10) The organizational relationship has been further solidified through the "Joint Declaration on UN/NATO Secretariat Cooperation" that was signed by both Secretaries-General in New York on 23 September 2008.
Although the number of insightful studies on the relationship between the UN and NATO is growing, the Secretaries-General remain a greatly underexamined part of the engagement of these two organizations.
This lack of close consideration is unfortunate since there is evidence of variation in the views and involvement of the secretaries-general across time.
UN Secretaries-General have similarly shown variation regarding their views on working with NATO.
When discussed in UN-NATO studies, the impression given is that the connection between the Secretaries-General is an important dimension to consider.
Despite such observations, involvement by the Secretaries-General is often not addressed in analyses of UN-NATO interaction.
25) The lack of such a comparative dimension is problematic because, as demonstrated even in the limited coverage from UN-NATO organizational studies, the UN and NATO Secretaries-General have maintained important interactions.
27) Yet even with such attention to Kosovo in connection to UN-NATO relations, there has not been a careful assessment of the engagement by the two Secretaries-General, despite a statement from NATO itself that "from the onset of the conflict in Kosovo in 1998 and throughout the crisis, close contacts were maintained between the UN Secretary General and NATO's Secretary General.
In this study, we compare the roles played by each leader, examine how the Secretaries-General interacted, and analyze the extent to which there was institutional competition or tension between Annan and Solana.
In the lead-up to the conflict, both Secretaries-General played important roles in moving NATO toward military action.
Each of the chapters dedicated to the secretaries-general begins with the process--the behind-the-scenes geopolitical posturing and consensus building that led to their elections.
The author's findings clearly demonstrate that different personalities and diplomatic styles employed by the secretaries-general seemed to work equally well in promoting consensus, depending upon the circumstances.