Category Archives: NATO

Donald Trump has long questioned whether other NATO states were carrying their share of the financial and military burdens that come with the alliance.

One GOP lawmaker tells POLITICO, 'Comments like this are not only ill-informed, theyre dangerous.'

By Nahal Toosi

07/21/16 07:56 AM EDT

Updated 07/21/16 03:30 PM EDT

Donald Trump's latest broadside against NATO, the military alliance that has long served as a pillar of Western unity, has further aggravated the disunity in the Republican Party as he prepares to accept its nomination for president.

In an interview with The New York Times, Trump said the United States shouldn't automatically come to the defense of fellow NATO members if they are attacked unless those countries have paid their bills to the alliance. That approach flies in the face of one of NATO's bedrock principles, Article 5, which requires NATO states to come to the aid of a fellow member under assault.

Story Continued Below

The comments drew scorn not only from American allies but also from several top Republicans, undermining the party's efforts to project unity during its national convention this week in Cleveland. They were published less than a day before Trump is due to deliver a major speech at the convention, and they further fueled the perception that Trump is a lackey for Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"I disagree with that," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who was in Cleveland, said of Trump's comments. "NATO is the most important military alliance in world history. I want to reassure our NATO allies that if any of them get attacked, we'll be there to defend them."

Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, speaking during a POLITICO panel event at the convention, said Trump's remarks made it harder for him to vote for the real estate mogul come November.

"You have allies right now, I mean I have friends that, you know, serve in parliament in places like Estonia, that every day worry about the Russians deciding that this is the time to re-annex and take them back, said Kinzinger, a former Air Force pilot. And comments like this are not only ill-informed, theyre dangerous.

Trump has long offered a radically different view of U.S. engagement with the world than many in his own party hold one that is defined primarily in economic terms and which does not hold treaties sacrosanct.

In the Times interview, Trump also said he would not chide authoritarian leaders for cracking down on civil liberties or their political rivals; that he'd pull the U.S. out of the North American Free Trade Agreement if Canada and Mexico didn't agree to better terms; and that he might withdraw U.S. troops deployed around the world, even from sensitive areas such as the Korean peninsula.

But the Manhattan billionaire's comments on NATO were unusually striking. Trump, who has often questioned whether other NATO states are carrying their share of the financial and military burdens that come with the alliance, said that if he became president the U.S. would come to the assistance of a member state under attack only if it has fulfilled their obligations to us.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, established in 1949, has 28 members. The first time NATO invoked Article 5 was after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, and America's NATO allies have since helped fight the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Many NATO members also are involved in the U.S.-led coalition battling the Islamic State terrorist network, and a number of their representatives were in Washington on Thursday for a meeting of the coalition, making the timing of Trump's comments all the more sensitive.

The international blowback was swift.

"Solidarity among allies is a key value for NATO," the military alliance's secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, said in a statement as word spread of Trump's remarks. "We defend one another. ... Two world wars have shown that peace in Europe is also important for the security of the United States."

Trump's comments were especially unnerving to smaller NATO countries, such as the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, who in recent years have begun to fear Russia's military aims. (Trump was specifically asked about the threat to the Baltic states in the Times interview.)

Toomas Hendrik Ilves, the president of Estonia, tweeted his dismay early Thursday, saying, "Estonia is 1 of 5 NATO allies in Europe to meet its 2% def expenditures commitment. Fought, with no caveats, in NATO's sole Art 5 op. in Afg." He added: "We are equally committed to all our NATO allies, regardless of who they may be. That's what makes them allies."

Latvia's foreign minister, Edgars Rinkevics, meanwhile, stressed to POLITICO in a phone interview that his country has aided the U.S. in Afghanistan and has been steadily increasing its defense spending to align with its NATO commitments.

"I am a politician myself and I always make a distinction when it comes to a campaign and when it comes to the trappings of the office," Rinkevics said while declining to comment directly on Trump. He added, however, "We take those commitments that have been made by the U.S. government seriously."

Trump aides on Thursday tried to contain the fallout from his remarks. His campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, insisted that Trump simply wants NATO to adjust to new security realities, where threats are often from nonstate actors.

"What Mr. Trump has said consistently is that he thinks NATO needs to be modernized and brought into the world of the 21st century where terrorism and [the Islamic State], which didn't exist when NATO was created, are taken into account in the way they deal with things," he said.

Trump is hardly alone in his concern that some NATO members do not devote enough resources to the alliance and that the U.S. carries more than its share of the burden. Even President Barack Obama has gently reproached some NATO states for not living up to their commitment of devoting 2 percent of their GDP to defense, saying in a speech in April that "sometimes Europe has been complacent" about its security.

Trump adviser Sam Clovis told POLITICO that the candidate was in effect putting NATO members on notice "We're putting a marker out there." He added, however, that the Trump's comments were about the exploring the opportunity to "reinvest in NATO" and not a "hostile confrontation."

Still, Article 5 is not meant to apply only to members who have paid all their dues. And even if Trump were to never actually follow through on his pay-for-protection philosophy, the simple fact that he would hint at it publicly, observers said, could rattle allies and fray diplomatic relations.

"I dont think hes given any serious thought to the substance of the issue," said Kurt Volker, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO. "Its one thing to complain that theyre not doing enough and they need to pull their share, which they do. But another is to question the U.S. commitment. The reason thats so important is certainty how we would behave and others behave is what provides stability. Its what provides deterrent. Its what guarantees that well never have to fight."

Trump's NATO comments were a gift to Democrats seeking to portray him as a threat to the world order.

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's campaign put out a statement invoking Republican darling Ronald Reagan to blast Trump the latest sign of how the Democrat is trying to take advantage of the divisions Trump has sowed within the GOP.

"Ronald Reagan would be ashamed. Harry Truman would be ashamed. Republicans, Democrats and Independents who help build NATO into the most successful military alliance in history would all come to the same conclusion: Donald Trump is temperamentally unfit and fundamentally ill-prepared to be our commander in chief," Clinton senior policy adviser Jake Sullivan said in the statement.

Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine, a potential vice presidential pick for Clinton, said he was "stunned" to learn of Trump's comments. "Is the new rule that your word isn't your bond?" he asked at an immigration-related event in his home state.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest, meanwhile, tried to reassure America's partners. "There should be no mistake or miscalculation made about this countrys commitment to our trans-Atlantic alliance," he said.

A number of Trump's critics said Trump's statements appear to be exactly what Putin would want to hear. Putin has long felt somewhat threatened by NATO's presence, especially as former Soviet states have sought to join the alliance.

Trump has been complimentary toward Putin; he told the Times that he and Putin "will get along very well." The Republican's team was reported to have pressured the party's platform-writing committee to remove references about the U.S. coming to the aid of Ukraine, a former Soviet country that Russia invaded in 2014 and has been locked in a battle over territory with since.

"Im 100 percent certain how Russian President Putin feels hes a very happy man," Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a prominent Republican critic of Trump, said of the GOP nominee's remarks.

Trump's vice presidential pick, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, also sought to defend him Thursday as word spread of his NATO remarks.

I have every confidence that Donald Trump will see to it that the United States of America stands by our allies and lives up to our treaty obligations," Pence told "Fox & Friends." "That being said, I think he makes an enormously important point that I think resonates with millions of Americans that at a time where we have $19 trillion in national debt, that we need to begin to look to our allies around the world to step up and pay their fair share.

But the Clinton team was all too happy to point out the daylight between Trump and Pence, as the former secretary of state gears up to announce her own choice of running mate. Sullivan's statement noted that Pence also had spoken of the importance of America's allies in his speech at the convention on Wednesday.

Tonight, Mike Pence said Donald Trump would stand with our allies. Tonight, Donald Trump flatly contradicted him," Sullivan said.

Seung-min Kim, Ryan Heath, Benjamin Oreskes, Giulia Paravicini, Michael Schwab, Louis Nelson, Burgess Everett, Daniel Ducassi and Bianca Padro Ocasio contributed to this report.

Read the original:
Republicans rip Trump over NATO plan - POLITICO

NATO flag

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is an intergovernmental military alliance based on the North Atlantic Treaty which was signed on 4 April 1949.

The organization constitutes a system of collective defense whereby its member states agree to mutual defense in response to an attack by any external party. NATO's headquarters are located in Haren, Brussels, Belgium.

Decades of economic and political turbulence across member states have left NATO weakened, and facing a strategic paradigm shift. With CSAT political and military influence dominating from the Pacific to the Mediterranean, NATO seeks to consolidate their diminished forces around traditional strongholds. As tensions continue to grow in the east, a US-led joint NATO-AAF peacekeeping force stationed on Stratis - Task Force Aegis - is in the middle of a staged draw-down.

NATO forces consisting of elements from the Army of the Czech Republic and German Kommando Spezialkrafte were sent to Takistan to assist the US Army.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) makes up of Arma 3s "western" forces, including many elements from the US Army and multi-national unit called CTRG.

NATO forces are sent to Tanoa in that same year.

US Army and British UKSF soldiers are very similarly equipped, as part of an international effort to standardize NATO equipment. Both sub-factions use Carrier Rigs (Crye Armor Chassis), ECH helmets, and are equipped with MX series service rifles. US Army units wear MTP Combat Fatigues (Crye G2 pants and combat shirts, Ringers gloves, as well as Lowa boots), while British UKSF wear similar uniforms with a Triangular Dazzle pattern. US Army gear is often brown or green with numerous variations, while British UKSF wear coyote-brown vests and headgear sprayed over with snakeskin.

The MX 6.5 mm, designed by CMMG, Inc. chambers the 6.5x39 mm non-case round. The MX series rifle is standard issue for NATO forces, and comes in 4 versions: a standard rifle (with an optional underslung 3GL), a carbine for non-combat personnel such as officers and vehicle crew, a squad automatic rifle, and a marksman rifle. The P07 is the standard sidearm for NATO units. The MXM 6.5 mm is used as a NATO marksman rifle, alongside the Mk18 7.62 marksman rifle.

NATO forces use the Hunter as a standard ground utility vehicle. It is a medium sized MRAP made for multipurpose use and comes in unarmed, RCWS HMG, and RCWS GMG variants. The HEMTT is an 8-wheeled truck used for multi-purpose roles such as troop and cargo transport. Special operations and utility units use quadbikes for general transport and other roles.

For combat the M2A1 Slammer (Licensed copy of the Israeli Merkava MBT) functions as NATO's Main Battle Tank for ground combat operations in the region. The AMV-7 Marshallis used as an amphibious APC for ground troops, in addition to the IFV-6c Panther(Licensed copy of the Israeli Namer IFV)Infantry Fighting Vehicle. The IFV-6a Cheetah serves as self propelled anti-air support, while the M4 Scorcher and M5 Sandstorm MLRS platforms are used as mobile artillery systems.

NATO aircraft are mostly American and utilize geometric stealth radar-resistant technologies. NATO helicopters include the AH-99 Blackfoot light helicopter gunship (revival of the prototype RAH-66 Comanche), MH-9 Hummingbird and AH-9 Pawnee (both updated versions of the Littlebird family), the CH-67 Huron (modernized stealth variant of CH-47 Chinook) and the UH-80 Ghosthawk (stealth variant of the UH-60 Blackhawk). NATO fixed-wing assets include the A-164 Wipeout (updated stealth version of the A-10 Thunderbolt).

NATO Naval forces seen in the Altis Conflict consist of Speedboats, Assault Boats, and SDV (Swimmer Delivery Vehicle) submersibles. British UKSF are seen to operate from the HMS Proteus, an Astute-Class Submarine.

NATO forces operate the Stomper UGV as both an unarmed logistics platform and an armed combat vehicle, mounting a 12.7 mm HMG and a 40 mm GMG in a RCWS. NATO troops also employ the AR-2 Darter Mircro-UAV and the MQ-4A Greyhawk UCAV.

NATO special operations deployed to the Republic of Altis and Stratis theater consist of reconnaissance, aquatic, and sniper teams.

Sniper teams are usually fielded in groups of two, made up of a sniper and a spotter. Said personnel make use of Gillie Suits based off of standard MTP Combat Fatigues, Chest Rigs, and Balaclavas. Snipers are armed with camouflaged M320 LRR sniper rifles and suppressed P07s, while spotters field suppressed MX rifles and suppressed P07s. Snipers are equipped with Rangefinders, while Spotters carry Laser Designators. Scout-sniper operations usually consist of very slow, stealthy movement and can last days on end. Tasks include observing and relaying enemy movement, as well as engaging high value targets or providing fire support for friendly forces in the vicinity.

Recon teams are equipped with lighter gear than standard infantry. Booniehats, Beanies, and other light head-wear along with Chest Rigs without ballistic protection are the norm. Recon teams deploy with suppressed weaponry.

NATO divers are equipped with SDAR underwater rifles and suppressed P07 pistols. They use Rebreathers and wear black Wetsuits.

The rest is here:
NATO | Armed Assault Wiki | Fandom powered by Wikia

In the largest buildup of troops in the region since the Cold War, the UK has said it will send Royal Air Force Typhoon jets to Romania for up to four months in 2017.

Defense Secretary Michael Fallon also confirmed that 800 personnel will be moved to Estonia, 150 more than originally planned.

"Backed by a rising defense budget, this deployment of air, land and sea forces shows that we will continue to play a leading role in NATO, supporting the defense and security of our allies from the north to the south of the alliance," Fallon said.

On Wednesday, Russia withdrew a request for a flotilla of warships, including its flagship aircraft carrier the Admiral Kuznetsov, to refuel in the Spanish port of Ceuta as the ships head toward Syria.

In a statement, Spain's foreign affairs ministry said Russia withdrew the request after the ministry had asked the Russian Embassy in Madrid to clarify reports the flotilla might participate in military operations against the besieged Syrian city of Aleppo.

The Russian role in the Syrian conflict has exacerbated tensions between Moscow and NATO that have risen since Russia's annexation of the Crimea region from Ukraine in 2014.

On Wednesday, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that recent tactics by Moscow had forced the alliance to respond.

"Russia has tripled defense spending," Stoltenberg told reporters.

"Russia has invested heavily in a modern military equipment. They are conducting a large-scale, no-notice exercises close to NATO borders, but perhaps most importantly Russia has been willing to use military force against neighbors.

"We have seen that in Georgia and we have seen it in Ukraine with illegal annexation of Crimea and the continued destabilization of eastern Ukraine. So therefore NATO has to respond. "

NATO defense ministers met Wednesday in Brussels, Belgium, to discuss the situation as well as the fight against ISIS.

The latest troop deployment comes at a time of fear over the security of Baltic states such as Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania, which have significant Russian-speaking minorities like Ukraine and concerns that they could suffer a similar fate to Crimea's.

Poland has already registered unease over Russia's move to bolster military options in its Baltic enclave of Kaliningrad, including the arrival of the Iskander missile system.

Poland's paramilitary defense has grown rapidly, with more than 35,000 people signing up and undergoing military training. They range from high school students to lawyers and doctors.

The United States and the UK are both set to send troops to Poland next year in a show of strength and support of their NATO ally.

"NATO does not seek confrontation with Russia," Stoltenberg said.

"We don't want a new Cold War, and we don't want a new arms race and therefore, what NATO does is defensive and it is proportionate.

"At the same time, NATO has to react when we, over a long period of time, have seen a substantial military buildup by Russia and we have seen them modernize their military capabilities and most importantly, we have seen them willing to use military force against neighbors."

In July, the UK said it would deliver one of four battalions to NATO's enhanced forward presence in the Baltic states and Poland.

According to the Ministry of Defense, the deployment is likely to include "armored Infantry, equipped with Warrior armored fighting vehicles, tactical UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles), and a troop of our Challenger 2 main battle tanks."

UK troops are expected to begin their deployment in Estonia in May.

NATO has also said that Albania, Italy, Poland and Slovenia will contribute to a Canadian-led battalion in Latvia.

Belgium, Croatia, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Norway will join a German-led battalion in Lithuania, while Denmark and France will contribute to the UK-led battalion in Estonia.

Romania and the UK will join the US-led battalion in Poland.

The initiative will include putting equipment in place in the Baltic states, Poland and Central Europe.

On Monday, Norway announced that US Marines would be deployed in the country, beginning in January.

Norway shares a 196-kilometer (122-mile) border with Russia.

See more here:
NATO bolsters presence in Europe

NATO (the North Atlantic Treaty Organization) is an international alliance that consists of 28 member states from North America and Europe. It was established at the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty on 4 April 1949. Article Five of the treaty states that if an armed attack occurs against one of the member states, it should be considered an attack against all members, and other members shall assist the attacked member, with armed forces if necessary.[1]

Of the 28 member countries, two are located in North America (Canada and the United States) and 25 are European countries while Turkey is in Eurasia. All members have militaries, except for Iceland which does not have a typical army (but does, however, have a coast guard and a small unit of civilian specialists for NATO operations). Three of NATO's members are nuclear weapons states: France, the United Kingdom, and the United States. NATO has 12 original founding member nation states, and from 18 February 1952 to 6 May 1955, it added 3 more member nations, and a fourth on 30 May 1982. After the end of the Cold War, NATO added 12 more member nations (10 former Warsaw Pact members and 2 former Yugoslav republics) from 12 March 1999 to 1 April 2009.

NATO has added new members six times since its founding in 1949, and since 2009 NATO has had 28 members. Twelve countries were part of the founding of NATO: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom, and the United States. In 1952, Greece and Turkey became members of the Alliance, joined later by West Germany (in 1955) and Spain (in 1982). In 1990, with the reunification of Germany, NATO grew to include the former country of East Germany. Between 1994 and 1997, wider forums for regional cooperation between NATO and its neighbors were set up, including the Partnership for Peace, the Mediterranean Dialogue initiative and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. In 1997, three former Warsaw Pact countries, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Poland, were invited to join NATO. After this fourth enlargement in 1999, the Vilnius group of The Baltics and seven East European countries formed in May 2000 to cooperate and lobby for further NATO membership. Seven of these countries joined in the fifth enlargement in 2004. Albania and Croatia joined in the sixth enlargement in 2009.

Go here to see the original:
Member states of NATO - Wikipedia

Hillary Clinton went too far when she claimed that Donald Trump said we should pull out of NATO. Trump has said that he would certainly look at pulling the United States out of the international security alliance, because it is obsolete and is costing us a fortune. But the Clinton campaign provided nothing indicating that Trump advocates pulling out now.

Trump, who has nearlyclinched the Republican nomination for president, has been critical of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which was established in 1949 by the U.S., Canada and 10 Western European nations to defend against the former Soviet Union. Trumps main criticisms of NATO, which now has 28 member nations, are that the alliance no longer serves its founding purpose and that it is too costly to the U.S., which pays about 22 percent of direct spending by NATO, the most of any nation, according to budget information. The U.S. also pays a much larger portion of the organizations indirect costs, NATO says.

During a campaign speech in Milwaukee on March 28, Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination, said that Trump wants us to pull out of NATO. That was the week after Trump, during campaign events and interviews with the editorial boards of the Washington Post and the New York Timesandothers, talked about the U.S. role in NATO.

In an interview with CBS News John Dickerson that aired May 8, Clinton again claimed that Trump, whom she referred to as a loose cannon, wants out of NATO.

Clinton, May 8: Being a loose cannon is saying we should pull out of NATO, the strongest military alliance in the history of the world and something that we really need to modernize, but not abandon.

While Trump has gone so far as saying that, as president, he would consider pulling the U.S. out of NATO if it is not restructured, weve found no instance of him saying he wants to do so at this point. And the Clinton campaign hasnt been able to point to an example of Trump saying that either.

In fact, it was during the interview with the Post, which initially brought attention to Trumps feelings about NATO, that Trump said that he doesnt want the U.S. to leave the alliance.

Charles Lane, Washington Post, March 21:So, Id like to hear you say very specifically, you know, with respect to NATO, what is your ask of these other countries?Right, youve painted it in very broad terms, but do you have a percent of GDP that they should be spending on defense?Tell me more, because it sounds like you want to just pull the U.S. out.

Trump: No, I dont want to pull it out. NATO was set up at a different time. NATO was set up when we were a richer country. Were not a rich country anymore. Were borrowing, were borrowing all of this money. Were borrowing money from China, which is sort of an amazing situation. But it was a much different thing. NATO is costing us a fortune and yes, were protecting Europe with NATO but were spending a lot of money. Number one, I think the distribution of costs has to be changed. I think NATO as a concept is good, but it is not as good as it was when it first evolved.

Later on March 21, during a CNN town hall event with Wolf Blitzer, Trump said the U.S. should reconsider its role in NATO, especially with concern to how much itspends compared with other nations.

Blitzer: Do you think the United States needs to rethink U.S. involvement in NATO?

Trump: Yes, because its costing us too much money. And frankly they have to put up more money. Theyre going to have to put some up also. Were paying disproportionately. Its too much. And frankly its a different world than it was when we originally conceived of the idea. And everybody got together.

But were taking care of, as an example, the Ukraine. I mean, the countries over there dont seem to be so interested. Were the ones taking the brunt of it. So I think we have to reconsider keep NATO, but maybe we have to pay a lot less toward the NATO itself.

Blitzer: When we say keep NATO, NATO has been around since right after World War II in 1949. Its been a cornerstone of U.S. national security around the world. NATO allies hear you say that, theyre not going to be happy.

Trump: Well, they may not be happy but, you know, they have to help us also. It has to be we are paying disproportionately. And very importantly if you use Ukraine as an example and thats a great example, the country surrounding Ukraine, I mean, they dont seem to care as much about it as we do. So there has to be at least a change in philosophy and there are also has to be a change in the cut out, the money, the spread because its too much.

Blitzer: So youre really suggesting the United States should decrease its role in NATO?

Trump: Not decrease its role but certainly decrease the kind of spending. We are spending a tremendous amount in NATO and other people proportionately less. No good.

Then, on March 25, in an interview with the New YorkTimes editorial board, Trump again said that NATO needed to be changed to deal with costs and other issues, such as terrorism.

Trump, March 25:Ill tell you the problems I have with NATO. Number one, we pay far too much. We are spending you know, in fact, theyre even making it so the percentages are greater. NATO is unfair, economically, to us, to the United States. Because it really helps them more so than the United States, and we pay a disproportionate share. Now, Im a person that you notice I talk about economics quite a bit, in these military situations, because it is about economics, because we dont have money anymore because weve been taking care of so many people in so many different forms that we dont have money and countries, and countries. So NATO is something that at the time was excellent. Today, it has to be changed. It has to be changed to include terror. It has to be changed from the standpoint of cost because the United States bears far too much of the cost of NATO.

It was on March 23, during an interview withBloomberg Politics Mark Halperin and John Heilemann, that Trump, when asked, said he would certainly look at getting rid of NATO because it may be obsolete (16:12 in the video).

Halperin, March 23: Should America be the leader of NATO or not necessarily?

Trump: I think NATO may be obsolete. NATO was set up a long time ago many, many years ago when things were different. Things are different now. We were a rich nation then. We had nothing but money. We had nothing but power. And you know, far more than we have today, in a true sense. And I think NATO you have to really examine NATO. And it doesnt really help us, its helping other countries. And I dont think those other countries appreciate what were doing.

Heilemann: So, just to be clear, you made two slightly different arguments there and I just want to clarify. One of them is that you might want to see the U.S. pay less money into NATO because

Trump: That one definitely. That one definitely.

Heilemann: But its possible that NATO is obsolete and should be gotten rid of?

Trump: Its possible. Its possible. I would certainly look at it. And Id want more help from other people. The one thing definitely were paying too much. As to whether or not its obsolete, Ill make that determination.

Then, at a campaign rally in Milwaukee on April 4, Trump said that he wasnt saying thatNATO should disband during his interview with CNNs Blitzer. Instead, he said he meant that if countries cant pay their bills theyve got to go.

Trump, April 4: And Wolf Blitzer asked me a question on television. He said, let me just ask you about NATO. And he asked me about it. Now, I havent been asked about NATO a lot, but I understand NATO and I understand common sense and Im, like, a smart person, like many of the people in this room, hopefully all of the people in this room.

But he asked me about NATO. I said its obsolete. This is my first thing. And you know what? Im the first one. Guys that study NATO and good people, but they study NATO and they say, I dont believe it, what he just said, I never thought of that. They study it because theyre so into it that they dont realize.

Because it was really put there you had the Soviet Union and now you have Russia, which is different, but Russia is very powerful, so we can sort of say thats a balance, so well leave it. But it doesnt really cover terrorism like its supposed to. It doesnt have the right countries. I mean, many of the countries in there arent, you know, that you associate with terrorism.

And so I said, number one, its obsolete. I said, number two, to the best of my knowledge, the United States pays far too much proportionately, and why are we always paying the bills to protect other people?

And the press, which is so totally dishonest, the press goes headlines the next day Trump doesnt want NATO, wants to disband. Thats not what I said. I said youve got to pay your bills. And you know what? If they cant pay their bills, honestly there should be theyve got to go. Because we cant do this.

And most recently, in his April 27 foreign policy speech, Trump said that theU.S. must be prepared to let these countries defend themselves if they are unwilling to pay more.

Trump, April 27:They look at the United States as weak and forgiving and feel no obligation to honor their agreements with us. In NATO, for instance, only fourof 28 other member countries besides America, are spending the minimum required 2 percent of GDP on defense. We have spent trillions of dollars over time on planes, missiles, ships, equipment, building up our military to provide a strong defense for Europe and Asia. The countries we are defending must pay for the cost of this defense, and if not, the U.S. must be prepared to let these countries defend themselves. We have no choice.

So, Trump has clearly outlined changes he would like to see made to NATO. And he has said that, under a Trump administration, the U.S. might no longer be a part of the alliance if it isnt restructured and other nations dont start to pick up more of the costs. But even that isnt the same thing as saying that we should pull out of NATO, as Clinton claims Trump said.

https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/9ba92dca-f398-4447-97b1-4f93fb93e712

Originally posted here:
Whats Trumps Position on NATO?

Op-Ed What Trump Doesnt Know About Allies Author: Stephen Sestanovich July 30, 2016 New York Times

Donald Trump's suggestion that NATO allies would lose U.S. protection unless they "pay" more for their defense is a reminder of how easily presidents can blunder their way into trouble, writes CFR's Stephen Sestanovich.

See more in Russian Federation; NATO

Inthe last year, some39,000 migrants, mostly from North Africa, tried to make their way to the United Kingdom from the French port of Calais by boarding trucks and trains crossing the English Channel.

See more in United Kingdom; NATO

A close call. It is tempting to view the chaos in Libya today as yet one more demonstration of the futility of U.S.-led military interventions. That is precisely the case that Alan Kuperman makes in his article (Obamas Libya Debacle, March/April 2015), which asserts that NATOs 2011 intervention in Libya was an abject failure that set free Libyas vast conventional weapons stockpiles, gave rise to extremist groups, and even exacerbated the conflict in Syria.

See more in Libya; NATO

Janine Davidson presents an interactive model of NATO members' military spending from 1949 to the present day. This visualization also tracks the total proportion of U.S. contribution over time.

See more in Global; NATO

This document was issued on September 5, 2014, after a summit with NATO leaders which addressed the instability in Europe between Russia and the Ukraine and the threat of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). The declaration includes increased sanctions against Russia and a rapid-reaction force based in Eastern Europe to act against moves from the Russian military.

See more in Russian Federation; NATO; Ukraine

John Mearsheimer, R. Wendell Harrison distinguished service professor of political science at the University of Chicago and author of "Why the Ukraine Crisis is the West's Fault" in the September/October 2014 issue of Foreign Affairs, on the unintended effects of NATO expansion.

See more in Russian Federation; Ukraine; NATO

Listen to Ivo Daalder, former U.S. permanent representative to NATO and president of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and Michael McFaul, former U.S. ambassador to Russia and professor of political science at Stanford University discuss NATO's role in addressing global challenges, including Afghanistan, Ukraine, and ISIS.

See more in Russian Federation; Ukraine; NATO; Regional Security

Adam Mount and Hans Kristensen argue that tactical nuclear bombs in Europe are no longer useful for defense, deterrance, or assurance. They have had little effect on Russian President Vladimir Putin's transgressions in Eastern Europe and instead detract from more useful defense initiatives.

See more in Europe; NATO; Nonproliferation, Arms Control, and Disarmament

Janine Davidson and Emerson Brooking argue that, on the eve of the 2014 NATO Wales Summit, the ongoing war in Afghanistan should not be relegated to a "side issue" in light of the crisis in Ukraine and growing threat of ISIS. The next few months will be critical in determining that Afghanistan does not follow the path of Iraq.

See more in Global; Afghanistan; NATO

When Western leaders gather for the NATO summit in Wales next week, they will be expected to answer calls to revive the old alliance in order to confront Russias gradual invasion of Ukraine. Despite this new clarity of purpose, however, the alliance remains profoundlydivided.

See more in Americas; Europe; NATO

With crises brewing in Ukraine and the Middle East, the transatlantic alliance must develop new capabilities to address the rising threat of unconventional warfare, says CFR's Janine Davidson.

See more in Ukraine; NATO

U.S. President Barack Obama and Polish President Bronisaw Komorowski held a press conference on June 3, 2014, to discuss commitments to NATO and Ukraine.

See more in Poland; United States; NATO

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel spoke at the Woodrow Wilson International Center Forum on May 2, 2014. He discussed strengthening NATO, in the context of Russia's annexation of Crimea and U.S. defense budget constraints.

See more in United States; Europe; NATO

Russian aggression in Ukraine has breathed new life into the Cold War-era security alliance, prompting allies to reinforce defenses in Eastern Europe and expand cooperation with nonmembers.

See more in NATO; Europe; Americas; Military Operations

The Foreign Policy Initiative organized fifty-two former U.S. government officials and foreign policy experts to sign a bipartisan letter to President Obama regarding policy to respond to Russia's actions in Ukraine.

See more in Russian Federation; Ukraine; Sanctions; NATO

NATO's response to Russia's annexation of Crimea may require it to bolster eastern European members with both military and non-military actions, says expert Christopher S. Chivvis.

See more in Ukraine; NATO

NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen spoke at a Brookings Institution event, The Future of the Alliance: Revitalizing NATO for a Changing World. Secretary-General Rasmussen's remarks, as prepared for delivery, are titled "Why NATO Matters to America."

See more in United States; NATO

"Europe is under pressure, both internally and from its allies, to take more responsibility for defence and security, especially in its immediate neighbourhood. The post-Cold War history of European deployments in Europe and joint NATO missions provide abundant evidence of such demands. Currently, US defence spending represents 72 percent of the NATO total up from 63 percent in 2001."

See more in Europe; NATO

Although there is no formal institutional connection between India and NATO, India and the NATO allies, most importantly the United States, informally share an interest in maintaining maritime security in the Indian Ocean and have spent significant resources to combat piracy in this vast area.

Read full answer

See more in India; NATO; Piracy

U.S. missile defense in the twenty-first century is focused on emerging threats from North Korea and Iran, but critics say these systems are too costly and largely unproven.

See more in United States; Missile Defense; NATO

More here:
NATO - Council on Foreign Relations

It is often said that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was founded in response to the threat posed by the Soviet Union. This is only partially true. In fact, the Alliances creation was part of a broader effort to serve three purposes: deterring Soviet expansionism, forbidding the revival of nationalist militarism in Europe through a strong North American presence on the continent, and encouraging European political integration. Read the full story

A series of 6 lectures on the history of the Atlantic Alliance by Dr. Jamie P. Shea. Take a history lesson

Since the 1950's these posters, cards, and calendars have adorned the walls and the desks inside the Headquarters. Historical posters

American general Dwight David Eisenhower was named Supreme Commander Allied Forces Europe (SACEUR) in December 1950. Eisenhower had lead the Allied armies in the Second World War and several of his key subordinate commanders served under him once again. In NATOs earliest days, those who had won the war were given the task of securing the peace. Eisenhower stepped down as SACEUR on 31 May 1952, to launch his successful campaign for the American Presidency.

Interesting anecdotes about NATO

Use your mouse to scroll through the decades and click on a NATO star to find out more about an event including links to photos and documents.

See the rest here:
NATO history

27 Jul. 2016 Change of Command - Director General of the NATO International Military Staff

Lieutenant General Jan Broeks took over the position of Director General of the NATO International Military Staff (DGIMS) from outgoing Director General, Air Marshal Sir Christopher Harper today (27 July 2016). Lieutenant General Broeks is a three star General in the Royal Netherlands Army who was elected by the NATO Chiefs of Defence in September 2015 and will serve a term of three years.

The NATO Communication and Information (NCI) Agency is announcing business opportunities in cyber, air and missile defence as well as advanced software, worth 3 billion EUR. This comes in parallel to decisions taken at the Warsaw Summit to strengthen the Alliance's deterrence and defence.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg attended a meeting of the Counter-ISIL Coalition at Joint Air Base Andrews, Maryland on Wednesday (20 July 2016). Discussions focused on the military campaign against ISIL and reaffirmed nations' resolve to degrade and defeat the terrorist organisation.

I have spoken to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in the aftermath of the attempted coup in Turkey. I welcomed the strong support shown by the people and all political parties to democracy and to the democratically elected government. The Turkish people have shown great courage.

I have just spoken to the Turkish foreign minister Mevlut Cavusoglu. I am following events in Turkey closely and with concern. I call for calm and restraint, and full respect for Turkey's democratic institutions and its constitution. Turkey is a valued NATO Ally.

I am appalled and saddened by the terrorist attack in Nice. My thoughts are with the families and loved-ones of the victims and with all those affected.

Deputy Secretary General Alexander Vershbow discussed recent developments in NATO-Ukraine relations with Ukraines Acting Chief of Mission Yehor Bozhok on Thursday (14 July 2016).

On 27 June 2016, on the banks of Lake Issyk-Kul in Kyrgyzstan, the Head of the NATO Liaison Office (NLO) to Central Asia, Rosaria Puglisi, took part in the opening of the second edition of the International Summer School for Junior Diplomats. The event brought together 21 young representatives from the five Central Asian countries, Afghanistan and Mongolia.

Experts and officials from across the public sector and international institutions gathered to discuss issues related to border security and resolving conflicts in Southern and Eastern Europe at a workshop in Kyiv, Ukraine, from 9 to 10 June 2016.

Over the last years, Serbia has become increasingly active within the framework of the NATO Science for Peace and Security (SPS) Programme and identified many areas for practical cooperation with NATO. An Information Day in Belgrade, Serbia on 30 June 2016 provided the opportunity to take stock of the successful SPS cooperation, to explore new areas of cooperation and to raise awareness about the Programme.

See more here:
NATO - News: News

NATO (engelsk: North Atlantic Treaty Organization) eller p fransk: OTAN (Organisation du Trait de l'Atlantique Nord) er en international organisation for politisk og militrt forsvarssamarbejde omkring den nordlige del af Atlanterhavet, som blev etableret i 1949 med de allierede krigspartnere USA, Storbritannien og Frankrig som de drivende krfter.

Landene er forpligtet til at forsvare hinanden i tilflde af, at de skulle blive angrebet. Derudover arrangerer NATO ofte strre, militre velser for medlemslandene. NATO deltager desuden med styrker i krigshrgede lande, fx Afghanistan.

Da man etablerede NATO, var der 12 lande med. Disse lande var Belgien, Canada, Danmark, Frankrig, Holland, Island, Italien, Luxembourg, Norge, Portugal, Storbritannien og USA. Senere er NATO blevet udvidet med flere medlemslande. Den sidste store udvidelse skete i 2004, hvor blandt andet en rkke af de tidligere Warszawapagt-lande blev indlemmet i NATO.

Bruxelles-Traktaten, der blev underskrevet 11. marts 1948 af Belgien, Holland, Luxembourg, Frankrig og Storbritannien, anses for at vre forgngeren til NATO aftalen. Denne traktat etablerede en militr alliance, der kaldtes Vestunionen eller WEU.[1] Men amerikansk deltagelse blev anset for ndvendig, hvis man skulle kunne matche Sovjetunionens militre styrke, og derfor begyndte forberedelsen af en ny, militr alliance hurtigt efter traktatens vedtagelse.[2]

Resultatet blev den Nordatlantiske Traktat, der blev udarbejdet af Lester B. Pearson og underskrevet i Washington D.C. 4. april 1949. Traktaten inkluderede de fem lande, der havde underskrevet Bruxelles-Traktaten, samt USA, Canada, Portugal, Italien, Norge, Danmark og Island.[3] Tre r senere, 18. februar 1952, underskrev ogs Grkenland og Tyrkiet aftalen. P grund af deres geografiske beliggenhed kunne Australien og New Zealand ikke vre med i alliancen, og i stedet blev ANZUS aftalen indget mellem de to lande og USA.[4]

I 1954 foreslog Sovjetunionen, at den skulle indg i NATO-alliancen for at bevare fred i Europa. NATO-landene ngtede dog dette, da de s det som et forsg p at oplse NATO indefra.

Indlemmelsen af Vesttyskland i NATO 9. maj 1955 blev beskrevet som "et afgrende vendepunkt i vort kontinents historie" af Norges davrende udenrigsminister Halvard Lange.[5] Et af de jeblikkelige resultater var da ogs oprettelsen af Warszawapagten, der blev underskrevet 14. maj 1955 af Sovjetunionen og dens satellitstater. Dermed var de to parter i den kolde krig endeligt etableret.

NATO's sammenhold blev brudt allerede tidligt i alliancens historie med en krise under Charles de Gaulles tid som prsident i Frankrig fra 1958 og frem. De Gaulle protestererede mod det, han mente var USA's hegemonistiske rolle i organisationen, og det han s som et specielt forhold mellem USA og Storbritannien. I et memorandum, han sendte til USA's prsident Eisenhower og den britiske premierminister Harold Macmillan 17. september 1958, argumenterede han for en ligestilling af USA, Storbritannien og Frankrig, og for at NATO's dkning skulle udvides til ogs at omfatte franske geografiske interesseomrder.

Charles de Gaulle ans svaret p sit memorandum som utilfredsstillende og begyndte at arbejde for et uafhngigt, fransk forsvar. Frankrig trak sin middelhavsflde ud af NATO kommandoen 11. marts 1959 og arbejdede henimod et selvstndigt atomvbenprogram.

I juni 1959 forbd de Gaulle al udstationering af udenlandske atomvben p fransk jord, og USA trak 200 militrfly ud af Frankrig. Dermed blev 26th Tactical Reconnaisance Wing, der tidligere var baseret i Tol-Rosires luftbasen, relokeret til Ramstein Air Base i Vesttyskland, og Tol-Rosires blev givet tilbage til Frankrig i 1967. Mellem 1950 og 1967 drev det amerikanske luftvben ti strre baser i Frankrig. 13. februar 1960 afprvede Frankrig sin frste atombombe, Gerboise Bleue.

Selv om Frankrig udviste solidaritet med resten af NATO under Cubakrisen i 1962, fortsatte de Gaulle sine bestrbelser for et selvstndigt fransk forsvar ved ogs at trkke de franske atlanterhavs- og kanalflder ud af den integrerede NATO kommando. I 1966 blev de franske, vbnede styrker ogs trukket ud af NATO's integrerede kommando, og alle udenlandske tropper blev bedt om at forlade Frankrig. Frankrig fortsatte dog som medlem af den politiske alliance. Frankrigs nej til udenlandske tropper resulterede i, at NATO's europiske overkommando (SHAPE) blev flyttet fra Paris til Casteau, nord for Mons i Belgien 16. oktober 1967.[6] Frankrig trdte igen ind i NATO's militre kommando i 1993.

Skabelsen af NATO havde som konsekvens, at der blev brug for en standardisering af militr teknologi. Standardiseringen skete gennem STANAG aftalen, der blandt andet resulterede i en flles kaliber for militre hndvben, flles procedurer for militre lufthavne og en rkke andre standardiseringer. Der blev ogs brug for en flles militr strategi. Den blev sikret gennem flles kommando, kontrol og kommunikationscentre.

Under det meste af den kolde krig optrdte NATO ikke som organisation i bne militre konflikter. 1. juli 1968 blev Traktaten om ikke-spredning af kernevben bnet for underskrifter.

30. maj 1978 definerede NATO landene to yderligere ml for alliancen: At opretholde sikkerheden og arbejde for afspnding. Dette skulle gres ved at tilpasse alliancens militre magt til Warszawapagtens offensive formen uden at starte et vbenkaplb.

12. december 1979 efter at warszawapagtlandene havde get deres atomvbenkapacitet i Europa, blev yderligere amerikanske atomvben deployeret i Europa. De nye vben skulle styrke Vestens forhandlingsposition i forhandlingerne om nedrustning. Beslutningen blev kaldt Dobbeltbeslutningen, fordi den egentlig indeholdt to beslutninger. Man ville tilbyde Sovjetunionen nedrustningsforhandlinger, men samtidig opruste, hvis ikke disse forhandlinger frte til noget. I 1983-1984 blev der i forbindelse med denne beslutning opstillet amerikanske Pershing II raketter i Europa som svar p Warszawapagtlandenes oprustning med SS-20 mellemdistanceraketter i Europa. Pershing II raketterne var i stand til at n Moskva p f minutter. Denne oprustning frte til protester fra fredsbevgelserne i Vesteuropa.

I denne periode var der ikke de store ndringer i NATO's sammenstning. I 1974 trak Grkenland sine tropper vk fra NATO kommandoen, og 30. maj 1982 blev Spanien indlemmet i alliancen. Efter grsk-tyrkiske spndinger efter striden om Cypern i 1974 blev de grske styrker igen underlagt NATO kommandoen i 1980 i samarbejde med Tyrkiet.

I november 1983 skabte NATO-velsen Able Archer 83 panik i Kreml. velsen simulerede et atomvbenangreb mod Sovjet. Det sovjetiske lederskab blev bekymret for, at den amerikanske prsident Ronald Reagan havde planlagt at starte et rigtigt angreb. Som reaktion blev de sovjetiske atomvbenstyrker i sttyskland og Polen sat i alarmberedskab. Selvom Sovjetunionens reaktion i samtiden blev udlagt som propaganda, mener mange historikere, at den sovjetiske frygt for et angreb var gte.

24. oktober 1990 afslrede den italienske premierminister, Giulio Andreotti, eksistensen af Gladio, en hemmelig, paramilitr milits, hvis officielle ml var at udkmpe en guerillakrig bag fjendens linjer i tilflde af et angreb fra warszawapagtlandene. Andreotti fortalte det italienske parlament, at NATO lnge i det skjulte havde trnet partisaner til dette forml.[7][8][9]

Gladio programmet var tilsyneladende aktivt i alle europiske NATO-lande og nogle neutrale lande. Emnet er specielt kontroversielt i Italien, hvor en rapport i 2000 konkluderede, at Gladio havde vret involveret i nyfascistisk terrorisme, der skulle mindske kommunistisk, politisk indflydelse i landet.[10][11]

Afslutningen p den kolde krig og oplsningen af Warszawapagten i 1991 fjernede NATO's primre modstander. Dette gav anledning til en strategisk revaluering af NATO's forml og opgaver. I praksis medfrte det en gradvis (og stadig igangvrende) ekspansion af NATO i steuropa og en udvidelse af aktiviteter til en rkke omrder, der ikke tidligere havde vret NATO's arbejdsomrder. Den frste udvidelse af NATO efter den kolde krig skete med genforeningen af Tyskland 3. oktober 1990 efter Berlinmurens fald. Det tidligere sttyskland blev en del af Tyskland og dermed ogs af NATO alliancen. For at sikre en sovjetisk godkendelse af et forenet Tyskland, der fortsat var en del af NATO, blev det aftalt, at udenlandske tropper og atomvben ikke mtte udstationeres i sttyskland, og at NATO aldrig ville blive udvidet lngere stp.[12]

28. februar 1994 deltog NATO for frste gang i ben kamp, da fire serbiske fly blev skudt ned efter at have brudt et flyveforbud over Bosnien-Hercegovina der var beordret af FN. NATO hndhvede flyveforbuddet, der var startet 12. april 1993 og sluttede 20. december 1995. NATO's luftangreb i 1995 hjalp med til at afslutte krigen p Balkan.

Mellem 1994 og 1997 dannede NATO flere fora for regionalt samarbejde mellem NATO og alliancens naboer, for eksempel Partnerskab for fred og Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. 8. juli 1997 blev tre tidligere kommunistiske lande, Ungarn, Tjekkiet og Polen inviteret til at deltage i NATO alliancen og blev formelt indlemmet i 1999.

24. marts 1999 deltog NATO i den frste strre konflikt i alliancens historie, da NATO styrker gik ind i Kosovokrigen med en 11 uger lang luftkampagne mod dele af det davrende Jugoslavien (nuvrende Serbien). En formel krigserklring fandt aldrig sted. De serbiske jugoslaver kaldte Kosovokrigen for militr aggression og imod FN-charteret.[13]

Konflikten sluttede 11. juni 1999, da Slobodan Miloevi bjede sig for NATO's krav og accepterede resolution 1244.[14] Nato hjalp derefter med at etablere KFOR, en NATO ledet styrke under FN mandat, der varetager sikkerheden i Kosovo.

NATO's ekspansion, aktiviteter og geografiske dkning er blevet forget yderligere efter terrorangrebet 11. september 2001. Angrebet frte til, at NATO chartrets artikel 5 blev taget i brug. Artikel 5 siger, at et angreb p en medlemsstat anses for et angreb p alle alliancens medlemmer. 4. oktober 2001 fastslog NATO endeligt, at angrebet var dkket af artikel 5.[15]

Angrebet medfrte de frste militre aktioner begrundet med artikel 5 i NATO's historie: Operation Eagle Assist og Operation Active Endeavour.

P trods af denne hurtige, solidariske reaktion stod NATO snart over for en krise. 10. februar 2003 nedlagde Frankrig og Belgien veto mod planer om at forsvare Tyrkiet i tilflde af en krig med Irak. Begrundelsen var, at sdanne planer ville sende et signal om, at forhandlingerne med Irak havde slet fejl.[16] Tyskland brugte ikke sin veto-ret, men stttede alligevel Frankrigs og Belgiens veto.

I sprgsmlet om Afghanistan udviste alliancen til gengld strre sammenhold. 16. april 2003 enedes NATO landene om at tage kommandoen over International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) i Afghanistan. Forslaget blev fremsat af Tyskland og Holland, de to lande der ledte ISAF, og alle 19 NATO ambassadrer godkendte beslutningen enstemmigt. ISAF kom under NATO's kontrol 11. august. Det var frste gang i NATO's historie, at alliancen styrede en militr operation uden for Europa.[17]

31. juli 2006 overtog en NATO-ledet styrke bestende af tropper fra Canada, Storbritannien, Tyrkiet, Danmark og Holland de militre operationer i det sydlige Afghanistan fra en amerikansk ledet styrke.[18]

Nye NATO strukturer blev skabt, og gamle nedlagt. NATO's reaktionsstyrke, NATO Response Force (NRF), blev dannet efter NATO topmdet i Prag 21. november 2002.[19]19. juni 2003 startede en strre omstrukturering af de militre NATO kommandoer, da hovedkvarteret for Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic blev nedlagt og en ny kommando, Allied Command Transformation (ACT) blev oprettet i Norfolk i Virginia i USA. Samtidig blev Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) ogs hovedkvarter for Allied Command Operations (ACO). ACT er ansvarlig for at transformere NATO til fremtidige opgaver, mens ACO er ansvarlig for militre operationer.[20]

Udvidelsen med nye medlemslande fortsatte, og syv nye lande blev indlemmet i NATO: Estland, Letland, Litauen, Slovakiet, Slovenien, Bulgarien og Rumnien.[21] Disse lande blev inviteret til forhandlinger om medlemskab ved NATO topmdet i Prag i 2002 og blev optaget i NATO 29. marts 2004. Udvidelsen var den strste i NATO's historie.[22]

En rkke andre lande har ogs udtrykt nske om at blive optaget i NATO, blandt andet Albanien, Kroatien, Den Tidligere Jugoslaviske Republik Makedonien, Georgien og Montenegro.

Rusland mener, at NATO's udvidelser mod st siden slutningen p den kolde krig har vret en klar overtrdelse af en aftale mellem den sovjetiske leder Mikhail Gorbatjov og George H.W. Bush, der tillod en fredelig genforening af Tyskland. NATO's ekspansionspolitik bliver set som en fortsttelse af den kolde krigs forsg p at omringe og isolere Rusland.[23][24][25]

Artikel 10 af den Nordatlantiske Traktat gr det muligt for ikke-medlemslande at blive optaget i NATO:

Artikel 10 stter to generelle begrnsninger for kommende medlemsstater:

I 1999 blev der fastsat en procedure for optagelsen af fremtidige medlemslande, Membership Action Plan (MAP). Et potentielt medlemsland skal rligt rapportere om sine fremskridt inden for fem omrder:[27]

NATO giver feedback og teknisk rdgivning til det enkelte land og evaluerer dets fremskridt.[28]

Det er usandsynligt, at NATO skulle invitere lande som Irland, Sverige, Finland, strig og Schweiz til medlemskab, fordi befolkningen og de valgte regeringer i disse lande ikke sttter et medlemskab i NATO. NATO anerkender officielt disse landes neutralitetspolitik.

Der er blevet etableret to fora, der skal fremme fremtidigt samarbejde mellem de 28 NATO-lande og 21 skaldte "partnerlande."

De 21 partnerlande er:

Den Individuelle Partnerskabshandlingsplan (IPAP), der s dagens lys ved NATO topmdet i Prag i 2002, er ben for lande, der har den politiske vilje til at ge deres samarbejde med NATO.[31][32]

IPAP handleplaner er oprettet med disse lande:

Middelhavsdialogen der blev startet i 1994, er et forum for samarbejde mellem NATO og syv lande i Middelhavsomrdet.

I 2004 styrkedes Middelhavsdialogen p et topmde i Istanbul, og blev hvad NATO kalder et "gte partnerskab," med en rkke nye ml: Styrkelse af den politiske dialog, strre interoperabilitet, en forsvarsreform og terrorbekmpelse.[33]

NATO samarbejder med Rusland i NATO-Rusland Rdet, der blev etableret i maj 2002.[34]

Filippinerne har lnge vret allieret med USA. Filippinerne fik betegnelsen "strre ikke-NATO allieret" 6. oktober 2003, hvilket tillod USA og Filippinerne at samarbejde om militr forskning og udvikling. I april 2005 indgik Australien, der lnge har vret allieret med USA, en sikkerhedsaftale med NATO, der skulle ge efterretningssamarbejdet i krigen mod terrorisme. Australien har ogs en forsvarsattach posteret i NATO's hovedkvarter.[35] Samarbejde med Japan, El Salvador, Sydkorea og New Zealand er ogs blevet udtrykt som vrende en prioritet.[36] Israel er med i middelhavsdialogen og har sgt at udvide sit samarbejde med NATO. Israel blev for frste gang besgt af en NATO-leder 23. februar 24. februar 2005.[37] Den frste flles fldevelse mellem NATO og Israel fandt sted 27. marts 2005.[38] I juni samme r deltog israelske tropper i NATO velser.

Flere har talt for, at Israel optages i NATO-alliancen, blandt andet Spaniens tidligere premierminister, Jos Mara Aznar og den italienske forsvarsminister Antonio Martino. Men NATO's generalsekretr Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, afviste i september 2006 at et Israelsk medlemskab kan komme p tale. Israel har heller ikke sgt om en optagelse i NATO.[39]

Som alle alliancer styres NATO i sidste ende af sine 28 medlemslande. Den Nordatlantiske Traktat, og andre aftaler, faststter rammer for hvordan beslutninger tages i NATO. Hver af de 28 medlemslande sender en delegation, eller mission, til NATO's hovedkvarter i Bruxelles i Belgien. Lederen af hver delegation kaldes "den permanente reprsentant" og er normalt en hjtrangerende embedsmand eller erfaren ambassadr. Den permanente reprsentant har diplomatisk status af ambassadr.

Sammen udgr de permanente reprsentanter det Nordatlantiske Rd (NAC), et organ der mdes mindst en gang om ugen og har den politiske beslutningsmagt inden for NATO. Der er ogs jvnlige mder i rdet med deltagelse af udenrigsministre, forsvarsministre eller regeringsledere, og det er ved disse mder, store beslutninger om NATO's politik normalt bliver taget. Det skal dog bemrkes, at rdet har samme politiske beslutningsmagt, ligegyldigt hvilket niveau mderne foregr p.

Mderne i det Nordatlantiske Rd ledes af NATO's generalsekretr, og nr beslutninger skal trffes, trffes beslutningerne enstemmigt. Der stemmes ikke, og der kan ikke tages beslutninger ud fra flertallets nsker.[41]

Et andet medlem af hvert lands NATO-delegation er den militre reprsentant, en hjtrangerende officer fra det enkelte lands militr. Sammen udgr de militre reprsentanter den Militre Komit,[42] et organ, der er ansvarligt for at udarbejde anbefalinger til det politiske organ i militre sprgsml. Til tider holder rdet ogs mder med landenes forsvarschefer.

NATO's Parlamentariske Forsamling (NPA) udgres af reprsentanter fra medlemslandene og reprsentanter fra 13 partnerlande.[43] Officielt er forsamlingen ikke en del af NATO's politiske struktur og har som arbejdsomrde at samle NATO lande til diskussioner om sikkerhedspolitik.

NATO's militre operationer ledes af to strategiske ledere, begge hjtstende officerer fra USA's militr, assisteret af en stab, der udgres af medlemmer fra hele NATO. De strategiske ledere er underlagt den Militre Komit.

Fr 2003 var de strategiske ledere verste, allierede leder i Europa (SACEUR) og den verste allierede leder for Atlanten (SACLANT). Under den nuvrende ordning er den samlede kommando delt mellem to kommandocentre, Allied Command Transformation (ACT), der er ansvarlig for udvikling og trning af NATO-styrkerne, og Allied Command Operations, der er ansvarlig for NATO's militre operationer p verdensplan. Lederen af Allied Command Operations har beholdt titlen SACEUR, og hovedkvarteret er stadig SHAPE, der ligger i Belgien. ACT derimod ligger i det tidligere SACLANT hovedkvarter i Norfolk i Virginia, USA.

Stillingen som chef for Allied Command Europe, der siden 2003 har heddet Allied Command Operations, er blevet besat af flgende:[45]

Note: Fra Ridgways tid har SACEUR ogs vret chef for United States European Command

LA-ikon

Koordinater: 505234N 42519 / 50.876155555556N 4.4220111111111 / 50.876155555556; 4.4220111111111

See the article here:
NATO - Wikipedia, den frie encyklopdi

11 July | Key Documents, NATO Summits

Warsaw Declaration on Transatlantic Security Warsaw Summit Communiqu NATO-EU Joint Declaration Commitment to Enhance Resilience Cyber Defense Pledge NATO Policy for the Protection of Civilians

10 July | Fact Sheets, U.S. & NATO

FACT SHEET: U.S. and NATO Efforts in Support of NATO Partners, including Georgia, Ukraine, and Moldova From The White House The United States strongly

10 July | Fact Sheets, U.S. & NATO

FACT SHEET: U.S. Contributions to Enhancing Allied Resilience From The White House At the NATO Warsaw Summit, heads of state and government will commit their

9 July | NATO Summits, President Barack Obama, Speeches, Transcripts

Remarks by President Obama at Press Conference After NATO Summit July 9,2016 PRESIDENT OBAMA:Good evening, everybody. Once again, I want to thank the government and

9 July | Key Documents, NATO Summits

Joint statement of the NATO-Ukraine Commission at the Level of Heads of State and Government We, the Heads of State and Government of the

9 July | Key Documents, NATO Summits

The Warsaw Declaration on Transatlantic Security Issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Warsaw

9 July | Key Documents, NATO Summits

Endorsed by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Warsaw 8-9 July 2016 I. INTRODUCTION 1.

9 July | Key Documents, NATO Summits

Issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Warsaw 8-9 July 2016 1. We, the

9 July | Fact Sheets

FACT SHEET: NATOs Enduring Commitment to Afghanistan From The White House NATOs mission in Afghanistan has been the Alliances largest and one of its

9 July | NATO Summits, Speeches

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg Opening Remarks Following the Meeting of the North Atlantic Council at the Level of Heads of State and Government in

9 July | Key Documents, NATO Summits

Issued by the Heads of State and Government of Afghanistan and Alliesand their Resolute Support Operational Partners We, the Heads of State and Government of

8 July | Key Documents, NATO Summits

Cyber Defence Pledge 1. In recognition of the new realities of security threats to NATO, we, the Allied Heads of State and Government, pledge to

8 July | Key Documents, NATO Summits

Issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Warsaw, 8-9 July 2016 We, the Heads

8 July | Key Documents, NATO Summits

Joint statement of the NATO-Georgia Commission at the level of Foreign Ministers We, Allied Foreign Ministers and the Foreign Minister of Georgia, met today in

8 July | NATO Summits, Speeches, Transcripts

Press Statement by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg at the Signing Ceremony of the EU-NATO Joint Declaration Followed by Statements by President Tuskand PresidentJuncker July

8 July | NATO Summits, President Barack Obama, Speeches

Remarks by President Obama, President Tusk of the European Council, and President Juncker of the European Commission After U.S.-EU Meeting July 8, 2016 PRESIDENT OBAMA:

8 July | Cooperative Security, Fact Sheets, U.S. & NATO

FACT SHEET: U.S. Assurance and Deterrence Efforts in Support of NATO Allies From The White House In the last 18 months, the United States

8 July | Key Documents, NATO Summits

Joint Declaration by the President of the European Council, the President of the European Commission, and the Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization

Visit link:
U.S. Mission to NATO