Germany opened more than 50 percent of its inspections for guest inspectors.

Russian Foreign Minister Andrei Kozyrev signs the Partnership for Peace Framework Document for Russia at NATO Headquarters.

CHANGES IN EUROPE INFLUENCE CFE TREATY IMPLEMENTATION

Throughout the first CFE Treaty year, 1992-93, considerable pressures had developed within the NATO alliance for a program of cooperation with the treaty verification agencies of the Eastern European nations--Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and the other successor states. These pressures had originated as a political and diplomatic consequence of the fall of the Berlin Wall; the revolutions in Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Bulgaria; the unification of Germany; and, of course, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the creation of the new republics. These continental upheavals influenced how the NATO nations approached implementation of the CFE Treaty. Within NATO, Belgium, Netherlands, Great Britain, and Germany were the strongest advocates of establishing joint inspector training, authorizing joint inspection teams, and sharing treaty data among all signatory nations.

In January 1993, seven months into the CFE Treaty's implementation, NATO's Verification Coordinating Committee invited the directors of the national verification agencies, east and west, to attend an important meeting at NATO Headquarters. At this meeting, the 16 NATO nations, acting through the VCC, formally invited the 14 Eastern CFE Treaty nations to have their inspectors participate on NATO nations' joint multinational inspection teams. They would be identified as NATO nation teams, but individual inspectors from one, two, or more of the Eastern bloc nations, as well as from the other NATO nations, could participate. The NATO nation conducting the inspection would lead the team. After hearing the concept, the directors of the Eastern states' verification agencies accepted the invitation. Within a matter of months, it became routine for inspectors from "cooperating partner" nations to serve on NATO-led multinational CFE inspection teams conducting reduction inspections in Eastern Europe.⁴⁰ Brigadier General Heinz Loquai, Director of the German Federal Armed Forces Verification Center, observed, "At first it was not so easy for the inspected countries, especially the former Warsaw Pact countries, to understand why guest inspectors were coming along with the [NATO nation] inspection teams. But, in my opinion, the participation of the guest inspectors is a good development. Germany has opened more than 50 percent of all its inspections for the guest inspectors."⁴¹

Along with these changes, the VCC also invited the Eastern nation treaty agencies to send individual inspectors to participate in NATO-conducted CFE Treaty courses. They accepted; and in 1993 and 1994, 80 inspectors from Eastern nations' verification agencies attended courses for CFE Treaty inspectors and escorts at the NATO school at Oberammergau, Germany. Other Eastern bloc inspectors participated in a NATO course on monitoring CFE reductions held at the Belgian Military Camp at Leopoldville. The guest inspectors at this Belgian reduction course even taught a portion of the course. They discussed the reduction methods being used in their nations, and, in turn, the NATO national inspectors explained how they would monitor those reductions. The VCC also sponsored seminars for all verification agency directors at NATO Headquarters in Brussels. These two-day seminars focused on treaty implementation issues and on strengthening director-to-director communications, but they should not be construed as a substitute for the CFE Treaty's Joint Consultative Group meeting in Vienna. The JCG was the official forum for resolving treaty issues and for authorizing any modifications to the treaty.

Modernizing by lifting the group of states concept.

EVALUATING THE CFE TREATY: THE FIRST REVIEW CONFERENCE

Incorporated into the treaty was a provision for a review conference of all the signatory states to be held 46 months after entry into force. Since the CFE Treaty entered into force in mid-July 1992, the treaty's First Review Conference was held in mid-May 1996. Representatives from all states parties met in Vienna from May 15-31. In 46 months, much had changed. The Warsaw Treaty Organization had collapsed, prompting some states, principally Russia, to advocate "modernizing" the treaty by removing the group of states concept from the treaty's text. This recommendation was opposed by other states, principally the United States, citing the conference's short duration and the opportunity to resolve more pressing treaty implementation issues. Specifically, those issues were Russia's commitment to reducing its TLE east of the Urals, the demands of Russia and Ukraine for adjusting the flank zone limits, the problem of accounting for the TLE transfers among the treaty states of the former Soviet Union, and the issue of authorizing a review and update of the treaty's Protocol on Existing Types of Conventional Armaments and Equipment (POET). The two major recommendations for the conference agenda--treaty modernization and treaty compliance/implementation issues--were not incompatible. Both were part of the conference's final statement; however, implementation issues dominated the conference agenda.⁴⁴

At Criel, France, officials observe a ceremony recognizing Brigadier General François Rozec, Director L'Unité Française de Vérification. (Front row left) Brigadier General Colae Corduneanu, Romania; Necil Nedimoglu, Head of the VICS; Brigadier General Thomas E. Kuenning, OSIA; Colonel Kenneth D. Guillory, OSIA; Brigadier General Peter Von Geyso, Germany; Colonel Colin A. Heron and Lt. Colonel Michael Morgan, United Kingdom.

One of the most interesting aspect of the First Review Conference's Final Document was the section reviewing the CFE Treaty's operations. In the 46 months that had elapsed since entry into force, much had changed in Europe, and much had been accomplished under the provisions of the treaty. The document summarized some of these accomplishments⁴⁵:

The states parties note with satisfaction that more than 58,000 pieces of conventional armaments and equipment have been reduced, and that the overall holdings of conventional armaments and equipment within the area of application are substantially lower than the limits set in the treaty.

More than 2,500 inspections have taken place. A permanent system for regular and routine exchange of treaty notifications and other information has been developed. The Joint Consultative Group has been firmly established and has demonstrated its utility and importance as the ongoing treaty forum.

With regard to the concluding act, the states parties note with satisfaction that the personnel strength of conventional armed forces in the area of application was reduced by 1.2 million persons.

The states parties note that the treaty established a high degree of transparency in military relations through its comprehensive system for exchange of information and for verification. Together with the extensive reductions of conventional armaments and equipment, this has led to greater predictability and confidence in security relations. The treaty has also nurtured the development of new patterns of cooperation in Europe and provides a basis for stability and enhanced security in Europe at substantially lower levels of conventional armaments and equipment than heretofore. Although risks and challenges still exist in some parts of Europe, the capability for launching surprise attack and the danger of large-scale offensive action in Europe as a whole have been diminished substantially. Nevertheless, the achievement of the goals of the treaty in the whole area of its application requires continuous efforts by the states parties.

EVAULATING THE TREATY: COMPARING THE NUMBERS

Following the end of the CFE Treaty's 40-month reduction period, all treaty states declared their force levels in the five categories of offensive weapons. This declaration allowed nations to compare the "anticipated" number of tanks, artillery, armored combat vehicles (ACVs), combat aircraft, and attack helicopters with the "actual" figure at the end of the reduction phase. The data were declared by each nation; when aggregated for the group of state parties (Western Group and Eastern Group), the figures indicated that the actual reductions were well below the CFE Treaty's anticipated ceilings (table 8-2).