A conversation with Dr. Vlasta Zekulic on NATO's Strategy Development and Croatia's Military2/13/2025
 Tin: From your lengthy career in high-ranking military positions in the Croatian military and NATO, what are the core leadership principles that made you successful in leading in these organizations?
Dr. Zekulic: I would say that the first one is focus. When you lead, there are no distractions, and there is little space to make mistakes. Second, there is nothing in the military that can be accomplished alone. So, the ability to synchronize and create synergies between units and people is absolutely key. You constantly depend on somebody else, so you need to be able to work with others. You have to be open to others' opinions. You have to be able to negotiate to find a solution. In the Croatian military and NATO, you have to find a way to work effectively with others to deliver the results on time. And last but not least is trust. I found that whether between commanders and subordinates or between the nations or NATO commands, without that personal trust, nothing happens. You have to be a trusted agent. You have to be somebody that when you speak, people know that they can trust and rely on you. Even if you’re bringing bad news. Tin Pak: What role do smaller nations like Croatia play in NATO's security framework, which is dominated by larger powers like the US, France, and Germany? Dr. Zekulic: We have to remember why NATO was established. A lot of times, people forget that in 1949, NATO was not established for the big, for the strong, but to help protect the weak. European countries just out of the Second World War were destroyed, and suddenly, another nemesis rose with the Soviet Union. To protect one another, the bigger ‘brothers and sisters’ led by the United States and the United Kingdom answered the call of these smaller countries to stand with them. This led to the formation of NATO as an organization to provide security guarantees for these smaller countries while protecting the geopolitical interests of the bigger ones. 76 years later, even though the alliance is combined now with far more small nations than big ones, that first postulate still stands: we need the bigger nations to provide the security umbrella. Small nations are willing to do everything they can to help. But if you look at Croatia, for instance, as a nation of 3.8 million people, there is only so much it can give. They can contribute a lot in relative amounts but not in absolute ones. Croatia has a full brigade under NATO command. They participate in all the rotational heads' forward presence in the Baltics. We participate in exercises, and we plug into every single international framework that we can. But again, if you look at the absolute numbers, the one brigade Croatia has committed is nothing in comparison to what the United States contributes in absolute numbers, yet it's almost half of Croatia’s land forces. Nonetheless, small nations like Croatia are doing everything they can to be a strong, reliable, and interoperable alliance partner. Within NATO, we follow a leading nation framework concept, where one of the bigger nations, usually Germany or Italy, will say, “okay, we are setting up this battle group or this project, who wants to contribute to it?” For Croatia, it's harder to lead like this, but we are always there to contribute to these larger initiatives. Therefore, what smaller nations need to do is to be stable, strong, capable, prepared, and interoperable with NATO standards across the board to assist these leading nations. This entails replacing legacy equipment with modern Western standards, such as tanks and airplanes, for instance. Tin Pak: With the greater numbers of hybrid attacks from Russia against NATO nations since the beginning of their invasion of Ukraine, how is and should NATO, as a collective security alliance, further deter hybrid attacks by Russia and its proxies? Dr. Zekulic: NATO started focusing on asymmetrical warfare, otherwise known as hybrid warfare, beginning in 2009, when we were running operations in Afghanistan. There were a variety of attacks on us, incorporating a broad range of unorthodox tactics whose source was ambiguous. The illegal annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014 was a watershed moment for the emerging concept of hybrid warfare. Without a shot fired, Russia was able to take hold of the territory through the employment of unorthodox and shadowy tactics, most notably in the deployment of non-insignia Russian troops called “little green men” alongside information campaigns. Following this event, NATO defined three necessary steps to address the future of hybrid warfare. The first step is to be better prepared. Second, we needed to figure out how to deter these attacks. And thirdly, how to defend against them. And over the years, the work on all three lines of effort really matured significantly. Where things got complicated was with the introduction of rapidly advancing technologies and digital tools, such as AI. The greatest vulnerability to hybrid attacks for NATO is in digital space. We are giving so much information about ourselves through digital channels that our adversaries are able to harness this and do exactly what they want: break us from within. In response to these growing threats, NATO has established the Resilience Committee to increase the strength of our critical infrastructures and civil societies. We trained a lot of people by increasing their awareness and understanding of where and how these hybrid attacks are happening. We also developed a comprehensive hybrid preventive and responsive toolbox, given the nation's capabilities, to help them identify hybrid attacks and what to do about them. Additionally, since 2019, NATO allies have agreed that hybrid attacks can trigger Article 5, NATO’s mutual defense clause. The last element that's making it far more challenging in recent years is China. China started using hybrid attacks before Russia, but they were doing it in a different part of the world. Since 2019, we've seen not just their rise of using hybrid activities against us in Europe, but now we have seen that Russia and China are working together to deliver this. This is quite a serious challenge because Russia has a good understanding of who we are, how we operate, how we think, what makes us afraid, etc. On the other hand, China has the tools that can cause a lot of damage, particularly cyber tools, and economic coercion. Thus, the interplay between the two is something that's quite worrying. But we are handling it. Tin Pak: From your experience as the branch head of NATO's Strategic Issues and Engagements department, what does the process look like in formulating and developing strategic solutions in NATO? Specifically, how do you ensure the policies that you guys develop align with all 32 members of NATO’s expectations? Dr. Zekulic: There are two sides to NATO decision-making. As a political-military alliance, politicians make the final decisions, but we, as the military, provide most of the information and advice during the formation of policy. Let's say we have a problem. A nation is saying there is an issue with a region or with an adverse actor. They then present their problem to NATO’s military authorities, who deliver unfettered military advice. Their job is to identify the core of the problem, understand what adversaries are trying to achieve with it, and finally offer Courses of Action to combat it. And then, the advice that we provide goes to the NATO Military Committee for the first layering of political and national considerations of our advice. NATO Military Committee is the first body inside the NATO headquarters in Brussels where all nations come together to discuss military challenges and solutions. At that point, the military authorities representing 32 allies look at our proposals. They then make edits and comments, saying, “We agree with this part. We should emphasize this here. I believe we should do more in this area and perhaps less in that one.” And then, that document goes to the political authorities – either from the foreign service or the ministry of defense, depending on the nature of the problem. They will analyze it and provide a political overview before submitting it for final approval by the North Atlantic Council – the most senior NATO decision-making body. In forming policies throughout this process, you need to know to make these documents as simple as possible but as complex as required. Simple, because the bureaucrats across the organizations will translate these policies in more than 20 languages, and it must resonate well across all of them. For example, in French, deter and dissuade are the same word, so strategic deterrence in English can mean something very different in French. But also complex, because it has to show and prove that it can solve the multidimensional problems that we are focused on. There are all of these things that you need to consider when you're writing a document so that it will not be misinterpreted. Finding this magical NATO language, which is as simple and clear but also strategically ambiguous enough that the nations can interpret it in different ways, is the art of our International Staff in Brussels. It's a science and an art. Negotiations over the wording of documents are not easy. Sometimes, they can last for weeks, as 32 nations need to say yes and commit to it. Tin Pak: Pivoting more towards Croatia specifically. I'm interested in your experience as a former commander of the Croatian Defence Academy. What were the most important values, principles, and concepts that you sought to instill in your cadets and future military officers to prepare them for modern warfare? Dr. Zekulic: Because everyone is different, you have to instill specific leadership styles that work for each one of the cadets. You still need to teach them the basic principles, but it's important that they understand how they will personally apply them to their subordinates and superiors. The first thing, from beginning to end of officer training, is integrity: doing what's right even when nobody's looking. Integrity is at the core because integrity leads to accountability. Moreover, if you're willing to do your best and admit your mistakes, it builds trust amongst your peers. The second part is professionalism. I always told my cadets that they have to be the best possible expert in their field. Nowadays, it's very hard to convince young people to learn the basic skills in their professions. They're always telling me that with the advent of all these new technologies that assist with our work, learning these skills is obsolete. However, in our world, we work in classified environments. There is no phone on you. There is no internet. When you're closed in the room, in the classified areas, what you have in your head is the only thing that's going to be able to deliver. If you're on a battlefield and the communications go down, there's no Googling. Either you know what to do, or you don't. Either you know the plan, or you don't. The ability to learn, retain, and connect information and be professional in these environments is very important. But at the end of the day, we just try our best to put our cadets in a situation where they have to learn. You never stop learning. I'm 46 now, and I have almost 30 years of experience. I continue to learn every single day because there is always something new. So having this mindset, it's something that's very relevant. And last but not least is physical strength. Physical strength leads to endurance, which strengthens our mental capacities. We work in a very stressful environment with long hours when you don't know when your next meal is and if you are going to sleep that day. You have to develop this relationship between the body and mind. That can never be neglected. I work with four-star generals that are in their late 50s. When they travel, they’re in the gym or going running every day. You cannot stop training your body. And again, it's not just a physical thing because it balances your mind and teaches you about how to deal with discomfort, pain, and pressure. Tin Pak: Looking back at Yugoslav Wars. How has Croatia's relationship, since then, with its neighboring Balkan nations, particularly Serbia, changed over this period? Are you concerned about another possible outbreak of hostilities among these nations? Dr. Zekulic: All Balkan nations, except for Bosnia and Hercegovina and Serbia, are members of the Alliance. We all get and understand each other, including Bosnia and Hercegovina who is a candidate nation. Serbia obviously does not have NATO ambitions, but they do have EU ambitions, so they're playing a little bit more by the book than was the case in the past. However, there is always, potential for disruption in the region, particularly through the actions of Russia. There is the problem of Republican Srpska, who are not working with the rest of the Bosnia and Herzegovina authorities in stabilizing the country. And obviously, there is an enduring issue with Kosovo. Amongst this regional instability, for us as a Croatian state, there are four main pillars to our national strategy that we have to execute. The first one is safeguarding the security of the Croatian people and the territorial integrity of the country. The second part is ensuring the well-being of our people. The third one is the solidifying of our national identity and building a strong international influence. This leads to the last aim of the Croatian security strategy, which is the protection of Croatian minorities in the other Balkan countries. Although one of the constitutional peoples, we are a minority in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and there is a risk that with the growth of the Bosniak population and the radicalization of the Serbian population, Croatians will be pushed out from government decision-making. Most of the time in NATO negotiations, Croatia doesn't have a strong opinion on many things until the Balkans are mentioned. Then, our diplomats pull out a huge list of instructions and demands of what we have to protect regarding our ethnic minorities and securing the future of the region. The primary solution to ensure our interests in the region is to mature enough to meet NATO standards and become a strong member of the alliance. Once we are all inside NATO, we are pretty confident that the risk of any escalation of tensions or conflict will decline greatly. Right now, it's still fragile. Every now and then, you can see tensions escalate in Kosovo. The solution for Kosovo is not easy because there are still several allies who have not recognized Kosovo as an independent state, which is really impeding our ability to find a long-term solution. And unfortunately, that solution is not something NATO can very much help with. It's mostly up to international diplomats and the European Union. As a military alliance, we only have to make sure that the conflict does not erupt there. Therefore, a NATO peacekeeping footprint in Kosovo remains. Tin Pak: Building from the previous question. What role does Croatia's military play in deterring conflict in the Yugoslav region and Eastern Europe more generally? Dr. Zekulic: There are two parts to that. The first part is, politically, we do not let the topic of the Western Balkans get off the agenda. With the war in Ukraine and in the Middle East, there are more urgent threats to the alliance, which sidelines many other issues we face. The second part is that, although we don’t currently feel threatened by our neighbors, we seek to maintain a strong deterrence in the region. This involves ensuring our ability to mobilize, modernize, train, and equip a modern military force. This serves as both a regional and Europe-wide deterrent, particularly in the southeast of Europe. For example, we are part of the NATO multinational headquarters center. This means that for all of the movement of units towards the Black Sea for any NATO operations, Croatia would be part of these operations. We contributed by helping open the convoy's airspace and land space. Also, as part of our own war legacy, although we have defense assurances from our NATO allies, we refuse to become completely reliant on others for our protection. Critics say that Croatia is too small to justify maintaining a combat air force. They say that air protection can be provided by Italy. But for Croatia, it's important that we have all of it. We have land forces that are equipped with modern weaponry, and we have a capable air force. We just now bought Rafale fighter jets from France and Black Hawk helicopters from the United States. We are small, but we are capable across the whole board. It's important for us that we are not just sitting behind and waiting for somebody else to provide security for us. We are doing our share. Tin Pak: Exellent. Thank you for sharing your insights.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |