Table of Contents | Introduction | Chapter I | Chapter II | Annex | ... page bottom

 

Responsibility Sharing Report July 2003

Chapter I Header

The Responsibility Sharing Report presents the Department of Defense's annual assessment of the relative contributions toward the common defense and mutual security by our NATO allies, our Pacific allies (Australia, Japan and the Republic of Korea), and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nations. The cornerstone of effective alliance relationships is the fair and equitable sharing of the full range of mutual security responsibilities, and the appropriate balancing of costs and benefits.

Assessments in this Report cover responsibility sharing contributions across a broad range of categories, including defense spending, NATO defense modernization spending, combat forces (ground, naval, and air), military mobility/logistic forces, multinational peace operations, cost sharing, and foreign assistance. National contributions are generally assessed relative to ability to contribute by measuring each nation's share of total allied contributions relative to its corresponding share of total allied Gross Domestic Product (GDP) or labor force. A nation is considered to be doing its fair share in a particular category if its share of total contributions is in balance with its share of total GDP or labor force.

Contributions to the War on Terrorism Header

The quantitative data presented in this Report does not reflect nations' contributions to the War on Terrorism. Instead, a narrative description of some of the allied contributions is provided.  Allied contributions to Operation IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF) will be addressed in the 2004 Report.

NATO

  • Six allies actively participated in combat operations inside Afghanistan during 2002. Denmark, France, Germany, and Norway contributed elite special operations forces (SOF) units, while Canada deployed 850, and the United Kingdom about 1,000, conventional ground troops in addition to SOF personnel.

  • Canada, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and the United Kingdom all contributed vessels to coalition maritime operations in the Indian Ocean, Persian Gulf and/or Red Sea during 2002. France and the UK each contributed a carrier battlegroup in the early part of the year, and aircraft from them flew numerous combat missions over Afghanistan.

  • Many NATO nations contributed support aircraft (transports, recon and EW aircraft, aerial tankers, etc.) to Operation ENDURING FREEDOM (OEF), including Germany, Italy, Spain, and Portugal. In addition, four nations (Denmark, France, the Netherlands, and Norway) deployed fighter-bombers to Kyrgyzstan and flew combat missions within Afghanistan.

  • The NATO allies provided the bulk of the sixteen-nation International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Kabul. The United Kingdom commanded the first operational rotation through June 2002 (ISAF-I), and Turkey held command of ISAF-II through March 2003.

  • NATO member nations substantially increased military and civilian police personnel committed to help secure U.S. military bases located within their territory.

  • NATO AWACS aircraft continued to support the air defense of the continental United States against terrorist attack from the beginning of 2002 through mid-May.

Pacific Allies

Australia deployed elite Special Air Service troops for combat operations in Afghanistan, and also contributed air-to-air refueling aircraft and F/A-18 fighter aircraft to the War on Terrorism (the latter deployed to Diego Garcia to back-fill U.S. combat aircraft deployed elsewhere in support of OEF). Australia also maintained a naval task group of two frigates in the Persian Gulf - representing a fifth of the Australian Navy's total major surface combatants.

  • Elements of the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Forces conducted refueling operations in support of OEF throughout 2002, and in December 2002, one of Japan's four Aegis-equipped destroyers was dispatched to the region to provide additional protection for these operations. In addition, the Japan Air-Self Defense Force flew numerous transport missions both in support for U.S. forces within Japan and to Guam and Diego Garcia.

  • The Republic of Korea provided C-130 transport aircraft and an amphibious landing ship. Furthermore, a 120-man Korean medical unit was deployed at Manas Airbase, Kyrgyzstan throughout 2002.

  • Japan and the Republic of Korea provided significant financial assistance and humanitarian aid to Afghanistan, Pakistan, and other adjoining countries. Both also provided enhanced security at U.S. bases within their territory.

Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)

  • The GCC nations provided critical support for operations in Afghanistan by granting overflight rights, and allowing the United States to base large contingents of aircraft, personnel, and equipment in their territory.

  • Most GCC states increased security at bases hosting U.S. forces, provided key air traffic control and fuel storage services, and covered increased U.S. billeting costs.

  • The GCC nations contributed generously to humanitarian operations in and near Afghanistan, and some provided significant economic assistance to Pakistan. They have also played a key role in efforts to block terrorist financing, including the seizure of al-Qaida financial assets.

Other Responsibility Sharing Contributions Header

NATO

Collectively, the non-U.S. NATO Allies contributed roughly their fair share or more of peace operations personnel and funding, combat forces, and foreign assistance but less than their fair share of defense spending. They also provided less than their fair share of military mobility/logistic forces including naval supply, tender and transport tonnage and substantially less than their fair share of military transport aircraft capacity, and tanker aircraft fuel offload capacity.

  • Defense Spending as a Percentage of GDP: Overall, the non-U.S. NATO members spent an average of 1.9 percent of GDP on defense in 2002 – as compared to 2.0 percent in 2001. Turkey, Greece, France, the United Kingdom, Portugal, the Czech Republic, Poland, Italy and Norway ranked at or above this average.  All other Alliance members fell below average, highlighting that there is clearly scope for greater effort in this area.

  • NATO Modernization Spending: Non-U.S. NATO members spent an average of 19 percent of their defense budgets on modernization programs in 2002. Turkey, the United Kingdom, Norway, Luxembourg, and France ranked above average, while all other members fell below average. Nonetheless, thirteen allies increased their percentages in 2002.

  • Combat Forces: Most NATO Allies contributed their fair share or more in at least one of the following categories: ground combat capability, naval combat and mine countermeasures tonnage, and combat aircraft capability. Greece and Turkey contributed far more than their fair share in all three categories.

  • Military Mobility/Logistic Forces: Most NATO Allies contributed less than their fair share in all of the following categories:  naval supply, tender and transport tonnage, military transport aircraft capacity, and tanker aircraft fuel offload capacity. Turkey contributed substantially more than its fair share of all three categories.  Greece contributed substantially more than its fair share of naval supply, tender and transport tonnage and its fair share of military transport aircraft capacity.  The United Kingdom contributed its fair share of naval supply, tender and transport tonnage.

  • Multinational Peace Operations: Our NATO Allies made strong contributions to multinational peace operations in terms of personnel and funding.  France and Portugal contributed substantially more than their fair share in both categories.

  • Foreign Assistance: Eleven allies contributed their fair share or more of foreign assistance. Italy contributed less than its fair share, as did less wealthy countries: the Czech Republic, Greece, Poland, and Turkey. Hungary is a net foreign aid recipient.

  • Cost Sharing: Italy, Germany, and the UK, the NATO Allies with the highest numbers of U.S. troops stationed on their soil, offset 34 percent, 21 percent, and 15 percent (respectively) of U.S. stationing costs.

Pacific Allies

  • Australia spent 1.9 percent of its GDP on defense in 2002.  Australia contributed its fair share of multinational peace operations personnel and funding, naval combat and mine countermeasures tonnage, combat aircraft capability, and foreign assistance. It contributed less than its fair share of military mobility/logistic forces and substantially less than its fair share of ground combat capability.

  • Japan spent one percent of GDP on defense in 2002, however its defense budget was second only to the U.S. in absolute terms.  Japan contributed substantially less than its fair share of combat and military mobility/logistic forces, and peace operations personnel. However, this must be viewed in the light of constitutional and historical factors that have limited the size and deployment of Japan's defense forces.  Japan contributed more funding for foreign assistance and UN peace operations than any nation in this Report, other than the United States.  It also contributed the highest absolute level of host nation support ($4.6 billion), and offset 75 percent of U.S. stationing costs in 2001.

  • The Republic of Korea (ROK) spent 2.8 percent of GDP on defense in 2002, which is above the average of 2.5 percent for all nations covered in this Report.  The ROK contributed substantially more than its fair share of combat forces but substantially less than its fair share of military mobility and logistic forces. The ROK contributed substantially less than its fair share of multinational peace operations funding and personnel, and foreign assistance, reflecting the focus on the North Korean threat. The ROK offset approximately 39 percent of U.S. non-personnel stationing costs in 2001. Under the terms of the new 2002-2004 Special Measures Agreement, ROK offsets will increase by 8.8 percent plus inflation each year through 2004.

Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)

  • Defense Spending as a Percentage of GDP: The GCC nations spent larger percentages of GDP on defense (4.2 to 14.5 percent) in 2002 than any country, other than Greece and Turkey, addressed in this Report.

  • Combat Forces: All GCC nations contributed more than their fair share of ground combat capability and all but the United Arab Emirates (UAE) contributed more than their fair share of combat aircraft capability. Excluding Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, all GCC nations contributed their fair share or more of naval combat, and mine countermeasures tonnage. Bahrain contributed substantially more than its fair share in all three categories and Oman contributed more than its fair share in all three categories.

  • Military Mobility/Logistic Forces:  Oman contributed its fair share of naval supply, tender and transport tonnage. Saudi Arabia, Oman, and the UAE, contributed their fair share or more of military transport aircraft capacity. Saudi Arabia contributed substantially more than its fair share of tanker aircraft fuel offload capacity while the other GCC nations had no contributions.

  • Multinational Peace Operations: The GCC nations contributed substantially less than their fair share of peace operations personnel and funding. Only the UAE contributed peace operations personnel in 2002 (five personnel).

    Foreign Assistance: Kuwait contributed more than its fair share of foreign assistance, while Saudi Arabia and the UAE contributed substantially less. Bahrain, Oman, and Qatar are net foreign assistance recipients.

  • Cost Sharing: Oman offset 79 percent of U.S. stationing costs in 2001 – ranking second of all nations in this Report. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait also contributed over 50 percent of U.S. non-personnel stationing costs in 2001.

The United States

  • In absolute terms, the United States contributes more funding for UN peace operations, and greater military combat and mobility/logistical forces than any other nation covered in this Report. It also devoted a far larger percentage of its defense spending to modernization than any other NATO nation. While the United States contributed less than its fair share of multinational peace operations personnel and funding, and foreign assistance, it contributed its fair share or greater of defense spending, combat forces, military mobility/logistic forces, and NATO modernization spending.

  • The United States greatly outstrips all of its allies in a broad range of military capabilities that are not reflected in the static indicators assessed in this Report. The most important of these are the United States' unique capabilities to deploy and sustain military forces over long distances for extended periods; others include suppression of enemy air defenses, precision strike, and theater ballistic missile defense capabilities.

Conclusion Header

The Department of Defense (DoD) will continue to urge allied and partner nations to maintain and increase their responsibility sharing contributions, particularly where there is scope for greater effort. Such areas include defense spending (including making better use of those funds), military modernization, mobility and logistic forces, and host nation contributions for U.S. forces stationed on allied territory. Where it is appropriate to do so, DoD will, at least as an interim goal, pursue cost sharing arrangements in which host nations commit to offset 50 percent of total non-personnel stationing costs. The United States will also continue to hold NATO Allies to their Prague Capabilities promises to fund and rectify Alliance shortfalls in chemical, biological, and nuclear defenses; intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities; command, control and communications; precision-guided munitions; mobility; and logistics.

Table of Contents | Introduction | Chapter I | Chapter II | Annex | ... page top