Building blocks for EU national defense: NATO's Framework Nation Concept

### How smaller NATO states are "docking" onto the Bundeswehr and why this makes everyone stronger ### How the Bundeswehr is becoming the backbone of European defense ### Focus on Germany's central role and strategic importance ### The framework nations concept: What lies behind the most important NATO strategy that hardly anyone talks about ### It only became decisive because of the Ukraine crisis: The NATO concept that is redefining Europe's security ### One nation leads, many follow: How Germany is revolutionizing military cooperation in Europe ###

What is the Framework Nation Concept and how did it come about?

The Framework Nation Concept represents one of the most important approaches to military cooperation within NATO. When I first became involved with this initiative, I was faced with the fundamental question of its origins and the motivations behind it.

The origins of the Framework Nation Concept date back to 2013, when the then German Federal Minister of Defense, Thomas de Maizière, developed this initiative. Interestingly, the first public announcement of the concept occurred somewhat by accident. In June 2013, during a NATO meeting, de Maizière announced that Germany would develop a new initiative for cooperation – a statement that even surprised his own ministry.

This announcement, which initially seemed spontaneous, was, however, the result of a systematic analysis of the European defense landscape. Some far-sighted individuals in the German Ministry of Defense recognized the opportunity to "Europeanize" the Bundeswehr and thus laid the foundation for the Framework Nations Concept.

What was the initial situation that led to the development of the concept?

The development of the Framework Nation Concept was based on a sober assessment of the European security situation at the beginning of the 2010s. Several factors contributed to the realization that new forms of military cooperation were needed.

The most important trigger was the continuous decline in military spending in Europe. This development led to radical cuts in European armed forces, which the United States sharply criticized. Individual European armed forces had become too small to make a significant difference on their own. While Russia has over a million soldiers, Europe's armed forces range from about 6,400 soldiers in Estonia to approximately 200,000 in France.

This unequal distribution resulted in a third of all EU and NATO countries having fewer than 20,000 soldiers, while eight states account for 80 percent of European armed forces. At the same time, basic military capabilities such as command, logistics, and reconnaissance, as well as specialized niche capabilities such as air defense and medical support, were increasingly lacking.

The Bundeswehr's military planners recognized that the impetus for developing the Framework Nations Concept stemmed primarily from the decline in military spending in Europe. This situation made it clear that European nations could only jointly possess all the necessary capabilities.

Who developed the Framework Nation Concept and with what motivation?

The Framework Nation Concept was developed under the leadership of Germany, led by Federal Defense Minister Thomas de Maizière. The German initiative arose from the realization that Germany needed to take a more active role in the European security architecture.

The motivation behind Germany's development of the concept was complex. On the one hand, it was intended to bring defense cooperation among NATO countries back into focus. Germany attempted to assert its claim to leadership in European defense cooperation without explicitly referring to leadership or hegemony.

Thomas de Maizière deliberately chose NATO as the forum for presenting the concept. This decision reflected Germany's desire to present itself as a reliable military partner and to dispel skepticism about its reliability. The Framework Nation Concept thus represented an important step toward transatlantic burden sharing.

After the initial announcement in June 2013, it took several weeks for the Ministry of Defence to send a concrete “food for thought” paper to the NATO Secretary General, which was prepared for discussion at the next meeting of defence ministers in October.

What were the original goals of the Framework Nation Concept?

The goals of the Framework Nation Concept were ambitious and multifaceted from the outset. The primary objective was to enable the joint, structured development of military capabilities in European states. This was to pursue long-term objectives while simultaneously visibly and rapidly advancing interoperability between the participating armed forces.

A key objective was to close capability gaps identified by NATO. This was to be achieved through a coordinated approach in which European states would join together in clusters and coordinate, over the long term, who would provide which equipment and troops.

The concept aimed to eliminate the need for every nation to provide and pay for everything. This would free up more money to procure what each group actually needs. This increased efficiency was a central aspect of the German initiative.

The long-term goal was to create a powerful alliance of European armies. It was important to emphasize that the Framework Nation Concept was not conceived as a path to a "European army," but rather to preserve the full national sovereignty of the participating states.

Another important objective was to strengthen collective defense through multinational cooperation. The concept was intended to sustainably and credibly strengthen the defense capability of the European pillar of the Alliance.

What role did the Ukraine crisis play in this development?

The 2014 Ukraine crisis served as a decisive catalyst for the further development and acceptance of the Framework Nation Concept. Although the concept had already been developed in 2013, the Russian annexation of Crimea in March 2014 fundamentally changed the security policy parameters in Europe.

The Russian annexation of Crimea and the destabilization of Ukraine sparked serious concerns about Moscow's ambitions, particularly in Eastern Europe. These events led to a renewed vitality for NATO as a security guarantor. The changed security situation made it clear that the traditional approach of small, mobile units would not be sufficient to deter large, state-sponsored armed forces.

The Ukraine crisis led to an expansion of the original objectives of the Framework Nation Concept. Following the Russian annexation of Crimea and the outbreak of the Russo-Ukrainian War in 2014, the objective was expanded to include the formation of larger, division-sized military units. This marked the transition from the original FNC 1.0, which focused on niche capabilities such as air defense, to FNC 2.0, which was triggered by the Ukraine crisis.

The events in Ukraine overtook the original plans for the NATO summit in Wales in September 2014. The heads of state and government had originally wanted to discuss the future of the Alliance after the Afghanistan mission, but the Ukraine crisis changed the central themes of the summit.

How was the concept officially introduced into NATO?

The official introduction of the Framework Nation Concept into NATO took place in several stages between 2013 and 2014. Following the initial announcement in June 2013 and the submission of the “Food for Thought” paper in October 2013, the concept was intensively discussed within the Alliance.

The decisive moment came with the NATO Summit in Wales on September 4 and 5, 2014. At this summit, the Framework Nation Concept was officially adopted by the heads of state and government of NATO member states. The Wales Summit Declaration states: "Today, we also endorsed NATO's Framework Nation Concept. This brings together groups of Allies coordinated by a Framework Nation."

The Framework Nation Concept was approved in the context of the NATO Readiness Action Plan, which was developed in response to the Ukraine crisis. This plan was designed to ensure that the Alliance was ready to respond quickly and decisively to new security challenges.

With the official adoption at the Wales Summit, the various cooperation models were potentially linked to the Alliance processes to create synergies within the Alliance. At the same time, it was clarified that cooperation should remain primarily a matter for the states and their respective consultation forums and processes.

Hub for security and defense – Image: Xpert.digital

The hub for security and defense offers well-founded advice and current information in order to effectively support companies and organizations in strengthening their role in European security and defense policy. In close connection to the SME Connect working group, he promotes small and medium -sized companies (SMEs) in particular that want to further expand their innovative strength and competitiveness in the field of defense. As a central point of contact, the hub creates a decisive bridge between SME and European defense strategy.

Suitable for:

• The Working Group Defense of the SME Connect – Strengthening SMEs in European defense

What structural changes did the concept bring about?

The Framework Nation Concept brought about significant structural changes in NATO's architecture. Initially, three distinct framework nation groups emerged, centered around Germany, Great Britain, and Italy. These three approaches differ significantly in their objectives, methods, and structure.

The German Framework Nations Concept group developed two pillars. From its inception, the group focused on coordinated capability development in so-called capability clusters. Since 2015, the development of larger multinational force units has also been a focus. The German Framework Nation Concept currently comprises 16 clusters, each of which focuses on one or more capability objectives, such as anti-submarine warfare.

As a framework nation, Germany assumed, among other things, the leadership role in the Logistics cluster. Under the leadership of the Logistics Command, various logistics capabilities were developed in a coordinated manner. Other important clusters include NBC protection, for which the Bundeswehr NBC Defense Command in Bruchsal acts as the national capability command.

The number of participants grew continuously. While ten countries initially participated in the German Framework Nations Concept Group, the number now includes 21 nations. These include EU states that are not members of NATO. In June 2016, it was agreed to open the cooperation to partner nations and organizations outside of NATO.

What are the concrete functions of the Framework Nation Concept?

The Framework Nation Concept operates according to a "plug-in" approach. The basic idea is that smaller nations that have significantly reduced the size of their armed forces can integrate their remaining capabilities into a larger framework nation. The framework nation provides the military backbone, consisting of logistics, command, and control. Smaller nations contribute their specialized capabilities, such as air defense or engineers, to this framework.

Coordination is carried out by various steering committees that meet under German chairmanship. Fundamental decisions are made by the Framework Nations Concept defense ministers at meetings, which are prepared and followed up by Berlin. Germany thus plays a crucial role in the work processes of the Framework Nations Concept group.

The concept follows a bottom-up approach. The Framework Nations Concept nations freely decide which clusters they wish to participate in. This flexibility makes the concept attractive to member states, but also means that the Framework Nation Concept, as a concept of the states, relies on their commitment.

The practical implementation is achieved through various exercises and coordination measures. One example is the "Coronat Mask 2024" exercise in the field of NBC protection, which set new standards in multinational defense capabilities and promoted the integration and operational readiness of European armed forces.

What are the challenges and limitations of the Framework Nation Concept?

Despite its successes, the Framework Nation Concept presents several challenges and structural limitations. A key challenge lies in the fact that the concept relies heavily on the determined leadership of the respective framework nation. Where decisive leadership is lacking, the flexibility of the Framework Nation Concept can turn from a strength into a weakness, as the alliance lacks a central coordinating body.

Another problem is that the German and British Nation Concept framework, with its focus on a force pool composed of national armies, does not necessarily offer a direct solution to the question of how multinational units can be quickly deployed in the event of a crisis. Even though cooperation is of course intended to help accelerate a potential force generation process.

The geographical orientation of the three Framework Nations Concept groups results in a broad regional focus. This can be helpful for operationalizing NATO's "360-degree approach," but also carries the risk of fragmenting the Alliance. Critics warn of "patchwork multilateralism," which could lead to a less cohesive, multi-level Europe.

A fundamental problem lies in the discrepancy between the aspiration and reality of burden sharing. While the Framework Nation Concept is intended to contribute to transatlantic burden sharing, analyses show that the ratio between European and American defense spending may not improve significantly. Early estimates for 2024 show that European NATO allies will spend approximately $490 billion and the US $935 billion.

What does the Framework Nation Concept mean for the future of NATO?

The Framework Nation Concept represents an important building block for NATO's future, even if it does not offer a complete solution to all of the Alliance's challenges. The initiative contributes to addressing the structural deficiencies of European armed forces while preserving national sovereignty.

For Germany, the Framework Nation Concept means assuming responsibility that goes far beyond its current role. The Bundeswehr could become a backbone of European security in the long term, and Germany, as a framework nation, can make a fundamental contribution to NATO's ability to act. However, this requires a willingness to assume a political and military leadership role within the Alliance.

The strategic importance of the concept is evident in its continuous expansion. With 21 participating nations and 16 capability clusters, the Framework Nation Concept demonstrates its attractiveness to European partners. The opening to non-NATO states such as Austria, Finland, and Switzerland further underscores the European dimension of the concept.

The Framework Nation Concept offers a model for systematic defense cooperation in Europe. It aims to connect large and small states, making them more than the sum of their parts. European nations form clusters to coordinate who will provide which equipment and troops over the long term.

A crucial factor for the future will be whether the Framework Nation Concept can achieve its ambitious goals. The challenge lies in overcoming the well-understood obstacles to defense cooperation while simultaneously reducing skepticism among potential partners. This will likely require further increases in defense spending in the long term.

The Framework Nation Concept demonstrates that sovereign states will continue to be the central actors of European defense cooperation within NATO. This strategic pragmatism opens up scope for maneuver, but also sets limits. The success of the concept ultimately depends on the long-term maintenance of the national resolve of the participating states and the effective closing of the identified capability gaps.

The initiative represents an important contribution to NATO's adaptation to changing security challenges. At the same time, it underlines that the future of European defense lies not in the creation of supranational structures, but in the intelligent networking of national capabilities while maintaining national sovereignty.

Markus Becker

I would be happy to serve as your personal advisor.

Head of Business Development

Chairman SME Connect Defense Working Group

LinkedIn

Konrad Wolfenstein

I would be happy to serve as your personal advisor.

contact me under Wolfenstein ∂ Xpert.digital

call me under +49 89 674 804 (Munich)

LinkedIn