Daily Archives: February 6, 2017

Politico

Pro-Russian opposition in Montenegro plans NATO referendum Miami Herald Montenegro's main opposition party said Monday that it will organize a referendum on the country's membership in NATO with the support of Russia if the ruling pro-Western majority keeps insisting the decision should be made in parliament. Flynn to recommend Trump back NATO membership for MontenegroPolitico all 8 news articles »

The rest is here:
Pro-Russian opposition in Montenegro plans NATO referendum - Miami Herald

There are two broad options: work harder to save the alliance, or turn inward and opt for self-reliance. In practice, we are likely to see elements of both, as different countries hedge their bets in different ways.

Last month, Prime Minister Theresa May declared that Britain and the US are "united in our recognition of NATO as the bulwark of our collective defense," while the President nodded alongside her in agreement.

On the other hand, the UK believes that to keep Trump on its side, it will also need to persuade other European nations to contribute more to the alliance in the form of higher defense spending.

Higher defense spending serves two purposes. For some, like Theresa May, it will help to neutralize Trump's charge that allies are merely free riding on American efforts. After all, even those NATO allies most skeptical of the President are not ready to give up on America.

If President Trump himself has been amongst those who would weaken NATO, who is left? One answer is Defense Secretary James Mattis, a retired general who served as NATO's Supreme Allied Commander of Transformation between 2007 and 2009. Another is Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who gave a calm, assured speech on his first day in the office. European states hope that Mattis, Tillerson, and others will prove a moderating influence on President Trump.

However, Europeans also realize that this may not be enough. Mattis and Tillerson can be sacked, and the President has shown a willingness to treat the very closest of allies, like Australia, with open hostility.

Higher defense spending therefore serves a second purpose: it increases Europe's safety net, should the US indeed weaken its commitment to the continent's defense.

That safety net is not very strong. While Europe's collective defense spending is around four times that of Russia, European militaries duplicate a lot of spending, and would be constrained in a crisis by the need for political approval from dozens of different capitals.

One answer to this is more cooperation. But should this cooperation be within NATO, the EU, or something else?

But NATO's Supreme Allied Commander is always an American, and the US continues to provide some of the key supporting capabilities, such as refueling aircraft and airborne radar, without which it would be very hard for even Britain, France, and Germany to act on their own.

Some European powers have therefore pushed for the EU to further develop its own defense institutions.

In September, France and Germany -- backed by Italy and Spain -- proposed a permanent military headquarters to plan and run the bloc's military missions, as well as a medical command, a logistics hub, and common officer training. These plans were later diluted, but it is clear that EU defense policy is receiving more attention in Brussels.

Here, the UK is a wildcard. The UK was once a major advocate of European defense cooperation, signing the landmark Saint-Malo declaration with France in 1998. But it has since grown warier of European defense integration, arguing that these efforts distract from NATO and encourage wasteful duplication.

Given Theresa May's eagerness to prove NATO's worth to the new leadership in Washington, she is likely to worry that such steps by the EU will encourage the US to walk away. But Britain is leaving the union and can no longer block what the EU does in the future.

At the same time, the UK is the largest military power in Europe, and far outstrips its allies in some areas, such as signals intelligence.

Any EU military institution that did not include the UK would have a very limited capability. Other European countries, like Poland and Slovakia, also share the UK's view, and would prefer to focus on strengthening NATO.

The first test for Trump's credibility on the issue of European security will come over Ukraine, where fighting between Russia-backed separatists and the Ukrainian government has escalated.

Many feared that Trump might reverse sanctions on Russia, without securing Moscow's compliance with a ceasefire agreement.

However, on Thursday, the US ambassador to the United Nation delivered a stinging, and surprising, rebuke of "Russia's aggressive actions." This will reassure European allies for now, but they will continue to watch how the White House deals with Russia in its first months, and its approach to military allies in Asia.

Speaking in Malta, French President Franois Hollande echoed Europe's fears. "We must have a European conception of our future. If not, there will be -- in my opinion -- no Europe and not necessarily any way for each of the countries to be able to exert an influence in the world."

Europe cannot be complacent about the Trump administration. But if European leaders push too quickly on defense cooperation outside NATO, they risk widening a rift with the region's largest military power, the UK, and encouraging those who believe that the European security order established after the Second World War is indeed over.

Europe is right to think about greater self-reliance in defense, but it should make every effort to work with those in Washington and in the Trump administration who understand the unique role of NATO.

See the original post here:
Can Europe still rely on NATO? - CNN

NATO launched a new training programme in Iraq on Sunday (5 February 2017), teaching Iraqi security forces to counter Improvised Explosive Devices (IED). Around 30 enlisted soldiers are participating in the first five-week course. ''NATO's training and capacity building in Iraq is strengthening the country's ability to fight ISIL and provide for its own security,'' said NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.

NATO Allies are supplying protective equipment to Iraqi security forces as part of their training. The new counter-IED training scheme will run alongside NATO-run courses in Iraq on civil-military cooperation.Since January 2017, NATO advisers have been working in the country, overseeing training activities and working with the Iraqi authorities to reform their security institutions. NATO has been training Iraqi security forces in several areas, including counter-IED, explosive ordnance disposal and de-mining in neighbouring Jordan. At the Warsaw Summit in July of last year, Allies agreed to expand this training into Iraq itself.

The Secretary General stressed that training Iraqi forces is an important part of NATOs contribution to the fight against terrorism, which includes AWACS surveillance support to the Coalition against ISIL. "The best weapon we have in the fight against terrorism is to train local forces," said Mr. Stoltenberg, adding that "a more effective Iraqi military means a safer Iraq, and a more stable Middle East."

Continued here:
NATO - News: NATO launches training effort in Iraq, 05-Feb.-2017 - NATO HQ (press release)

Thousands of Nato troops have amassed close to the border with Russia as part of the largest build-up of Western troops neighbouring Moscows sphere of influence since the Cold War.

The Baltic states, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria are hosting soldiers from across Natos 28 member states, with more than 7,000 troops deployed in countries bordering Russia.

The UK is the lead nation in Estonia, where 800 soldiers are based at the Tapa base, about 50 miles from Tallinn, helped by French and Danish forces.

British soldiers are also deployed in Poland as part of a US-led Nato mission numbering some 4,000 troops, which is supported by the Romanian army.

Poland's leaders hold ceremony to welcome US troops as part of Nato build-up

In Latvia and Lithuania, around 1,200 troops from Canada and Germany (respectively) are deployed alongside forces from across Europe.

Tanks and heavy armoured vehicles, plus Bradley fighting vehicles and Paladin howitzers, are also in situ and British Typhoon jets from RAF Conningsby will be deployed to Romania this summer to contribute to Natos Southern Air Policing mission.

This map, produced for The Independent by Statista, illustrates the scale of Nato's military build-up in Eastern Europe.

In the far north of the continent, more than 300 US marines are also on rotation in Norway, which shares a border with Russia inside the Arctic Circle.

Kremlin officials claim the build-up is the largest since the Second World War.

The extensive troop deployment comes as defence budgets in the Baltic States continue to rise.

Combined, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania spent little more than 900 million Us dollars on defence in 2005.

Fast forward to 2019 and that figure will have more than doubled to a little over two billion dollars.

Chart showing defence budgets rising in the Baltic States (Statista)

According to research by the US-based think tank Heritage Foundation, between 1950 and 2000 on average 22 per cent of all US troops were stationed on foreign soil.

The low point for US soldier deployments abroad came in 1995 as East-West tensions began to subside, with just 13 per cent of Americas armed forces serving abroad.

Now, Russia believes the US and its Nato partners are expanding.

The US is also increasing its presence in the Black Sea and in Western Europe at bases in the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany.

Tensions between Russia and the West have been heightened since the annexation of Crimea and the war in Syria, which put Washington and Moscow on opposing sides.

Russia blames the West for worsening relations and says the build-up of Nato troops in the Baltics is a provocation.

Moscow has criticised recent deployments as truly aggressive.

More:
The map that shows how many Nato troops are deployed along Russia's border - The Independent

Wall Street Journal

NATO to Start Training Soldiers in Iraq - WSJ Wall Street Journal The North Atlantic Treaty Organization will begin its training effort in Iraq on Sunday, as the alliance looks to step up its efforts to assist in the fight against Islamic ... and more »

See the original post:
NATO to Start Training Soldiers in Iraq - WSJ - Wall Street Journal

May is expected to brief EU leaders on her recent trip to the United States, where she received assurances that President Trump is fully committed to NATO.

The push for more defense spending follows a warning from U.K. Defense Secretary Michael Fallon on the dangers of Russia's military resurgence: Moscow's recent aggression couldn't be treated as "business as usual."

NATO was designed to counter exactly such a threat. But Trump called the alliance "obsolete" during the presidential campaign and accused other members of not spending their fair share.

"We are spending a tremendous amount in NATO and other people proportionately less," he said. "No good."

When it comes to costs, Trump and May have a point. Only five of NATO's 28 members -- the U.S., Greece, Poland, Estonia and the U.K. -- meet the alliance's target of spending at least 2% of GDP on defense.

U.S. ambassador to UN hits Russia hard over Ukraine

The alliance increased overall defense spending for the first time in two decades in 2015, but the U.S. is still doing a lot of the heavy lifting. It spends the highest proportion of its GDP on defense: 3.61%.

The second biggest NATO spender in proportional terms is Greece, at 2.38%, according to NATO. The U.K. is third, at 2.2%. Meanwhile, Germany spent 1.19% last year, while France forked out 1.78%. Canada, Slovenia, Belgium, Spain and Luxembourg all spent less than 1%.

NATO admits it is overly dependent on the U.S. for the provision of essential capabilities, including intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, air-to-air refueling, ballistic missile defense and airborne electronic warfare.

According to NATO statistics, the U.S. spent an estimated $664 billion on defense in 2016. That's more than double the amount all the other 27 NATO countries spent between them, even though their combined GDP tops that of the U.S.

NATO is now pushing hard for the 2% guideline to be taken more seriously.

Back in 2014, all member countries that fall below the threshold committed to ramp up military spending to reach the target within a decade. Most countries are sticking with the promise: 12 increased their spending in 2014, and 16 did so in 2015. Last year, 22 countries spent more as a share of their national economic output.

Trump, China, Europe: Why 2017 is impossible to predict

Fear of Russian aggression is driving some of the splurge. Latvia, which shares a border with Russia, increased its defense spending by 42% in 2016. Its neighbor Lithuania boosted its outlays by 34%. Both, however, are still below the 2% threshold.

NATO is based on the principle of collective defense: an attack against one or more members is considered an attack against all. So far that has only been invoked once -- in response to the September 11 attacks.

Retired Marine Gen. James Mattis, Trump's defense secretary, has described NATO as vital to U.S. national interests and security. Former ExxonMobil (XOM) CEO Rex Tillerson, who has been confirmed as secretary of state, has also defended the alliance.

CNNMoney (London) First published February 3, 2017: 6:11 AM ET

Read the rest here:
Britain tells Europe: Pay your fair share into NATO - CNNMoney