NATO Technology: From Gap to Divergence? (2004)

Overview A widening technology gap between the United States and other NATO members will challenge the ability of NATO to function as a cohesive, multinational force. Over several decades, great disparities in the funding of defense research and technology by NATO members has produced a widening technological gap that threatens to become a divergence--a condition from which the Alliance may not be able to recover. The technology gap, in turn, is creating a capabilities gap that undercuts the operational effectiveness of NATO forces, including the new NATO Response Force. With only slight modifications (not additions) to current total defense expenditures, and using funds that will be available as they restructure their forces, European members could not only double their current investment but take significant strides to ensure that they are not left behind in a world dominated by technology. In addition, and of equal importance, the United States must share more of its fundamental basic and applied research with NATO partners, take a greater role of leadership in NATO's Research and Technology Organization(RTO), and increase participation across all technical areas in the RTO. These primary actions, coupled with other actions by all NATO nations and the Allied Command Transformation, offer the potential to dramatically improve a situation that very much needs immediate attention. It is a relatively straightforward matter now. NATO has both a capabilities gap and a technology gap. Immediate attention to the latter, with a commitment by every NATO nation to invest three percent of its military budget in research and technology, may, over time, significantly reduce the capability gap. ********** One of the major results of the Prague Summit in November 2002 was the formal recognition of the military capabilities gap between the United States and the other NATO nations. Members made a strong commitment to address this gap, especially in strategic transport, UAVs, precision guided munitions, air-to-air refueling, maritime counter-mine capabilities, and nuclear, chemical, and biological identification and defense capabilities. The Prague Capabilities Commitment is silent on a major long-term issue--funding of the defense research and technology needed to reduce the capabilities gap over the long term. The United States makes the largest annual investment in war-fighting capability in the world, exceeding that of the closest NATO members by an order of magnitude. (1) The disparity is even greater when one compares how the NATO nations invest their budgets. The United States spends approximately 35 percent of its defense budget on personnel, 30 percent on equipment expenditures, and the remainder in miscellaneous areas, including infrastructure. (2) By comparison, Belgium and Italy spend over 70 percent on personnel. France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland, and Spain each spend approximately 60 percent on personnel. These same nations make investments in equipment that range from 5 percent (Belgium) to 20 percent (France), with most countries investing around10 percent. (3) These imbalances have existed for years. The effect of this mismatch on defense investments is considerable: an overly large force structure in much of NATO that is ill equipped (as well as ill trained) to fight modern conflicts, and a widening technology gap between the United States and the rest of NATO. In recent years, the United States has undergone its most significant military transformation since World War II as it has aligned and equipped itself to meet changing threats. The resulting forces are lighter, more mobile, and more lethal than ever before. The United States has transformed so rapidly that it has left its traditional allies behind. Consider air power. The capabilities gap here is unquestionably one of the largest. The United States has the only significant strategic transport, refueling, surveillance, and bomber capabilities among the NATO nations--at a time when the Alliance has committed itself to out-of-area activities. …