Category Archives: NATO

Donald Trump and Gentiloni at a news conference last week. Photo: Saul Loeb/AFP

US President Donald Trump told Italy's Paolo Gentiloni that the country must "pay up" for NATO during the leaders' private meeting last week, according to an interview transcript released on Monday.

"We were joking, and I said 'You have to pay, you have to pay'. He'll pay, he's going to end up paying," said Trump in an interview with the Associated Pressabout his first 100 days in office, the transcript shows.

Trump was answering a question on how the office of the presidency had changed since his election in November this year.

The journalist clarified whether this conversation had taken place in the leaders' private meeting, to which Trump responded: "He'll end up paying".

He added: "You know, nobody ever asked the question. Nobody asked. Nobody ever asked him to pay up. So it's a different kind of presidency."

Trump also said he had "a great relationship with all the leaders I've met, but no-one writes about it".

The two leaders met for the first time on Thursday, in a White House meetingto prepare for the G7 leaders' summit in Sicily.

At a news conference following the talks, Trump said Italy was a "key partner" for the United States, both in terms of trade and in the fight against terrorism.

The leaders also touched on the topic of NATO contributions. When a journalist asked Gentiloni if Italy would pay the new quotas, Trump said: "I would also like to know that."

Gentiloni responded: "The commitment was taken in 2014 and we are accustomed to honouring our commitments." He said the payment was "a gradual process that has already begun" but highlighted Italy's "budget constraints".

READ ALSO: Trump says Italy is 'key partner', but contradicts Gentiloni on Libya Photo: AFP

Read the original here:
Trump: Italy will 'pay up' for NATO - The Local Italy

Washington Business Journal

Italy is a key NATO customer for defense firms but it comes with risk Washington Business Journal Gentiloni's comments come as Trump has repeatedly called on NATO allies to meet their spending commitments much to the pleasure of defense contractors like Lockheed Martin Corp. (NYSE: LMT) but also at a volatile time for the European Union. Italy's Gentiloni Vows to Meet Trump NATO Spending Demand SlowlyBloomberg Trump Uses Italian Prime Minister Visit to Call Out Another NATO Ally for Spending GoalsU.S. News & World Report Trump jabs Italian PM Gentiloni on meeting financial NATO obligationUPI.com Newsy -New York Times -CNN -Nato all 307 news articles »

Read the original:
Italy is a key NATO customer for defense firms but it comes with risk - Washington Business Journal

More Nato fighter jets are being scrambled to monitor and intercept Russian planes than at any time since the end of the Cold War as tensions continue to rise.

Around 780 deployments were made from European military bases last year in response to Russian aircraft, compared to just 410 in 2015.

British planes have been scrambled in numerous operations involving the RAF, which has pilots in theQuick Reaction Alert forceready to launch 24-hours a day.

Incidents have seen Russian bomber planes approach the UK several times, including when Blackjack bombers spent more than five hours skirting British airspace in February.

Russian planes are not known to have violated international regulations or entered any EU nations sovereign airspace, flying instead into identification zones in international airspace that are monitored for security.

A typical response sees fighter jets launched by the nearest country to visually identify the foreign aircraft and ascertain whether it is a threat, frequently flying alongside until the Russian plane breaks away and turns back.

A further 90 alerts were sparked by non-Russian planes in 2016, such as commercial flights that lost contact with air traffic control, according to officials at Ramstein Air Base in Germany, where the US Air Forces in Europe are headquartered.

NATO intercepts Russian bombers

It brings the total number of deployments to 870 in the year, which saw Nato increase its air policing missions after noting a steady increase in Russian military air activity.

Officials at Ramstein told Germanys DPA news agency that the rising number of jets being scrambled was partly due to the Turkish Air Force stepping up its operations under Nato command and launching operations along the Syrian border.

Turkey shot down a Russian fighter jet after it crossed the boundaryfor 17 seconds during a bombing mission in 2015, although the Kremlin claimed it had not violated Turkish airspace.

Nato was among the bodies working to defuse tensions following the attack, which was the first time a member state had shot down a Russian or Soviet plane since 1952.

The number of Russian planes intercepted in Eastern Europe fell slightly last year, with the Lithuanian ministry of defence saying there were 110 deployments in 2016, compared to 160 the previous year.

However, the number is still more than double that seen before the Ukrainian conflict, which has driven worsening relations between Russia and the EU over the Kremlins military intervention and annexation of Crimea.

The figures were revealed after Russian planes approached the Alaskan coast for four nights in a row this week, sparking two intercepts and two monitoring operations.

The North American Aerospace Defence Command (Norad) told The Independent two Tu-95 Bear bombers were intercepted on Monday and Thursday, and monitored on Tuesday.

On Wednesday, an IL-38 Russian maritime patrol aircraft appeared and was watched.

US Air Force First Lt Lauren Hill, a spokesperson for Norad, said the latest incident on Thursday saw two American F-22 Raptor stealth fighters and two Canadian Air Force CF-18 Hornets scrambled.

They were launched to intercept two Russian bear bombers off the coast of Alaska at around 7pm local time (2am BST) andvisually identify the foreign aircraft.

They were always in the 200-mile radius that is the Alaskan Air Identification Zone but at no time did they enter sovereign North American airspace, which is 12 miles from land, First Lt Hill said.

All four flights were conducted safely and professionally.

An RAF Typhoon shadows Russian navy vesselsas they pass through the English Channel (MoD)

Incidents have not been seen in the same level of intensity by the US since 2014, but Norad is understood not to consider the Russian behaviour abnormal.

Before last week, the most recent previous incident seeing Russian aircraft intercepted by American forceswas in 2015.

That saw a pair of Russian bombers fly just 40 miles off the coast of California and around Alaska on 4 July, when a pilot relayed the message: Good morning, American pilots. We are here to greet you on your Fourth of July Independence Day.

A Russian intelligence ship, the Viktor Leonov, has recently been spotted off the US coast and two months ago, Russian aircraft had several encounters with the USS Porter as it sailed in the Black Sea.

US-Russian relations have soured in the wake of Mr Trumps vow to improve ties with Moscow, following mounting tensions over Syria and Ukraine.

The two conflicts, seeing Vladimir Putin back his allies Bashar al-Assad and the former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych, have also increased tensions between Russia and the EU.

Amid increased military deployments and rival drills, both Nato members and Russia have accused each other of warmongering amid fears over a new arms race.

In Natos latest air exercise, codenamed Ramstein Alloy, fighter jets from the Baltic air policing mission, the Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Norway and the US will practice intercepts over Lithuania on Tuesday.

See the rest here:
Nato intercepting highest number of Russian military planes since the Cold War as 780 incidents recorded in 2016 - The Independent

Neil Clark is a journalist, writer, broadcaster and blogger. He has written for many newspapers and magazines in the UK and other countries including The Guardian, Morning Star, Daily and Sunday Express, Mail on Sunday, Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, New Statesman, The Spectator, The Week, and The American Conservative. He is a regular pundit on RT and has also appeared on BBC TV and radio, Sky News, Press TV and the Voice of Russia. He is the co-founder of the Campaign For Public Ownership @PublicOwnership. His award winning blog can be found at http://www.neilclark66.blogspot.com. He tweets on politics and world affairs @NeilClark66

Just imagine if over 1,200 Russian troops were carrying out major military drills over a two week period in Mexico, a country that borders the United States. Would media headlines be warning about US aggression? Of course not.

Yet 1,200 NATO troops have been carrying out military exercises in Latvia, the Baltic country that shares a border with Russia. Guess who is being portrayed as the aggressor? You got it: the big, bad Russian bear.

This week, NATO's Summer Shield military exercises got underway at the Adazi military base. Soldiers from Latvia, the US, Bulgaria, Estonia, Canada, Lithuania, the UK, Luxembourg, Romania, Slovakia, Germany and also non-NATO member Sweden are taking part in the drills, which have been held in the country since 2004.

The US Air Force has sent several of its newest stealth fighters to the UK as part of an initiative to reassure Europe in the face of Russian aggression, reported the Independent newspaper on Easter Monday.

In March, ITV announced"UK troops arrive in Estonia for NATO mission to deter Russian aggression."

Over the past few months theres been a massive military build-up in Eastern Europe by NATO, but all we hear is the same old phrase: "Russian aggression, Russian aggression, Russian aggression." Yet proof is wanting.

Todays mantra regarding Russian aggression is the 2003 equivalent of Saddams Weapons of Mass Destruction, to be repeated ad nauseum by anyone supporting NATOs Drang nach Osten. And like the WMD claim, its based on zero evidence.

The two examples of so-called Russian aggression that hawks routinely cite in order to portray Putin as a threat were in fact nothing of the sort. No matter how many times you read the phrase in neocon propaganda pieces, there was no Russian invasion of Ukraine. What did occur was that after a Western-supported regime change operation against a democratically-elected government in Kiev, the predominantly Russian population of Crimea (the province where the Russian Black Sea fleet was already based) quite understandably voted overwhelmingly in a referendum to rejoin Russia. If there had indeed been a Russian invasion of Ukraine, then the people of Kiev would certainly know about it.

And in Georgia in 2008, it was the tie-chewing Western-backed President Mikhail Saakashvili who started the conflict in South Ossetia. This is not a pro-Russian version of events, its simply the truth.

As the EU report of 2009 declared, "There was no ongoing armed attack by Russia before the start of the Georgian operation ... Georgian claims of a large-scale presence of Russian armed forces in South Ossetia prior to the Georgian offensive could not be substantiated."

Read more

Once we reject the claims of Russian aggression in Ukraine and Georgia, then the case for regarding Putin as a threat crumbles. We could of course go back further (as neocons indeed do) and talk about events in the Soviet era, such as the invasion of Finland in 1939, but that wasnt Russia and in any case, why do that when weve got much more recent examples of invasion and military interventions to look at?

Any fair-minded and objective observer, looking at the history of the past 25 years, would conclude that the worst culprits when it comes to threatening the peace are the NATO powers themselves - not Russia. In horse-racing terminology, when it comes to attacking other sovereign states its the US and its allies - not the country led by Vladimir Putin - who have the best form.

In 1999, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which had not threatened to invade anyone, was subject to a 78-day humanitarian bombing campaign by NATO. There was no let up on the attack, not even at Orthodox Easter.

In 2001, US and its allies invaded Afghanistan.

Two years later, a US-led coalition invaded Iraq on fraudulent grounds that the country possessed WMDs. In 2011, NATO bombed Libya, the country with the highest living standards in Africa, back to the Stone Age. Its leader, Muammar Gaddafi, was brutally murdered, with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gloating, "We came, we saw, he died."

In Syria, NATO powers and their regional allies have been backing jihadist rebels to overthrow the government, and have also been bombing the country illegally. In 2015, it was revealed that at least 1.3m people had lost their lives in Americas so-called War on Terror in just three countries- Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, between 2001 and the end of 2013.

But hey, lets ignore all this and keep obsessing about Putin and the Russian threat shall we?

Tanks and missiles are not the only weapons that Putin threatens to unleash according to reports. Indeed, we mustn't forget about those super-sexy Russian women. The Copenhagen Post informs that according to a risk assessment from the Danish Defense Intelligence Services, "Russian and pro-Russian agents will do their utmost to discredit the presence of the Danish soldiers and their NATO colleagues in the area and this will include the use of female operatives."

The DDIS report revealed that Danish soldiers should be wary of so-called Russian honey traps the use of beautiful women to put soldiers and agents in compromising positions, as quoted inthe Post.

Read more

You can just imagine Putin getting his battalion of cigarette-holder waving, suspender-wearing "female operatives" ready to ensnare the unsuspecting away from home for the first time Danish soldiers in dive bars in downtown Tallinn. I bet out of all his jobs, its the one the Russian President enjoys the most.

The talk is of getting soldiers into "compromising positions," but in fact the really dubious positions are the ones held by NATO troops in Eastern Europe. After all, we know that they are not there to deter a Russian invasion of Europe. So what are they there for, apart from being the potential victims of Russian Mata Haris?

There are two explanations. First, promoting a non-existent Russian threat is great news for the military-industrial complex, which dear old Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us about all those years ago. All you have to do to find the source of Russian threat paranoia, is, as I explained here, is to follow the money trail

The second reason is even more sinister. Namely that an invasion force is being mustered, much like in 1941. The uber-hawks in Washington know that for the US to attain full global hegemony Russia has to be dealt with. A color revolution wont work in Moscow because the liberal politicians the West would love to take power have nowhere near enough public support. A military assault on Russia might be the only way to colonize the country.

Lets take this scenario. In Britain, PM Theresa May is returned with a thumping 80-seat majority in Junes General Election. President Trump knowing he has a War Parliament to rely on in the UK and egged on by the neocons at home, is emboldened to go all-out for regime change in Syria. He calls the UK, who assure him theyre on board for air-strikes against Assad (Note that only this week UKs gung-ho and utterly bonkers Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said that Assad needs decapitating and that the UK could join in any future US attacks on Syria).

US and UK planes then attack Syrian government positions. Russian planes are destroyed as well as Syrian ones. Russia retaliates by firing at US/UK aircraft. NATO responds by ordering Operation Barbarossa 2.0 in self-defense. Note in this context that hawks in the US are already talking positively about the limited use of nuclear weapons.

If it all sounds far-fetched, then remember, Donald Trump is US President and Boris Johnson is UK Foreign Secretary.

Another variation, and probably the more likely one, is that the Kremlin is warned that if it dares to try and retaliate in Syria against the US or UK, NATO troops would sweep into Russia. In other words, the forces built up in Eastern Europe and the Baltics would indeed be used as a deterrent, but not against Russian aggression, as is claimed, but to try and stop Russia defending its allies and its vital strategic interests.

Either scenario is deeply disturbing. The best way to take these options off the table is for citizens of NATO countries to demand their countries stop the military build-up on Russias borders. After all, were the ones paying for this nonsense, at a time when cuts to vital public services are being made at home. To defuse tensions, demilitarized borders in Eastern Europe, as UK Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn has called for, are urgently needed.

Reading about NATOs defensive Summer Shield exercises this week reminded me of being back at university in the 1980s. Anyone who studied law in England will know the famous case of Combe v. Combe (1951) in which Lord Denning ruled that promissory estoppel can only be used as a shield and not a sword. We should insist that NATO, which in recent years has most definitely been used as a sword, follows the same rules. And those Danish soldiers in Estonia should enjoy their posting and any honey-traps while they can.

Follow Neil Clark @NeilClark66

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Read this article:
NATO military games on Russian border: 'Summer Shield' or 'Summer Sword'? - RT

TALLINN, Estonia - One of the reasons the U.S. Congress has launched an investigation into Russia's alleged meddling in the 2016 U.S. election is to "prevent the same kind of thing happening" to its NATO and other allies, U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan said Saturday.

Ryan spoke at a news conference with Estonian Prime Minister Juri Ratas in Tallinn, the Estonian capital, during a visit by a bipartisan congressional delegation to the Baltic NATO member and staunch Washington ally.

While the Republican speaker claimed that Russia's alleged meddling didn't affect the outcome of the election won by U.S. President Donald Trump he said its actions "cannot be tolerated."

"One thing we know for certain is that Russia meddled in our election," Ryan said. "This is a foreign country trying to meddle within the internal activities of a sovereign country or a democracy."

He stressed the U.S has a responsibility to share the results of the Russia investigation with countries like Estonia, which in recent years has faced aggressive Russian disinformation campaigns along with Baltic neighbors Latvia and Lithuania.

"What we're doing through our investigation process is to figure out exactly what is it they did and how they did it so that we can help, equip and assist our allies to prevent the same kind of thing happening to them," Ryan said.

He thanked Estonia a country of 1.3 million for its strong commitment to cyber defense and NATO, and for being one of the very few NATO members to spend two percent of its GDP on defense.

"We're here to say thank you for meeting that pledge," Ryan said.

Estonia's relations with neighboring Russia have remained cold and uneasy since the former Soviet republic gained independence in 1991. Among other things, bilateral ties have suffered due to Estonia's success at catching spies working for Moscow.

Ryan was meeting with Estonian President Kersti Kaljulaid later Saturday with his eight-lawmaker delegation. Estonia was the last stop in the delegation's European tour, which also included visits to Britain, Norway and Poland.

Go here to read the rest:
Russia probe will help NATO, U.S. allies, Ryan says - Newsday

The Jamestown Foundation

NATO: Assessing the Alliance's Counter-Terrorism Efforts The Jamestown Foundation NATO's counter-terrorism efforts have been the focus of much attention in recent months. Faced with a U.S. ultimatum that Washington might moderate its commitment to the Alliance, member states have sought ways to demonstrate that the organization ...

See the article here:
NATO: Assessing the Alliance's Counter-Terrorism Efforts - The Jamestown Foundation

Russia wants Iran to receive full membership in a geopolitical organization designed as a partial counterweight to NATO and other western pacts, a move that would likely deepen the economic and military ties between the two governments.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called for Iran's speedy accession to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a group of Central Asian states dominated by Russia and China that fosters military and economic cooperation between the members. He issued the call within days of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson signaling a desire to impose sanctions that former President Barack Obama lifted under the terms of the recently-negotiated nuclear deal.

"Iran has settled the problem of the UN Security Council sanctions and hence fully meets the SCO membership criteria," Lavrov said. "We hope that during their June summit in Astana the heads of our states will be able to discuss the possibility of launching the procedure for admitting Iran into the organization as a full member."

That would give Iran formal ties to Russia and China, the two leading powers in an organization often regarded as "a counterbalance to the Western-dominated international institutions that have held sway since the end of the Second World War," as Newsweek put it. SCO nations cooperate militarily and economically, although the organization doesn't guarantee mutual defense the way NATO does.

The economic appeal of the group is growing with the accession of India and Pakistan. "The SCO will account for 43 percent of the world's population and 24 per cent of global GDP," as Lavrov noted.

Membership of such a league would have political and military benefits for Iran. "Iran has been angling for quite awhile to get into the SCO just for the benefits of being closer to what it calls, in its parlance, the eastern powers China and Russia," Behnam Ben Taleblu, a senior Iran analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told the Washington Examiner. "Iran has expressed interest in joining them because it sees these guys as a natural counterweight to American and the west, American counterweight and hard power and its Iran saying, 'you want to divest us of western markets, then we can go east."

Those relationships will be especially valuable to Iran when bans on conventional weapons and ballistic missile sales expire in 2020 and 2023, respectively. "Russia and China will likely be the two biggest arms markets for Iran," Taleblu said. "The SCO process would provide a much broader international cover for these arms relationships."

The timing of Lavrov's statement underscores how Iran can factor into disagreements between Russia and the United States. President Trump's team announced days earlier a new effort to punish Iran for supporting terrorist groups and other destabilizing moves, a crackdown that might include walking away from the deal and reimposing economic sanctions that were lifted through the nuclear deal. "The Trump administration has no intention of passing the buck to a future administration on Iran," Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said Wednesday.

Originally posted here:
Russia pushes for Iranian membership in NATO counterweight group - Washington Examiner

Attack on the Champs-Elysees, 20 April 2017.

At the beginning of 2017, we were informed that jihadists were preparing actions which were intended to force France and Germany to postpone their elections. It was not easy to discern: whether the aim was to postpone the French Presidential election (April-May), or the French parliamentary elections (June), or both; whether France was a target in itself, or if the actions in France were a preparation for future actions against Germany.

Among the candidates for the Presidential election, only Franois Fillon and Marine Le Pen have criticised the support offered by France to the Muslim Brotherhood. Fillon has even made it one of the recurring themes of his campaign.

We alerted our readers that the Press campaigns and the legal affairs launched against Donald Trump in the United States, and against Franois Fillon in France, were commanded by the same groups. We wrote that according to Messrs. Trump & Fillon, it will not be possible to restore peace and prosperity without first putting an end to the instrumentalisation of Islamic terrorism, without freeing the Muslim world from the ascendancy of the jihadists, and without attacking the true source of terrorism: the Muslim Brotherhood. [1]

At that time, the French, believing wrongly that the Muslim Brotherhood was just a movement within the Muslim religion, did not react. Later, I published a book , Right Before our Eyes. From 9/11 to Donald Trump, whose second part describes in detail, and for the first time, how this secret organisation, created and controlled by MI6, is run by the British secret services. It is this Brotherhood which, since the Second World War, has been attempting to transform Sunni Islam into a political instrument. All the leaders of jihadist groups without exception came from the Brotherhood - from Oussama Ben Laden to Abou Bakr al-Baghdadi.

On 26 February, without explanation, Franois Fillon published a communiqu which was widely criticised: We find ourselves in an unprecedented situation: less than two months from the Presidential election, we are in a state of quasi civil war which is disturbing the normal course of the campaign () I say again that we are in a state of emergency, and yet the government does nothing () Today, in my rle as ex-Prime Minister, as an elected member of the Nation, I solemnly accuse the Prime Minister and the government of failing to guarantee the conditions for a serene exercise of democracy. They have a very heavy respnsibility in allowing a state of almost civil war to develop, and which can only profit the extremes () Whoever the candidates are, they must have the right to express themselves, and the government must take the necessary measures so that the rioters and the enemies of democracy cease disrupting the Presidential campaign [2].

On 17 April, the Police Nationale informed the four main candidates that there were threats to their security, and reinforced their protection.

On 18 April, M. (29 years old) and Clement B. (23 years old) were arrested while they were preparing an attack during a meeting in support of Franois Fillon.

On 20 April, a policeman was killed and two others seriously wounded during an attack on the Champs-Elyses.

Franois Fillon and Marine Le Pen cancelled the journeys they had planned for the 21 April. Following the movement, and althought here was no real threat to him at all, Emmanuel Macron did the same.

The security of the French people will be a central issue for the next five-year Presidential term. This question is all the more complex in that the recent terrorist attacks perpetrated on French soil have implicated three of Frances NATO allies the US deep state, the United Kingdom, and Turkey.

I have widely covered the question of the attacks in Paris (13November 2015) and Brussels (22March 2016).[3]. In my latest book, I indicate that while the responsibility for these attacks was claimed by President Recep Tayyip Erdoan and his Press, they were carried out by independent commandos, with the exception of a common operator, Mohammed Abrini of MI6 (p. 231)[4].

For years, the successive governments of Nicolas Sarkozy and Alain Jupp, and also the government of Franois Hollande and Laurent Fabius, have hidden their criminal activities from the French people, and the consequences for which they are responsible - terrorism intra muros.

It is absurd to believe that al-Qada and Daesh could be in possession of so much money and weaponry without the support of major states. It is absurd to believe that France could have participated in the remodelling operations in the Greater Middle East without suffering the counter-attacks. It is absurd to believe that it will be easy to fight international terrorism when it is commanded by our own NATO allies.

See the rest here:
France caught up in terrorism, victim of her own NATO allies - Voltaire Network

U.S. President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni of Italy at a news conference in the East Room at the White House, on April 20, 2017.

Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni promised to contribute more toward NATOs defense, responding to a pet peeve of President Donald Trump. Only not quickly.

The commitment has been made, Gentiloni said Thursday at the White House during a joint press conference with Trump as the two leaders held their first summit. We are used to respecting our commitments.

But, he added, this will be a gradual process given that Italy has certain limitations when it comes to its budget.

Trump has berated countries that fail to meet the North Atlantic Treaty Organizations guideline for each countrys defense budget -- 2 percent of gross domestic product. Italy spends about half that amount -- 1.1 percent of GDP in 2016, according to NATO estimates.

When a reporter at the press conference asked Gentiloni whether Italy would raise its defense spending to meet the threshold, Trump took the opportunity to needle the prime minister on the point.

I love the question you asked the prime minister, Trump responded. I look forward to his answer. Because Im going to ask him very soon.

Trumps demand for increased contributions from NATO allies has been a consistent theme, as a candidate and as president. While he at times also had called the military alliance obsolete he has since embraced it as a bulwark of collective defense.

During a speech Tuesday at a tool factory in Kenosha, Wisconsin, Trump said he had asked House Speaker Paul Ryan to deliver a message to NATO partners while hes in Europe this week.

Paul, youre over with NATO; get them to pay their bills, Trump said. They are really sort of letting us down in that one respect, and we dont want people taking advantage of the United States.

Only five of the alliances 28 member countries met the 2 percent threshold in 2016. However, total defense spending by NATO members grew an estimated 3.8 percent in 2016, after declining from 2009 to 2014.

Former President Barack Obama also criticized NATO members for not meeting their defense spending obligations, though he didnt go as far as Trump.

Trump is slated to travel to Brussels for a summit of leaders of NATO nations on May 25. He also plans to attend the Group of Seven annual gathering of leaders of major industrialized democracies in Italy next month.

The rest is here:
Italy's Gentiloni Vows to Meet Trump NATO Spending Demand Slowly - Bloomberg

In a very direct-worded statement the foreign ministry says NATO is not needed in the Arctic.

We strongly believe that there are no problems in the Arctic region that require NATO participation to solve, let alone militarily, the statement reads.

NATOs Parliamentary Assembly consists of delegated from the 28 NATO member countries. The Assembly holds different activities bringing together members of parliaments in various formats.

In May, one meeting will take place at Svalbard. Norway has the sovereignty at Svalbard, but the Svalbard Treaty puts certain stipulations, like demilitarisation of the archipelago.

Article 9 prohibits naval bases and fortifications and also the use of Svalbard for war-like purposes.

Russia operates based on the premise that all the states that are party to the Spitsbergen [Svalbard] Treaty of 1920 should be interested in ensuring that Spitsbergen remains an archipelago of peace and neighbourliness, the foreign ministry says.

Moscow claims that the meeting is at odds with the spirit of the Svalbard Treaty.

In the context of NATOs current policy of containing Russia, accompanied by unprecedented military preparations near the border of our country, the attempts to bring Spitsbergen under the wing of this military-political bloc and to hold its meetings there are at odds with the spirit of the 1920 Treaty. We consider this to be a provocative policy.

One thing is the location of the meeting; another thing Moscow reacts on is the items to be discussed the agenda of the seminar includes, among other things, discussing how geopolitics and future of the Arctic are interconnected.

The escalation of tension is not in the long-term interests of the countries of Northern Europe and weakens, rather than strengthens, their security.

Moscows statement comes just ahead of the Norwegian Governments presentation of its renewed Strategy of the High North, to be made public in Bod on Friday by Prime Minister Erna Solberg together with Foreign Minister Brge Brende.

Norway, Russia tension over Svalbard has escalated in recent years after Deputy Prime Minister Rogozin made a stop-over at Svalbard in 2015 on his way to Camp Barneo, an annual Russian temporary base on the sea-ice near the North Pole. The visitcreated an outcry from Norway. Rogozin is on the EUs and Norways sanction list because of conflict involvement in Eastern Ukraine, and is consequently barred entry to Norwegian territory. Svalbard, however, is visa-free zone and Moscow protested Norways attempt to restrict any Russian citizens an undisputed right to visit the archipelago.

Last year, Chechen Special Forces used Longyearbyen airport for transportation of personnel and equipment for an airborne drill near Camp Barneo.

Cargo and other personnel were brought to Camp Barneo by a Russian plane from Longyearbyen. The Chechen delegation was lead by Ramzan Kadyrovs aide on law enforcement issues Daniil Martynov.

The Norwegian Government in itsWhite paper on Svalbardexplains that All foreign military activity in Svalbard is prohibited and would entail a gross infringement of sovereignty.

Next months meeting on Svalbard is, however, not the first time a delegation from NATOs Parliamentary Assembly visits Svalbard. In May 2012, 26 NATO parliamentarians spent four days on the archipelago to learn more about how strategic changes are affecting the Arctic region.

The visit to this Arctic Archipelago provided a unique opportunity for the parliamentarians to meet with Norwegian and international experts working on a wide range of Arctic challenges, the parliamentarians reported after the tour.

The NATO meeting this spring now triggers widespread coverage in Russian media.

Analysing the meeting, RIA Novosti commentator Aleksandr Khrolenko points to historic Russian population on Svalbard these islands were populated by Russian Pomor settles, he writes in a text that in-between the lines questions Norways historic rights. Since the Russian settlers, according to a 1569 map, were on the archipelago, it has been controlled by the Netherlands, the UK, Denmark, Sweden and finally, independent Norway.

RIA Novosti is a news agency operating under the purview of the Russian Ministry of Communications and Mass Media. Under a presidential decree signed by Putin in December 2013, the news agency became a part of Rossiya Segodnya. According to the decree, the mandate of Rossiya Segodnya is to Provide information on Russian state policy and Russian life and society for audiences abroad.

Sputnik News, another arm of Rossiya Segodnya, on Thursday publishedan English version of the statements questioning Norways historic rights over Svalbard.

Further northeast of Svalbard in the Barents Sea is Russias Franz Josef Land. Here, the worlds northernmost military complex was recently opened at the Nagurskoye base on Aleksandra Island. Visited by President Vladimir Putin, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev and Minister of Defense Sergei Shoygu last month, the complex provide living and working conditions for up to 150 soldiers. A nearby military airfield is upgraded.

When construction work at the base started in 2014, Defense Minister Sergei Shoygu said one of the prioritized areas for the military is development of military infrastructure in the Arctic.

A constant military presence in the Arctic and a possibility to protect the states interest by military means are regarded as an integral part of the general policy to guarantee national security, Shoygu said as previously reported by theBarents Observer.

Go here to read the rest:
Moscow says NATO meeting on Svalbard is a provocation - The Independent Barents Observer