsion
-Liquid Propulsion
-Hybrid Propulsion
-Ramjet
-Scramjet
-Cyrogenic
Warhead:
-Conventional
-Strategic
Guidance Systems:
-Wire Guidence
-Command Guidance
-Terrain Comparison Guidance
-Terrastrail Guidance
-Inertial Guidance
-Beam Rider Guidance
-Laser Guidance
-RF and GPS Reference
The main classification as we referred above is type of missiles and the Ballistic Missiles are going to
be our main issue as we are talking about the missile defence.
b)
Evaluation Of The Importance Of Missile Defence With The Cold War Example
During the Cold War, USSR and USA has come really close to the edge of the nuclear war several
times with regards to the armament race. Since your rival’s armament means a threat to your security
and pacify your current capability, this process becomes a race, a kind that even the superior party
does not want to loose its advantage towards the rival.
Just after the World War II, USSR wanted to develop its own nuclear weapon and achieved this goal in
late 1940s. In the begining of the 1950s, US announced its hydrogen bombs and as an answer, USSR
tried to reach this capability and just several years later they have achieved it. Since USA has
maintained its advantage during this process, they also desired to reach all the USSR soils with the
range of their missile’s, USSR’s respond was to launch the Sputnik missile to the space to show their
capability of shooting them where ever they launch the missiles. In addition to the very short summary
of the the process that is stated above, we also wanted to empower the image of the our aim with an
historical agreement; SALT. As known the outcome decision of the treaty was to inactive the missile
defence systems of both USA and USSR to ensure the security and to establish the trust.
c)
NATO Missile Defence System
In NATO 2010 Lisbon Summit assembled under the theme of “NATO’s New Strategic Concept”.
During the Summit the allies were talking about the future proplems that the Alliance may face. One
of the key challanges is the increase of the proliferation level through the Europe border. In this regard,
the representative of the United States has offered a missile defence system as the capability of the
Alliance. The pupose of the this proposal was to serve to the Alliance’s core task of collecive defence.
To do so, Allies decided in the Declaration4 of the Lisbon Summit as:
“36. The threat to NATO European populations, territory and forces posed by the proliferation of
ballistic missiles is increasing. As missile defence forms part of a broader response to counter this
threat, we have decided that the Alliance will develop a missile defence capability to pursue its core
task of collective defence. The aim of a NATO missile defence capability is to provide full coverage
and protection for all NATO European populations, territory and forces against the increasing threats
posed by the proliferation of ballistic missiles, based on the principles of the indivisibility of Allied
security and NATO solidarity, equitable sharing of risks and burdens, as well as reasonable challenge,
taking into account the level of threat, affordability and technical feasibility, and in accordance with
the latest common threat assessments agreed by the Alliance.
37. To this end, we have decided that the scope of NATO’s current Active Layered Theatre Ballistic
Missile Defence (ALTBMD) programme’s command, control and communications capabilities will
be expanded beyond the protection of NATO deployed forces to also protect NATO European
populations, territory and forces. In this context, the United States European Phased Adaptive
Approach is welcomed as a valuable national contribution to the NATO missile defence architecture,
as are other possible voluntary contributions by Allies. We have tasked the Council to develop missile
defence consultation, command and control arrangements by the time of the March 2011 meeting of
our Defence Ministers. We have also tasked the Council to draft an action plan addressing steps to
implement the missile defence capability by the time of the June 2011 Defence Ministers’ meeting.
38. We will continue to explore opportunities for missile defence co-operation with Russia in a spirit of
reciprocity, maximum transparency and mutual confidence. We reaffirm the Alliance’s readiness to
invite Russia to explore jointly the potential for linking current and planned missile defence systems at
an appropriate time in mutually beneficial ways. NATO missile defence efforts and the United States
European Phased Adaptive Approach provide enhanced possibilities to do this. We are also prepared
to engage with other relevant states, on a case by case basis, to enhance transparency and confidence
and to increase missile defence mission effectiveness.”
As seen above in the declaration, current sysytem’s capability has expended. Therefore, Allies agreed
upon a plan that will covered by the common economic effort by the allies in 10 years of process. The
estimated total cost of the Ballistic Missile System has calculated as 200 million € (260 million $ with
the currency of that day). In June 2011, Defence Ministers approve the NATO Ballistic Missile
Defence Action Plan as the significant first step. Followingly, Turkey announced that they can host
US-owned missile defence radar as one of the NATO Ballistic Missile Defence capability. During the
same month, United States and Romania agreed upon to base a US Aegis Ashore System in Romania,
also Poland signed an agreement with US to enter into force and The Netherlands announced that they
will upgrade their four air-defence frigates with extended long range system for the aim of national
contribution to the system. A few months later, in October, Spain and US announced that US Aegis
Ashore Ships will be ported in Rota, Spain.
At the begining of 2012, Germany offered its Patriot air and missile defence systems with the aim of
national contribution to the system.
4
(see: Lisbon Summit Declaration http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_68828.htm)
In April, NATO succesfully tested the command and control architecture for the Interim Capability in
the Air Command HQ Ramstein, Germany. In May, at the NATO Chicago Summit, NATO members
signed the decleration of Interim BMD Capability.
In December, as the result of the ongoing civil war in
Syria, the conflict reflected to its biggest border
neigbour, Turkey. Therefore, NATO decided to
protect its ally which carries an important role with
its geo-strategical location. In this regard, Germany,
the Netherlands and the United States deployed
Patriot air and missile defence systems to eastern
Turkey.
In 2013, US Aegis Ashore system has grounded to Deveselu, Romania and the United States
announced that its act of revision of EPAA.
In the first part of 2014, first and second US Aegis is stationed in Rota,Spain. Then Denmark
announced its decision to acquire ship-based radars for NATO Ballistic Missile Defence.
Lastly, In the NATO Summit in Wales, the Allies revised the basic points for the NATO BMD and also
discussed upon additional contribution that offered or decided by the Allies.
As you see above the main and vital point here is not to have a Missile Defence System among the
Allies but to connect them under the roof of a stronger network system. Because, 30 countries already
has this capability and some of them are allies. “The aim was to put al these capabilities in one single
network, so this all capabilities would become more effective and efficient by working in such network.
By doing that the whole is much greater than the sum of its parts. “(Ludwig Decamps, Head of
Armaments Programme Support Section) Therefore, when the allies contributes to the system one by
one, the system becomes more comprehensive and stronger.
d)
Components of Missile Defence System
-Infrared Satelite
-Communication Stalite
-Communication System
-Ground Station/Command Station
-Missile Sensor Systems
-Shooter/Interceptor Missiles
e)
How The Missile Defence System Works?
This process is the written version of NATO’s introduction video which you can see in the following
link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LPdmxnBkIU
We will explain this process via a case simulation step by step;

When the missile (the threat) launches to a location which NATO wishes to defend,
missile’s heat signatures detected by a space-located infrared satelite,

The information is transfered to a ground station(most likely to HQ) for processing,

Then the information is sent to the communication network which in turn transfers to
all neccessary sensors in weapon systems,

Since the missile’s engine eventually burns out, the infrared satelite can no longer
detected,

So, the long range range sensors get involved such as land-based and sea-based
systems,

Then this systems continue to track the missile and transfer information to weapons
and to command and control system to let them calculate the firing solutions,
Since there will be variety of factors, the upper layer shooter may or may not engage to the missile but
lets continue with lower shooters,

The information becomes contiunallty being shared among all the network system, as
this tracking continues, of course the greater and greater accuracy achieved. The upper layer
sensor are updated information to the lower layer systems an d shooters,

As the missile continues on its path, lower layer sea-based and land-based sensors
continue to track it,

Finally, a lower layers shooter that has seen fit engages and destroys the missile.
The best part of this system is that the whole process occurs in a few minutes.
a)
Funding NATO and MD System
Allies can directly or indirectly make
financial contributions to the Allience for
its costs of running the activities and
implementing its policies. Indirect
contributions normally the largest
incomes of the Alliance, for instance to
volunteer equipments or troops to a
military operations holds a serius costs.
Direct contributions are used by the
Alliance for the financial requirements
that serve the interests of all 28 Members.
The Costs are being shared by 28
Members according to an agreed
sharing formula that is based on GNI
(Gross
National
Income)
which
symbolizes a small percentage of each
member’s defence budget. As you see
from the next table that shows the sharing
procedure the era between 1/1/2014 and
31/12/2015. The costs are sharing
collectively but according to their defence
budgets to have the same amount of
burden to each member’s budgets. For instance, when Albania holds 0.0870 amount of costs, United
States holds can hold 21.7394 percentage of the costs that is slightly more than one of five of the total
costs.
The Costs are divided into three groups as you can see from the table as Military Budget, Civil Budget
and NSIP5( The NATO Security Investment Programme). The Military budget of the Alliance covers
the expenditures of Military
committee,
the
Military
Agencies, International Military
Staff,
the
two
strategic
commands,
control
and
informations systems, theatre
headquarters
for
deployed
operations etc and the military
budget of 2015 is € 1.2 Billion.
The Civil Budget covers the
costs of Headquarter, personnel
expenses and operating costs.
The Civil Budget for 2015 is €
200 Million. The NATO Security Investment Programme (NSIP) covers major construction and
command and control investments that are beyond the national defence requirement of individual
member states. The NSIP budget for 2015 is € 700 million.
b)
Conclusion
As we stated above, the issue of Missile Defence holds an important role for the Alliance as one of the
most important capabilities of NATO. At the Lisbon Summit, NATO announced its plans for an
alliance missile defence system and today, by the time and contributions become an important part of
the Alliance’s collective security. However, the economic burden of the system has mostly carried by
United States. The politicy that desires to rebalance of American attention from Europe to Asia and
with respects to the automatic budget cuts that are called sequstration, US readiness to fund a NATO
missile defence system is constantly decreasing. Future US governments are likely to significantly cut
their MD funds also, the European members with their own rapidly shrinking defence budgets, are
neither willing nor able to step in by procuring thier own components, the future of the entire NATO
MD project is at stake. “NATO’s political leadership will have to take bold decisions to avoid the
missile defence project from turning into a Potemkin’s village”
5
c)
Questions to Consider

Does your country have its own missile defence system?

Does your country believes the need of such system’s?
The NATO Security Investment Programme (NSIP) covers major construction and command and control system
investments, which are beyond the national defence requirements of individual member countries. It supports
the roles of the NATO strategic commands by providing installations and facilities such as air defence
communication and information systems, military headquarters for the integrated structure and for deployed
operations, and critical airfield, fuel systems and harbour facilities needed in support of deployed forces. The
NSIP is financed by the ministries of defence of each member country and is supervised by the Investment
Committee. Projects are implemented either by individual host countries or by different NATO agencies and
strategic commands, according to their area of expertise. The 2015 ceiling for the NSIP is €700 million. For
Further information: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_67655.htm?selectedLocale=en

Does your country contributes to the current NATO Missile Defence System?

What your country thinks about the future of the Missile Defence System?

Can your country contribute more to the system with direct or indirect means?

Which measures sould be taken to reach a fair burden-sharing of MD system that is
also able respond to the future threats that NATO may face?
AGENDA ITEM 2: NATO-RUSSIA RELATIONS
INTRODUCTION TO THE TOPIC B: NATO-RUSSIA RELATIONS
After the collapse of former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in 1991, NATO remained as
the only largest military union all over the world. Purchase to bipolar world did not mean the ending of
the existence of NATO. Instead of ending, the organization choosed to adopt current new order by
creating new policies such as open door based expansion or fight against terrorism. Particularly, fight
against terrorism has been pointing very mutual concerns of all states and international community.
That is why, many states even the continuation of USSR the Russian Federation has been acting with
Nato appropriately in sort of common interests. In order to conduct the wide range of collaboration
between USSR and NATO in common interests, in 2002 NATO-Russia Council is found as the
continuation of the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security
Forum.6
Picture:17
CRUCIAL AREAS IN NATO-RUSSIA RELATIONS
6
http://www.nato.int/nrc-website/en/about/index.html
7
http://www.nato.int/nrc-website/en/news/index.html
There are sort of key points in NATO-Russia relations which are conducted by NATO-Russia Council
in order to extend the cooperation between parties and create a developed comprehension. These
certain areas mainly have purpose address to common interests such as protection of civil people in
case of unwanted circumstances and problems of all of the world “terrorism.” Furthermore to be able
to create an extended confidence between NATO Alliances and Russia cooperation in Nuclear issues,
such as sharing of experiences, are in the agenda of NATO-Russia Council as well.
1-Russia’s support for ISAF and Afghan Security Forces
In 2008, Russia supported the ISAF forces in Afghanistan by allowing the passing of several
equipments of ISAF from Russian territories as transit state. In addition to in March 2011, NATORussia Council leaders agreed on Russia’s supports and maintenance to Afghan Security Forces’
helicopter flee. In this project; Turkey, United States, Italy, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany
and Croatia participated as donor states. The total amount of these donation was approximately $23
million.
2- Counter-narcotics training of Afghan and Central Asia Security Personnel
This project was started by The Nato-Russia Council Foreign Ministers in December 2005 to fight
against the trafficking in Afghan narcotics. In that way a local capability and regional networking and
cooperation were tried establish with the expertise of seven member states Afghanistan, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Tajiskistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Pakistan. At the same time United Nations
Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) cooperated the project. Training institutes were founded in
Russia, United States and Turkey.
3- Fight Against Terrorism
Action Plan to fight against terrorism was started by Nato-Russia Council Foreign Ministers in
December 2004 in order to create wide range of coordination and strategic cooperation in this area. In
that pathway, an information exchange system was developed to control the air activities and help
against to prevent terrorist attacks just like 9/11 attack to United States of America. In scientific and
technical meaning, Russia and Nato collaborated on the STANDEX project. This STANDEX project
has a purpose of developing a technology “that will enable the stand-off detection of explosive devices
in mass transport environments.”
4- Issues Related to Nuclear Weapon
NATO Alliances and other parties primarily Russia are creating nuclear strategy and exchanging views
which are based on experiences of these states. In that way extended sharings of lessons taken from
nuclear incidents and accidents among the states that have nuclear capability are provided. At the same
time emergent response to nuclear weapon incidents was discussed in June 2011 with the participation
of NATO Alliances and Russia. Also in the meeting, increasing of the policy of transparency and
developing of common understanding in nuclear issues were put forward and considered. In that way
full confidence among the states that have capability to produce nuclear weapon was tried to be
provided.
5- Industrial Cooperation on the Issues Related to Defense
A Project called “NATO-Russia Defence Industrial and Research and Technological Cooperation” 8
was started in January 2005 and in 2007 the Project was ended. As a result of the project, it is
concluded that there was a great potential that could address to global threats in terms of technological
and scientific capabilities.
6- Civil Emergencies
From 1996 to 2014 NATO and Russia cooperated in order to create a capacity to joint response to civil
emergencies just as earthquakes and floods. Also prevention of these disasters before they come to
occurrence was in the agenda. In 1998, “Euro Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre” 9 was
found in order to coordinate the joint actions conducted by NATO Alliances and Russia in case of
emergencies. At the same time within the framework of NATO-Russia Council, joint actions were
conducted in order to fight against the results of terrorist attacks. As instances for these joint actions
Fighting Floods in Georgia 2005, Pakistan Earthquake Relief Operation 2005, Earthquake in Turkey
2011 and Forest Fires in Bosnia Herzegovina in 2013 could be given.
7- Creating Public Awareness
In order to inform the people of the world about the cooperation between NATO Alliances and Russia,
public campaigns were held and a website of NATO-Russia Council
http://www.nato-russia-
council.info/ was found.
MILESTONES IN NATO-RUSSIA RELATIONS
8
http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_publications/20141008_140108SummitGuideWales2014-eng.pdf
9
Ibid.
It is obvious that from the “end of Cold War in 1991” to “Ukraine Crisis 2014”, there had been an
increasing cooperation between NATO and Russia relations. These cooperation were firstly carried by
North Atlantic Cooperation Council. By the establishment of NATO-Russia Council, it is argued that
the cooperation between NATO and Russia had shifted thorough a different and more creative
dimension. In this point the milestones-which are the officially accepted by NATO- of this relation
could be given year by year as in below:
1991- Following to the end of Cold War Russia joined the North Atlantic Cooperation Council.
Picture:210
1994- Russia joined the Partnership for Peace (PfP).
1996- Russian troops took a part in NATO-led peacekeeping force in Bosnia and Herzegovina
1997- Russian and Alliance of Nato leaders signed the NATO-Russia Founding Act on Mutual
Relations and Security at a summit in Paris. At the same Permanent Joint Council (PJC) was
established.
10
http://www.nato.int/multi/photos/1992/m920604a.htm- North Atlantic Cooperation Council-1991
1998- Russian diplomatic mission to Nato was established. Also memorandum in the meaning of
scientific and technological cooperation was signed.
1999- Due to Nato’s Kosova air campain, Russia put aside its participation in PJC for a few months.
2000- New president of Russia Vladimir Putin stated that he will work with Nato in a mentality of
Pragmatism.
2001- Russian President Putin was the first world leader called The USA President George W. Bush
after September 11 terrorist attack to USA. Russia had opened its airspace to international coalition
targeting the terrorist groups in Afghanistan as well as its intelligence contribution.
2002- Nat founded a Military Liaison Mission in Moscow. Russian and Nato Alliances Leaders signed
a declaration pertaining to “Nato-Russia Relations: A new Quality” at a summit in Rome. Also PJC
was replaced by NATO-Russia Council (NRC).
2003- As a first time an Nato-Russia Council meeting is held in Moscow. An agreement which refers
to the rescue of submarine-crew was signed between NATO and Russia. In Balkans, Russian troops
were decided to withdrawn from Nato-led peacekeeping forces.
2004- In Colorado Springs, United States, the first Nato- Russia Council misile defence post exercise
took place. Also Russian Federation offered to support Nato’s maritime counter terrorist operations at
the Nato-Russia Council meeting in Istanbul. For very first time time interoperability courses were
held in Moscow. A detailed action plan in order to fight against terrorism at the framework of NatoRussia Council was created. Foreign Ministers of Nato-Russia Council issued a statement which
expresses the common concerns pertaining to the elections in Ukraine.
2005- Inoperability between NATO and Russia had been increased in strategic, tactical and operational
level. The second missile defense exercise took place in Netherlands.
2006- In Sofia sort of priorities and advices were agreed to guide the NRC’s future works. For a first
time a Russian frigate was sent to Mediaterraine to support Operation Active Endeavour.11
2007- The ratification of “PfP Status of Forces Aggrement” was done by Russian Parliament. This
year refers to the 5th anniversary of NATO-Russia Council. Also in this year for a second time a
Russian frigate was sent to Meditrainne in order to support the Operation Avtive Endeavour.
2008- Russia contributed ISAF forces by providing them transition. Following to the Russia’s military
action to Georgia sort of the works of NATO-Russia Council was put aside in August 2008. However
in key areas the collaboration between NATO and Russia was continued specifically in terms of fight
against narcotics and terrorism.
Picture:412
11
http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_publications/20141008_140108SummitGuideWales2014-eng.pdf
12
https://fmashiri.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/russia-nato.jpg This cartoon refers to the situation of NATORussia Council after Georgia intervention
2009- It was agreed that formal meetings between NATO and Russia has to be resumed as well as
practical cooperation at the framework of NATO-Russia Council.
2010- For the very first time a political advisory forum was held in Rome in June. In July a military
committee with the presidency of Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola visited Moscow to meet with the Chief
of the General Staff of the Russian Federation Armed Forces in order to discuss about military
cooperation at the framework of NATO-Russia Council.
2011- Foreign Ministers of NATO-Russia Council meet in Berlin in April in order to discuss about the
situation in Libya and Afghanistan at the same time the future of missile defense cooperation between
NATO and Russia. Also NATO-Russia Council action plan against terrorism was updated. NATORussia Consolidated Glossary of Cooperation (NRCCGC) was started to support the military and
political cooperation between NATO and Russia.
Picture:513
13
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/news_72654.htm NRC meeting in Berlin-2011
2012- Russia Federation sent a special representative to ISAF meeting in at the NATO Chicago
Summit in May. Foreign Ministers of NATO-Russia Council agreed to the increasing of cooperation
between NATO and Russia in December for the collaborated work programme for 2013.
2013- NATO Secretary General Rasmussen met Russian Federation Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov
in order to discuss the way to strengthen the dialogue between NATO and Russia in February. Foreign
Ministers of NATO-Russia Council exchanged views about global security issues such as North Korea
and Syria in April.
Picture:614
2014- Russia’s military intervention to Crimea was condemned by NATO in March. Also Russia’s this
act was considered as illegal use of force in the territory of Ukraine. Furthermore NATO considered
the referendum held Crimea as illegitimate and contrary for both the Ukraine Constitution and
international law. The results of referendum were not recognized by NATO alliances. In April,
Alliances urged Russia to take appropriate steps in accordance with international law. NATO pointed
out that the solution for the problem should be created in a diplomatic way instead of military way. In
that point all the practical cooperation between Russia and NATO were decided to suspended by
NATO unilaterally.
THE SITUATION IN UKRAINE WITH IN THE SCOPE OF NATO-RUSSIA RELATIONS
A-NATO-UKRAINE RELATIONS
14
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2014/12/we-should-respond-north-korea-what-if-we-cant
In recent times, Ukraine has developed and strengthen relations with Nato in terms of political
dialogue and practical cooperation. Especially after the Russia’s illegal military intervention to
Crimea, the importance of this cooperation has increased. Nato’s supports the sort of initiatives in
Ukraine as well as Ukraine Army’s contributions to Nato’s Afghanistan and Kosova missions are one
of the symbol of the mutual trust of both parties. Formally, the basis of Ukraine-Nato relations roots
the foundation of Nato-Ukraine Comission (NUC).15
Picture:716
As a result of the illegal invasion of Crimea by Russia, Nato Allies keep supporting the
sovergnity and territorial integrity of Ukraine as it has been internationally recognized. Also the
importance of the concepts of Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and democratic development
were identified in the Article 14 of the “1997 Charter on a Distinctive Partnership between the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization and Ukraine” as:
NATO Allies will continue to support Ukrainian sovereignty and independence, territorial
integrity, democratic development, economic prosperity and its status as a non-nuclear
15
http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_publications/20141008_140108SummitGuideWales2014-eng.pdf
16
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10670603/Ukraine-in-pictures-Threat-of-warbetween-Ukraine-and-Russia.html
weapon state, and the principle of inviolability of frontiers, as key factors of stability and
security in Central and Eastern Europe and in the continent as a whole.17
Nato, supports the democratic reforms and the increasing of the defense capacity in Ukraine for the
goal of providing chance for the Ukraine people to be able to shape their future according to their
truths. Furthermore in Chicago Summit 2012, Allies declared that “Nato still has an open door policy
for Ukraine in terms of enhancing political dialogue and interoperability with Nato.” Related Article
35 of 2012 Chiago Summit Declaration is being partially given below:
An independent, sovereign and stable Ukraine, firmly committed to democracy and the
rule of law, is key to Euro-Atlantic security. Marking the fifteenth anniversary of the
NATO-Ukraine Charter on a Distinctive Partnership, we welcome Ukraine’s
commitment to enhancing political dialogue and interoperability with NATO, as well
as its contributions to NATO-led operations and new offers made. We note the recent
elimination of Ukraine’s highly enriched uranium in March 2012, which demonstrates
a proven commitment to non-proliferation. Recalling our decisions in relation to
Ukraine and our Open Door policy stated at the Bucharest and Lisbon Summits,
NATO is ready to continue to develop its cooperation with Ukraine and assist with the
implementation of reforms in the framework of the NATO-Ukraine Commission and
the Annual National Programme (ANP). (…)18
Nato allies consider the Ukraine’s ongoing necessary reforms specifically in defense and security
sector very vital for the state for its democratic development process as well as the ability to defend
itself.
B-NATO RESPONSE TO THE SITUATION IN UKRAINE
After the Russia’s act on Ukraine, The U.S. Congress stated its concerns about the Russia’s
“illegal” annexation of Crimea and ongoing problematic situation in Ukraine. At the same time it is
argued that the situation Ukraine heightened the concern in NATO alliances in terms of transatlantic
security and NATO’s future policies. It is obvious that Russia’s act on Ukraine is also threatening the
accumulation and concrete steps taken between NATO and Russia. The Ukraine crisis became the
reason of the explosion on longer-standing tension between NATO and Russia. It is possible for us to
say that this tension came to occurrence very concretely after the situation in Georgia since the end of
17
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_25457.htm
18
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_87593.htm
Cold War. Former NATO Secretary General Rasmussen defined the Russia’s military act to Ukraine as
“the most serious crisis in Europe since the fall of Berlin Wall” and declared that NATO “can no
longer do business as usual with Russia.” 19 On the first days of the April NATO declared the
suspension of all practical cooperation with Russia conducted at the framework of NATO-Russia
Council founded in 2002. But the political dialogue and the reciprocal existence of diplomatic
missions are still continues.
After Russia’s military aggression to Ukraine, NATO-Ukraine Commission issued as
statement that condemns Russia’s act.
“We, the Heads of State and Government of the NATO-Ukraine Commission, stand united in
our support of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized
borders.
We strongly condemn Russia’s illegal and illegitimate self-declared “annexation” of Crimea
and its continued and deliberate destabilization of eastern Ukraine in violation of international law.
We call on Russia to reverse its self-declared “annexation” of Crimea, which we do not and will not
recognise. Russia must end its support for militants in eastern Ukraine, withdraw its troops and stop
its military activities along and across the Ukrainian border, respect the rights of the local population,
including the native Crimean Tatars, and refrain from further aggressive actions against Ukraine.
Allies consider any unilateral Russian military or subversive action inside Ukraine, under any pretext,
including humanitarian, as a blatant violation of international law.
Allies support the efforts of the Government of Ukraine, including through the Ukrainian
Peace Plan, to pursue a political path that meets the aspirations of the people in all regions of
Ukraine without external interference. Allies welcome the commitments made by all parties, including
in Geneva and Berlin, and other ongoing negotiations to work toward establishing the conditions for a
peaceful solution. However, despite the commitments it has made, Russia has, in fact, carried out
direct military intervention inside Ukraine and increased its support to the militants. We call on Russia
to change course and to take active steps to de-escalate the crisis, including to engage in a meaningful
dialogue with the Ukrainian authorities.
Allies recognise Ukraine’s right to restore peace and order and to defend its people and
territory and encourage the Ukrainian Armed Forces and security services to continue to exercise the
utmost restraint in their ongoing operation to avoid casualties among the local population.
Allies commend the Ukrainian people’s commitment to freedom and democracy and their
determination to decide their own future free from outside interference. They welcome the holding of
free and fair Presidential elections under difficult conditions and the signature of the Association
19
http://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R43478.pdf
Agreement with the European Union, which testify to the consolidation of Ukraine’s democracy and its
European aspiration. We expect that the upcoming elections to the Verkhovna Rada in October of this
year, as an important element of the Ukrainian Peace Plan, would contribute to this end.
We welcome the actions of other international actors to contribute to de-escalation and to a
peaceful solution to the crisis, in particular the OSCE, the European Union and the Council of
Europe, as well as individual Allies.
In the framework of our long-standing Distinctive Partnership, NATO has consistently
supported Ukraine throughout this crisis, and all 28 Allies, including through NATO, are enhancing
their support so that Ukraine can better provide for its own security. Recognising Ukraine’s intent to
deepen its Distinctive Partnership with NATO, we are stepping up our strategic consultations in the
NATO-Ukraine Commission. NATO has already strengthened existing programmes on defence
education, professional development, security sector governance, and security-related scientific
cooperation with Ukraine. We will further strengthen our cooperation in the framework of the Annual
National Programme in the defence and security sector through capability development and
sustainable capacity building programmes for Ukraine. In this context, Allies will launch substantial
new programmes with a focus on command, control and communications, logistics and
standardisation, cyber defence, military career transition, and strategic communications. NATO will
also provide assistance to Ukraine to rehabilitate injured military personnel. Allies are reinforcing
their advisory presence at the NATO offices in Kyiv. Allies have taken note of Ukraine’s requests for
military-technical assistance, and many Allies are providing additional support to Ukraine on a
bilateral basis, which Ukraine welcomes.
NATO and Ukraine will continue to promote the development of greater interoperability
between Ukrainian and NATO forces, including through continued regular Ukrainian participation in
NATO exercises. Allies highly value Ukraine’s ongoing contributions to Allied operations, the NATO
Response Force and the Connected Forces Initiative. Allies welcome Ukraine’s participation in the
Partnership Interoperability Initiative, appreciate Ukraine’s interest in the Enhanced Opportunities
Programme within the Initiative, and look forward to its future participation.
With Allied support, including through the Annual National Programme, Ukraine remains
committed to the implementation of wide-ranging reforms, to combat corruption and promote an
inclusive political process, based on democratic values, respect for human rights, minorities and the
rule of law.
As noted at previous NATO Summits, including in Madrid, Bucharest, Lisbon and Chicago, an
independent, sovereign and stable Ukraine, firmly committed to democracy and the rule of law, is key
to Euro-Atlantic security. We reiterate our firm commitment to further develop the Distinctive
Partnership between NATO and Ukraine which will contribute to building a stable, peaceful and
undivided Europe. 20
As concrete steps in addition to the position taken in the NATO-Ukraine Commission, NATO
is imposing sort of sanctions to Russia in various terms and having various response to Russia’s
military aggression.
D- CONCLUSION
After the end of Cold War, the world turned to US based monopolar structure. In such an
environment it was inevitable for Russian Federation –former USSR- to act with NATO in certain
areas. Until the beginning of Ukraine Crisis in 2014, it could the argued that sort of cooperation areas
were created and continually functioned between NATO and Russia with the lights of common
interests such as civil emergencies, fight against terrorism and counter-narcotics etc. Of course it was
obvious that sort of controversies came to existence as we have seen in Kosovo and Georgia situations,
in fact the relations sustained until 2014. However the Ukraine Crisis and following that the
annexation of Crimea by Russia became the reason of the end the cooperation between NATO-Russia.
20
http://www.nato.int/cps/da/natohq/news_112695.htm
Picture: 821
21
http://arsenalfordemocracy.com/2014/04/12/ukraine-crisis-map-as-of-april-12-2014/2014-ukraine-crisismap/#.VRxznfmsVyU
Picture: 922
22
http://www.geocurrents.info/place/russia-ukraine-and-caucasus/energy-issues-ukrainian-crisis
Picture: 1023
REFERENCES
23
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/lightbox/map-showing-ethnic-proportions-crimean-population-photo190051953.html
http://www.nato.int/nrc-website/en/about/index.html
http://www.nato.int/nrc-website/en/news/index.html
http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_publications/20141008_140108SummitGuideWales2014-eng.pdf
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_117901.htm
http://www.nato.int/multi/photos/1992/m920604a.htmhttp://www.aco.nato.int/page14683036.aspx
https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=TTrFOvY4weYC&pg=PA135&lpg=PA135&dq=putin+spirit+o
f+pragmatism+2000&source=bl&ots=e9kOMEAGtS&sig=0Z5D1nrlEzRUOvwphLKysoI2jyU&hl=tr
&sa=X&ei=s8cOVePbDcv7ywPi_oKoCw&ved=0CEgQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=putin%20spirit%20
of%20pragmatism%202000&f=false
https://fmashiri.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/russia-nato.jpg
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/news_72654.htm
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2014/12/we-should-respond-north-korea-what-if-we-cant
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10670603/Ukraine-in-pictures-Threat-ofwar-between-Ukraine-and-Russia.html
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_25457.htm
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_87593.htm
http://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R43478.pdf
http://arsenalfordemocracy.com/2014/04/12/ukraine-crisis-map-as-of-april-12-2014/2014-ukrainecrisis-map/#.VRxznfmsVyU
http://www.geocurrents.info/place/russia-ukraine-and-caucasus/energy-issues-ukrainian-crisis
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/lightbox/map-showing-ethnic-proportions-crimean-population-photo190051953.html
http://www.nato.int/cps/da/natohq/news_112695.htm
NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION
Under-Secretary-General
Göksenin GÜNGÖR
İstanbul University/ Political Science and International Relations
[email protected]
Academic Assistant to the Under-Secretary-General
Kutlu Aksu
İstanbul Univesity/Faculty of Law
[email protected]