{
  "id": "R43698",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R43698",
  "active": true,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 434272,
      "date": "2014-09-08",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-06T20:06:26.204370",
      "title": "NATO\u2019s Wales Summit: Outcomes and Key Challenges",
      "summary": "On September 4-5, the leaders of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization\u2019s (NATO\u2019s) 28 member states met in Wales for the alliance\u2019s 2014 summit. This was their first meeting since Russia began providing large-scale military support to separatist forces fighting in Ukraine, and their last before the planned completion by the end of 2014 of NATO\u2019s mission in Afghanistan, the longest and most ambitious operation in NATO history. As such, some analysts portrayed the summit as an opportunity to consider a possible strategic shift for NATO, away from the broad, \u201cout of area\u201d focus embodied by the Afghanistan mission, toward a more narrow focus on territorial defense and deterrence, largely in response to a resurgent Russia. Although the allies did not make such decisive declarations, summit deliberations did center largely on responding to Russian aggression in Ukraine and elsewhere in the region.\nSummit outcomes centered on three main areas: (1) enhancing allied readiness and collective defense in response to Russian aggression; (2) increasing defense spending and boosting military capabilities; and (3) boosting NATO support for partner countries outside the alliance, including through a new \u201cDefense Capacity Building Initiative.\u201d The allies also marked the planned withdrawal at the end of 2014 of NATO\u2019s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan and discussed a non-combat security sector training mission in the country expected to begin in 2015.\nThe cornerstone of NATO\u2019s new collective defense initiative is a \u201cReadiness Action Plan\u201d intended to enable a continuous NATO military presence on the alliance\u2019s periphery, including in its easternmost member states. This includes enhanced troop rotations and military exercises in Central and Eastern Europe and establishment of a high readiness force able to deploy within a few days. Although NATO leaders have characterized the envisioned rotational troop deployments in Central and Eastern Europe as continuous, they say the deployments will not amount to a permanent NATO military presence. Some allied governments in the region, including Poland and the Baltic states, have called for larger, permanent NATO deployments. These are opposed by member states concerned about the possible negative consequences of longer-lasting militarization in the region. \nIn Wales, the allies also sought to address widespread concerns regarding a long and ongoing decline in European defense spending\u2014in 2013, only four allies met the alliance\u2019s target to spend 2% of GDP on defense. NATO leaders committed to halting any further decline in defense spending and pledged to aim to reach the 2% target within a decade. These declarations fell short of the shorter-term, binding commitments reportedly sought by the United States and the NATO Secretary General. \nA top U.S. Administration priority for the summit was to secure allied commitments to increase defense spending, enhance military capabilities, and boost contributions to NATO defense initiatives in Europe. In addition, President Obama sought to reassure European allies, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe, that the United States remains prepared, capable, and willing to honor its collective defense commitments in Europe. The Administration also used the summit to gain commitments from other governments to join ongoing efforts to fight the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). Although a group of allies agreed to join these efforts, all ruled out deploying ground forces, and NATO as a whole did not commit to any new, substantive engagement in the region. \nCongress can continue to play an important role in guiding the U.S. and NATO response to Russian aggression in Ukraine and in addressing broader concerns regarding NATO\u2019s future. This includes consideration of the Administration\u2019s request for $925 million to fund a proposed European Reassurance Initiative. Many Members of Congress have consistently called on NATO\u2019s European allies to enhance their contributions to NATO collective defense efforts. They have also advocated a more proactive NATO enlargement policy, which they argue would send an important signal to aspiring members that NATO\u2019s \u201copen door\u201d policy will not be scaled back in the face of Russian opposition. The proposed Forging Peace through Strength in Ukraine and the Transatlantic Alliance Act (H.R. 4433), for example, calls for additional NATO and U.S. military assistance to Ukraine and calls for immediate NATO membership for Montenegro and the granting of a NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) to Georgia. \nThis report provides an overview of the summit\u2019s main agenda items and outcomes, highlighting key challenges, U.S. policy priorities, and potential issues for Congress. For more on the situation in Ukraine and NATO\u2019s response, see CRS Report R43478, NATO: Response to the Crisis in Ukraine and Security Concerns in Central and Eastern Europe, coordinated by Paul Belkin; and CRS Report RL33460, Ukraine: Current Issues and U.S. Policy, by Steven Woehrel.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": true,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R43698",
          "sha1": "2faec264582fe39d575e7f339962a7bb6c28644f",
          "filename": "files/20140908_R43698_2faec264582fe39d575e7f339962a7bb6c28644f.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R43698",
          "sha1": "3379309743591bf51ca86c0ae401750db0b50eda",
          "filename": "files/20140908_R43698_3379309743591bf51ca86c0ae401750db0b50eda.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "IBCList",
          "id": 4636,
          "name": "Europe:  Regional Policy, Bilateral Relations, and Key Issues"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc463205/",
      "id": "R43698_2014Aug26",
      "date": "2014-08-26",
      "retrieved": "2014-12-05T09:57:41",
      "title": "NATO's Wales Summit: Expected Outcomes and Key Challenges",
      "summary": "This report provides an overview of the NATO's Wales summit's main agenda items and expected outcomes, highlighting key challenges, U.S. policy priorities, and potential issues for Congress.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20140826_R43698_6344d946ecb3641d1ecfd45eb4ea5c6dc0d233cf.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20140826_R43698_6344d946ecb3641d1ecfd45eb4ea5c6dc0d233cf.html",
          "source": "pymupdf"
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "NATO countries",
          "name": "NATO countries"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "NATO enlargement",
          "name": "NATO enlargement"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Foreign relations -- U.S. -- Russia",
          "name": "Foreign relations -- U.S. -- Russia"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Foreign relations -- U.S. -- Ukraine",
          "name": "Foreign relations -- U.S. -- Ukraine"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Intelligence and National Security"
  ]
}