Category Archives: NATO

In the current tense climate, Russian President Vladimir Putin knows that he has true friends in the European Union. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbn is certainly one. On February 1, he turned up in Moscow for talks with the Russian leader, as the threat of an invasion by some 100,000 Russian troops and heavy weaponry hung over Ukraine.

The official reason for his visit was to negotiate additional volumes of natural gas, following the signing of a 15-year supply agreement with Gazprom back in September last year. The Hungarian prime minister has brushed off criticism of the trip by the opposition and insisted that he was pursing the countrys economic interests and the cause of peace.

Orbn may appear to be breaking ranks with NATO and the EU in the hope of capitalising on his special ties to the Kremlin and there may be others in Eastern Europe that are careful not to displease Moscow. But that does not necessarily mean there is weakness in the alliances Eastern flank. If anything, the ongoing regional developments demonstrate the value of NATO membership to Central and Eastern European states, including Hungary.

For one, there is no support for Moscows demand that NATO move out its troops and military assets from the region, including in Hungary. In fact, according to media reports, the Hungarian defence ministry is currently negotiating the deployment of NATO forces in the country, in response to the crisis in Ukraine.

In the rest of Central Europe, Orbns political games do not seem to have resonance. The Polish government of the Law and Justice Party, which often joins its Hungarian counterpart in challenging the EU, has been one of the most vociferous advocates of a robust NATO response to Russias brinkmanship in Ukraine, going as far as criticising Germanys reluctance to supply arms to Ukraine.

On February 1, as Orbn was heading to Moscow, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki landed in Kyiv where he promised military assistance to Ukrainians.

Romania, another country where there is no love lost for Russia, has also stood firmly in support of a strong NATO response to Russian threats. President Klaus Iohannis was calling for more American boots on the ground well before the current crisis started heating up and applaudedUS President Joe Bidens recent announcement that 8,500 US troops would be put on alert for a possible deployment along the Eastern flank.

In the three Baltic states Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia Russia is also unequivocally seen as a major threat, especially after its 2014 annexation of Crimea. For this reason, since 2016, they have been eagerly hosting a multinational NATO force an initiative known in the military diplomatic lingo as forward presence.

Still, Orbn is not alone. There are other governments in the region which are loathe to pick fights with Putin. On January 25, Croatian President Zoran Milanovi threw a bombshell with his declaration that Zagreb will not participate in a NATO military operation in Ukraine (as if one was in the works), calling it one of the most corrupt countries in the world. Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovi had to dispel the ensuing confusion with a public statement and issue an apology to the Ukrainian people.

Bulgaria is another example. In recent days, Bulgarian Defence Minister Stefan Yanev has gone out of his way to make statements against NATO deployments in the Black Sea country. In a TV interview, Yanev declared that in case of an escalation in Ukraine, Bulgaria would be protected by Bulgarian forces under Bulgarian command.

Of course, such pronouncements are only halfway sincere. For one, military bases in Bulgaria, as well as in neighbouring Romania, already host US troops for training and force projection purposes, as part of a military cooperation agreement signed with the US in 2006. And as in the Baltics, NATO allies also carry out air policing in Bulgaria. In fact, on January 21, the Dutch defence ministry announced it would send F-35 fighter jets to beef up the mission. In other words, NATO is already present militarily in Bulgaria which it sees as a front-line state.

Regardless of public pronouncements and political games of some politicians from NATOs Eastern members, the ongoing standoff around Ukraine has proven to Central and Eastern Europeans the value of NATO membership. Had it not been for the security guarantees extended by the US and its allies, the countries of the former Warsaw Pact could have faced the same predicament as Kyiv. At the minimum, they would have been more vulnerable to what scholar Mark Galeotti describes as the Kremlins heavy metal diplomacy the use of military threats to coerce neighbouring governments into making concessions.

That applies as much to the hawks in Poland, Romania and the Baltic countries as it does to the doves in Budapest and Sofia. Orbn will no doubt continue to play his complex game, trying to win favours from the Russians, but he will do so from the security of being within NATO as well as the EU. The Bulgarian cabinet may take extra care not to provoke Russia but, in the end, it still depends on the extra layer of protection the Atlantic Alliance offers for its national security.

When the chips are down, all Central and Eastern European countries will go along with the Western response to Russia, whether it is tougher sanctions or additional troop deployments on NATOs borders. Some in the region might have second thoughts about it, complain in public, or keep their head down out of fear from Russian reprisals, but the direction of travel is clear.

The views expressed in this article are the authors own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeeras editorial stance.

See original here:
Is there a weakness in NATOs Eastern flank? - Al Jazeera English

LONDON British lawmakers will be asked to consider legislation this week that would let ministers impose a wider range of sanctions against Russia should it move against Ukraine, the British foreign secretary said Sunday.

The foreign secretary, Liz Truss, outlined the plan in an interview with the broadcaster Sky News, presenting it as part of a broad range of efforts to deter further aggression from President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia. Britain is already supplying defensive weapons to Ukraine and has offered to increase its troop deployments elsewhere in Eastern Europe.

Also on Sunday, Russias foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, said that Russia would seek clarity from NATO on its intentions days after the United States and its allies delivered a formal rejection to Moscows demands that NATO retreat from Eastern Europe and bar Ukraine from joining the alliance.

Mr. Lavrovs comments in an interview with Russias main government television channel suggested that while Moscow is displeased as expected with the Western response, there may still be a flicker of hope for further diplomacy.

But if diplomacy fails, Ms. Truss said, the British legislation will give the country more punitive options, so there will be nowhere to hide for oligarchs or any company of interest to the Kremlin and the regime in Russia. Britain has long been a financial hub for Russias wealthy and well connected, with one British parliamentary report describing London as a laundromat for illicit Russian money.

While the British Parliament typically takes weeks or months to pass a bill, emergency procedures allow it to legislate in as little as a day under some circumstances.

Ms. Truss said Britain would rule nothing out and would look at every option to support Ukraine, as the British government and its allies pursue diplomacy at the same time as developing economically punitive measures that might persuade Mr. Putin not to invade.

Were doing all we can through deterrence and diplomacy to urge him to desist, Ms. Truss, who plans to meet with Ukraines president and the Russian foreign minister in the next two weeks, told the BBC.

Biden administration officials reiterated on Sunday that the United States believes a Russian invasion is imminent, even if Ukraine has been trying to play down the crisis.

We have been nothing but clear and transparent about our concerns here at the Pentagon over the rapid buildup for the last few months around the border with Ukraine and in Belarus, the Pentagons press secretary, John F. Kirby, said on Fox News Sunday.

Feb. 3, 2022, 12:25 p.m. ET

On CNNs State of the Union, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Bob Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, made a joint appearance with the panels top Republican, Senator Jim Risch of Idaho. Mr. Menendez said there was an incredibly strong bipartisan resolve to have severe consequences for Russia if it invades Ukraine, and in some cases for what it has already done.

Mr. Menendez said that legislation under discussion was expected to include massive sanctions against the most significant Russian banks: crippling to their economy, meaningful in terms of consequences to the average Russian and their accounts and pensions.

Sanctions, though, were not Mr. Lavrovs focus on Sunday NATO was.

He said an official request was sent Sunday to both NATO and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, an alliance that includes Russia. Mr. Lavrov described it as an urgent demand to explain how they intend to fulfill their obligation not to strengthen their security at the expense of the security of others.

If they do not intend to, then they must explain why, Mr. Lavrov said, adding that this will be the key question in determining our further proposals, which we will report to Russias president.

The Kremlin has been highly critical of NATOs so-called open-door policy of granting membership to former Communist bloc countries without taking Russias security concerns into account. In his remarks, Mr. Lavrov reiterated a frequent Kremlin complaint that NATO, in the years since the Soviet collapse, had crept ever closer to Russias border.

Now theyve come up to Ukraine, and they want to drag that country in, Mr. Lavrov said. Though everyone understands that Ukraine is not ready and will make no contribution to strengthening NATO security.

Ominous warnings. Russia called the strike a destabilizing act that violated the cease-fire agreement, raising fears of a new intervention in Ukraine that could draw the United States and Europe into a new phase of the conflict.

The Kremlins position. President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, who has increasingly portrayed NATOs eastward expansion as an existential threat to his country, said that Moscows military buildupwas a response to Ukraines deepening partnership with the alliance.

As the temperature stayed high between most of the West and Russia, one bit of statesmanship did apparently succeed. Russia backed out of a plan to conduct naval exercises next week in international waters off Irelands coast, which had drawn protests from Irish fishing groups and the Irish government.

The drills were set to take place 150 miles off Irelands southwest coast, outside its territorial waters but within Irelands exclusive economic zone, an area where the country has sovereign rights over marine resources.

Fishing groups raised concerns that the activity could disrupt marine life and jeopardize an important region for their trade. One organization had planned to peacefully protest the exercises.

Irelands foreign minister, Simon Coveney, described the proposed drills in an interview last week with the Irish public broadcaster RTE as simply not welcome and not wanted right now.

While acknowledging that Russias plans did not breach the international law of the sea, he said in a statement that his department had raised several concerns with Russian authorities in light of the current political and security environment in Europe.

Moscow then decided to relocate the exercises outside of the Irish exclusive economic zone as a gesture of good will, the Russian ambassador to Ireland, Yuriy Filatov, said in a statement released on Saturday.

Mr. Coveney said on Twitter that he welcomed Russias response.

Emily Cochrane and Helene Cooper contributed reporting from Washington, and Michael Schwirtz from Kyiv, Ukraine.

Here is the original post:
Britain Toughens Stance on Russia, as Russia Presses NATO for Assurances - The New York Times

Make no mistake, Russias fundamental strategic objective in coercing Ukraine is to undermine NATO. In Russian President Vladimir PutinVladimir Vladimirovich PutinRussia crisis exacerbates US political divisions Americans should be paying attention to Ukraine White House says it's nixing use of 'imminent' to describe Russian invasion MOREs mind, a weaker NATO directly correlates with a stronger Russia. Long-festering policy differences within the alliance, self-inflicted vulnerabilities to external pressures and weak political leadership in key Western states are already on full display. Ponderous rhetoric about NATO solidarity, endlessly repeated by the Biden administration, only underscores rather than conceals these problems.

Putin well understands these phenomena. He is actively seeking to exacerbate existing tensions and weaknesses, and create new ones, and has already made significant progress in undercutting the alliance. Today, these divisions eviscerate the credibility of threatened post-invasion sanctions against Russia, no matter how serious the West might be. If Russia remains undeterred, the long-term damage to Americas global position, compounding the corrosive effects of the Afghan withdrawal, could be incalculable.

NATOs problems are hardly new. Not for nothing was Henry Kissingers pathbreaking mid-1960s analysis entitled The Troubled Partnership. Nonetheless, the undeniable Soviet Cold War threat; Americas sustained, vitally important perception that ensuring Europes security enhanced its own; and U.S. leaders like Ronald Reagan, determined to defeat communism not merely manage or contain it, ultimately prevailed. NATO members collective-defense commitments held, and the USSR collapsed. The story becomes vaguer from there, with upticks after 9-11 and during the ensuing war on Islamicist terrorism.

During the 1990s generally-shared Western euphoria (remember the end of history?), NATOs expansion was both inevitable and beneficial to all involved. But Washington failed to think through how far NATO should grow. There was talk of possibly including Russia at some point, although that opportunity, not nurtured seriously during the Clinton administration, died through inattention. Spains former Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar proposed making NATO a global alliance, including members such as Japan, Australia and Israel, but Europes burghers were uninterested.

Unfortunately, and critical here, NATOs eastern European flank was left unfinished, with many former Soviet republics isolated in an ambiguous, clearly dangerous grey zone between NATO and Russia. In 2008, with bipartisan support, President George W. Bush proposed fast-tracking NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia. Germany and France blocked the move, and now assert tautologically that not being NATO members means they are of no special concern to the alliance. Contemporary criticisms that Ukraine is not ready for NATO membership because of corruption and an unsteady democracy overlook Bushs prior initiative. They also conveniently ignore that eastern and central European states admitted after the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union collapsed were hardly clones of Luxembourg or Canada.

But who determines the strategic status of the grey-zone countries? Ukraine exemplifies this issue, struggling to shed its communist past and create durable representative government. While key national territory has already been annexed or subjugated by Moscow, Ukrainians nonetheless still believe they should decide their international future. Russia believes it should decide, and many Europeans and Americans seemingly agree: Russia is powerful, borders Ukraine and there are historic antecedents. Perhaps we should ask Chinas neighbors how they feel about that logic. Not long ago, we could have asked that question of Germanys neighbors.

Undeniably, Ukraine is now under brutal pressure, including the palpable risk of further Russian military invasion. In response, President BidenJoe BidenOath Keepers leader spoke to Jan. 6 panel from detention center Biden nominee faces scrutiny over fintech work, compensation Overnight Defense & National Security Pentagon deploying 3,000 troops to Europe MORE has not solidified the alliance. He has in fact increased its divisions through his soon-to-be-historical banter about minor incursions, desperate efforts to concede something to Moscow to halt the march toward military hostilities and public disagreement with Ukraine itself on the imminence of a Russian attack. Observers watch daily for more signs of Biden going wobbly.

Europes reaction is mixed. Despite domestic political turmoil, Great Britain has been firm, even ahead of the U.S. by some measures. Eastern and central European NATO members need no lectures on the Kremlins threat, and they are wholly resolute, notwithstanding reliance on Russian natural gas. More distant NATO countries are less visible, but at least not obstructionist. France is being France, with President Emmanuel MacronEmmanuel Jean-Michel MacronGermany's chancellor says he will not be at Beijing Olympics Americans should be paying attention to Ukraine Merkley slams 'shameful' decision by UN secretary-general to attend Beijing Olympics MORE, facing a difficult reelection race, pirouetting around the international stage searching for attention.

Then theres Germany. Basing its reluctance to do much of anything on its recent history, Berlin has it exactly backwards. Precisely this history should impel Germans to be the most steadfast and resolute opponent of efforts to change European borders by politico-military aggression. Of all European countries, Germany owes this to its neighbors, in concrete deeds not just words. Instead, it has been passive at best, and frequently unhelpful. This is NATOs core weakness, and Putin is pounding on it for all he is worth.

Germany led Europe in ignoring Reagans 1980s admonitions not to become dependent on Russian oil and gas. Incredibly, Russias Gazprom hired former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder to help complete the first Nordstream pipeline, begun during his tenure. Schroeders successors effectively did nothing to mitigate Germanys vulnerability and now act as if terminating Nordstream II is unthinkable. Maybe the devil made them do it.

Germany has not come within sight of meeting NATOs 2014 Cardiff agreement that members spend 2 percent of GDP on defense. It has long refused to provide Ukraine with lethal military aid, and recently barred Estonia from sending German-origin weapons to Kyiv. Berlins offers to send 5,000 military helmets and a field hospital were greeted with well-deserved mockery and incredulity. To top it off, the commander of Germanys navy was recently fired for all but supporting Russias position.

Newly-installed Chancellor Olaf Scholz will meet Biden in Washington on Feb 7. They have a lot to talk about. Germany was delighted to shelter under Cold War Americas nuclear umbrella and NATOs European fastnesses. We will soon see if Germany is ready to do the right thing by Ukraine. Putin is watching closely.

John Boltonwas national security adviser toPresident TrumpDonald TrumpConservative leader O'Toole ousted in Canada Biden nominee faces scrutiny over fintech work, compensation Overnight Defense & National Security Pentagon deploying 3,000 troops to Europe MOREfrom 2018 to 2019, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations from 2005 to 2006 and held senior State Department posts in 2001-2005 and 1985-1989. His most recent book isThe Room Where It Happened"(2020). He is the founder ofJohn BoltonJohn BoltonPutin's effort to split NATO may depend on Germany Belarus is risking its independence for a Russia-centric foreign policy Former Trump officials plotting effort to blunt his impact on elections: report MORE Super PAC, a political action committee supporting candidates who believe in a strong U.S. foreign policy.

Read more:
Putin's effort to split NATO may depend on Germany | TheHill - The Hill

BEIJING, February 3. /TASS/. Beijing recognizes and supports Moscows position in negotiations with Washington and NATO on security issues, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said on Thursday at a meeting with his Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov.

"The Russian side reported on the latest developments in relations with the US and NATO, stressing the principled stance that security is indivisible. China expresses its understanding and support for this," said the Chinese top diplomat.

On December 17, 2021, the Russian Foreign Ministry published drafts of a treaty with the United States on security guarantees and also an agreement on measures of ensuring the security of Russia and the NATO member states. Consultations on these issues were held in Geneva on January 10. On January 12, the Russia-NATO Council met in session in Brussels and on January 13 there was a session of the OSCE Permanent Council in Vienna.

Russia is looking forward to a prompt response to Lavrov's written message on the indivisibility of security, which was submitted to the top diplomats of Canada, the US and several European countries on January 28.

More:
Beijing supports Moscow in negotiations with US, NATO on security foreign ministry - TASS

Russia military aviation flew out from the Barents Sea this morning, says Stine B. Gaasland, spokesperson with the Norwegian Air Force.

They operated north of Finnmark and were as usual met by our Norwegian F-35s on NATO QRA, Gaasland says to the Barents Observer.

Several of the Russian planes were also identified by a Norwegian P-3 Orion surveillance aircraft that was on a Barents Sea mission Thursday morning.

The Norwegian pilots took images of the Russian submarine hunter as it was refueling the tanks before flying further west and south.

Gaasland says that of the planes, two long-range Tu-142 aircraft, continued out of the Barents Sea area to the Norwegian Sea and flew south. The Tu-142 is a maritime surveillance aircraft aimed at finding enemy submarines.

According to British media, Typhoon fighter jets on Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) from Lossiemouth airbase were scrambled to meet the two Russian planes approaching UK area of interest.

This is the second day in a row that several Russian military planes flew out to international airspace northwest of the Kola Peninsula and continued over the Barents Sea with some of them flying all south to the North Sea region.

On Wednesday, February 2, four long-range aircraft, two Tu-142 sub-hunters and two Tu-95 bombers, were identified by Norwegian and British fighter jets scrambled by NATO.

A nations sovereign airspace extends 12 nautical miles beyond its coastline over the territorial waters. Although, Russia has never since the breakup of the Soviet Union violated Norwegian airspace, there are several reasons for scrambling fighter jets when a radar station sees unidentified foreign planes approaching.

Per Erik Solli is a former F-16 pilot at Bod Air Station and now senior advisor with Nord University. He explains why NATO fighter jets maintain alert readiness at all hours.

The response time is 15 minutes from a scramble order is given to the fighter aircraft are airborne, he says to the Barents Observer.

Time is essential Solliunderlines.

If the flight time to the intercept somewhere outside northern Norway is 20 minutes, a Russian aircraft flying at 450 knots has flown260 nautical miles from the scramble order is given to the Norwegian fighter aircraft appearing on their side.

Waiting until a hostile aircraft has entered sovereign airspace before sending the fighter jets up in the air could be too late. Therefore, intercepts of military aircraft in international airspace in peacetime is normal and ordinary activity.

Solli says this is a normal procedure also for the Russians.

Russian fighter aircraft regularly intercept Norwegian or Allied military surveillance aircraft in the Barents Sea in international airspace far from the Russian border, he explains.

When piloting the F-16s, Per Erik Solli many times met Russian pilots in the skies over the Barents- and Norwegian Seas.

Everyone is professional and courteous and it is quite common to greet each other with a hand wave.

Solli says there were even times withfriendly humor from cockpit to cockpit.

The Russian aircrew sometimes showed us what type of magazines they were reading. When we intercepted Russian intelligence aircraft who listen in on our military radio frequencies, they sometimes used to hold up a sign in the window with the letters and numbers in our flight callsign. The gesture was a display of friendly humor among aviators.

Per Erik Solli says todayslevel of activity is about 20% of the level we experienced in the Cold War.

Norways Air Force routinely identifies Russian aircraft approaching from the north. In 2021, F-16s from Bod were scrambled 34 times and identified 58 Russian military planesoutside Norwegian air space.

The first Norwegian F-35s to meet Russian military planes are the ones that are on Quick Reaction Alert (QRA) for NATO fromEvenes air base above the Arctic Circle. Further south, F-35s from rland air station take over. If the military planes continue south over the North Sea, like today and yesterday, the mission is handed over to British fighter jets in airspace ensuring they are continually shadowed.

British Air Traffic Control has previously saidRussias long-range military aviationis posing ahazard to civilian air trafficas they fly with transponders turned off making it difficult for other planes to know their positions.

Most commercial flights from the Middle East and northern Europe have routes in the skies above the North Sea and the Norwegian Sea when flying to and from destinations in North America.

So does air traffic between Iceland and Europe.

There is currently a group of navy warships from the Baltic Fleet and the Northern Fleet sailingsouthwest of Ireland towards anannounced exercise areain the North Atlantic.

Last week, several of the largest warships in Russias Northern Fleetexercised in the Barents- and Norwegian Seas.

Russias Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, recentlysent a requestto all member states in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) where he asks for written answers on whether the countries will comply with commitments not to strengthen their security at the expense of others.

Read more here:
NATO jets scrambled for second day in a row - The Independent Barents Observer

This story was first published inthe Fayetteville Observer.

FORT BRAGGA first wave of soldiers boarded C-17s at Fort Bragg on Thursday, as paratroopers with the 82nd Airborne Division and soldiers part of the XVIII Airborne Corps deployed to Europe.

Thetroops are going in support of NATO allies and partners in deterring Russian aggression, said Capt. Matthew Visser, a spokesman for the XVIII Airborne Corps.

The soldiers of XVIII Airborne Corps and the 82nd Airborne Division are always ready as Americas contingency corps (and) have the responsibility to mobilize on a moments notice to deploy supporting whatever operation it is, Visser said.

About 1,700 paratroopers who are part of an infantry brigade combat team will go to Poland, as the XVIII Airborne Corps moves a joint task force headquarters to Germany.

Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said Wednesday that the troops are deploying to bolster capabilities inside NATOs eastern flank. after Russian President Vladimir Putin has massed troops on Ukraines border for months, raising concerns of an imminent incursion or full-scale invasion.

The Pentagon estimates there are more than 100,000 Russian forces near the Ukrainian border.

President Joe Biden has been clear, that the U.S. will respond to the growing threat, Kirby said.

Kirby said Wednesday that U.S. officials dont know if Russia has made a final decision to further invade the Ukraine, but Putin continues to add more forces to the western part of his country and Belarus.

Were going to be prepared to defend our NATO allies if it comes to that, Kirby said. Hopefully, it wont come to that.

U.S. Army soldiers with the 18th Airborne Corps. sit with their gear as they wait to board a plane for deployment to Europe Thursday, Feb. 3, 2022 from Fort Bragg, N.C. (AP Photo/Chris Seward)

Visser said paratroopers in the division and soldiers in the Corps prepare for different operations, which have included deployments in recent years to Haiti or Kabul, Afghanistan for a noncombatant evacuation operation in August.

He said the deployment to Europe communicates a message thats connected to the units lineage during World War II in Normandy, Bastogne and Luxembourg.

This is why people choose to come to Fort Bragg Its the most ready, and when you come to Fort Bragg,its no surprise that this could be the scenario that youre in that you get to deploy and that you get to support what the country needs, Visser said.

Lt. Col. Brad Jordanis among those deploying soldiers, Hes been in the Army for 20 years with previous deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan.

He said that there are a lot of unknowns but that the Fort Bragg soldiers are ready to join forces with allied partners if the NATO response force requires that coordination.

I know that sounds new for a lot of people, but it doesnt really go away, so that continued working with our NATO allies has not stopped, Jordan said.

Jordan said he is confident with the training the soldiers have received.

Personally, he said, this will not be the first deployment that his 13-year-old son and 11-year-old daughter have gone through to experience him being gone.

But hes left them with something while hes gone.

Each one of my kids have half of a dog tag, Jordan said. I have the other half. It just reminds them that Im there.

Soldiers with the 82nd Airborne Division get themselves and their gear weighed as the prepare to deploy from Fort Bragg to Eastern Europe on Thursday, Feb. 3, 2022. (Andrew Craft /The Fayetteville Observer via AP)

Visser said families that remain on the home front will be supported by a variety of Army Community Services and Fort Bragg readiness groups.

Visser said it is not known how long the mission will last.

From the moment they stepped into the Green Ramp passenger shed on Thursday, troops were briefed by leaders and had the chance to participate in a benediction.

We want to make sure that every soldier that leaves this airfield, that gets onto an aircraft, understands what their mission is, know that theyre supported by the soldiers to the left and to the right, and know that their leadership is here to take care of them to make sure that they get back safe, Visser said.

Soldiers also had support from veteran and military service organizations.

Roland Rochester, a Marine veteran and national recruiter of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, said hes been shaking hands with Fort Bragg troops that have deployed and redeployed since 2002.

I tell them to be safe, Rochester said.

The USO of North Carolina was also on site to hand out food and personal care kits consisting of toothpaste, shaving cream and other toiletries.

When the paratroopers and the soldiers are prepared to deploy, the USO is right there with them, said Barry Morris, a regional communications manager for the USO. Our mission is strengthening Americas service members by keeping them connected (to) family, home, country.

Go here to see the original:
On the ground with paratroopers deploying to back NATO amid Ukraine crisis - ArmyTimes.com

With NATO pondering how to appropriately respond to Russia's mobilization along theUkrainian border, a small element of possible deterrence arrived this weekin Rukla, Lithuania.

Flatbed railcars, loaded with armoured infantry vehicles from Germany, were met by soldiers from the nearby NATO base,who promptly unloaded the noisy, tracked machines and drove them off in a convoyalong the narrow, rural roads.

The vehicles and the troops that man themare replacing othersreturning to Germany, as one rotation ends and another begins all part of a NATO strategy in the region known asEnhanced Forward Presence, which dates back to 2017.

In Lithuania, Germany is providing the core of the battle group for the alliance, explained commanding officer, German Lt.-Col.Hagen Ruppelt.

"We are here because the Lithuanian government and the Baltic states are perceiving a threat around them," hetold CBC News during a visit to see a small part of the German operation.

Similar NATO basesare in place in Estonia and Latvia, led by British and Canadian commanders respectively and all three with roughly 1,200 soldiers each.

As of late, the pressing political question for the 72-year-old NATO has been whether it urgently needs to further beef up its troops and equipmentin the Baltic states that border Russia.

Or, alternatively, show a more restrained stancein the hopes of not provoking the Kremlin.

Tensions have soared in the region amid the buildup of Russian troops near Ukraine's border, prompting fears that an invasion could be on the horizon. Western military experts estimate there are already as many as 127,000 Russian troops near theborder and tens of thousand moretaking up positions inside Belarus,within 200kilometers ofKyiv.

Russia denieshaving any such plans and insists it's just running military drills.It has also said its objective is to negotiate a security deal with the United States that would see foreign forces removed from the countries along its border, ensure Ukraine is off limits for NATO troops and providea guarantee Ukraine would never be admitted to the alliance.

The U.S., Europe, and NATO have rejected Russia's demands but are offeringa dialogue on a range of strategic issues.

But while the U.S. and manyNATO allies are stepping up their response plans in eastern Europe amid the standoff, Germanyremains an outlier.

WATCH | Germany holds off onadditional support for Ukraine:

Germany has vast commercial interests with Russia and buys huge amounts of natural gas from the country,leading to accusations that its government is putting its commercial interests first.

The Nord Stream 2 pipelinebuilt by Russia, with extensive German helphas been completed and is awaiting final regulatory approval.The project is set to double Russia's gas export capacity.

But the United States has vowed the gas will never flowif Russia attacks.

Germany, on the other hand,has been non-committal about the pipeline's fate should that happen.

The German battle group commander, however,insists the only considerations that matter for troop deployments are strategic ones not economic.

"The more forces you bring in, that can be perceived as a provocation and an increase of tensions.That is not our intent," said Ruppelt.

In an interview with CBC News in the capital of Vilnius,Lithuania's deputy defence minister emphatically rejected the logic that bolstering forces along NATO's eastern flank or directly helping Ukraine will inflame the situation and provoke Russia.

"I think deploying more troops to the eastern flank is the only rightresponse to the current escalation,"said Margiris Abukeviius.

"Some say this would continue the [Russian] escalation,but I really believe that the only thing that could stop the Russians from escalating further is credible military force on the other side."

Abukeviius insisted his remarks should not be taken as criticism of the German NATO role in his country,which he says is deeply valued. "When it comes to Germany,we have full confidence.They are really one of the key contributors to our security and deterrence."

For Lithuania,the massive military presence now gathered on Russia's border with Ukraine,as well as in neighbouring Belarus, amounts to an existential threat.

Lithuania shares a 700-kilometreborder with Belarusto the east,and a 300-kilometer border with Russia's European enclave, Kaliningrad,to the west.

Along with its soldiers, Russia has also moved in mobile hospitals,pontoon bridges and its most sophisticated anti-missile interceptors,the S-400. None of those deployments are standard for typical exercises,say military experts.

"I think this worries a lot of people,seeing how many Russian troops are gathered around;that thiscould go out of control and that it wouldn't stop in Ukraine," saidAbukeviius.

Germany's insistence on not trying to agitate Moscow by keeping its troop levels consistent in eastern Europe is increasingly incontrast to several other NATO nations.

On Thursday,four F-16s from Denmark arrived at a NATO airbase in Lithuania to bolster the alliance's air-policing capabilities in the region. Lithuania's president was scheduled to hold a welcoming ceremony Friday for the 80 or so Danish personnel accompanying the aircraft.

The U.S., the U.K.,Norway, Spain, France andthe Czech Republicare also weighing sending more troops into eastern Europe.

Germany has also decided not to provide any lethal assistance directly to Ukraine,opting instead to send 5,000 helmets,along with medical supplies.

While the Ukrainiangovernment has said it is satisfied with the level of German support,some inside the country are not. Kyiv mayor and former champion boxer Vitali Klitschko called the German offer "a joke" that left him "speechless."

Germany has also been criticized for holding up some shipments of anti-tank missiles that countriessuch as Estonia and Lithuaniaare trying to send to Ukraine, by not issuingpermits for the German-origin weapons.

In some ways,Germany's situation mirrors Canada's,which holdsacommand role at the NATO base next door, in Latvia.

The Trudeau government has also refused repeated requests from the Ukrainian government and pro-Ukraine groups at home to send armamentsand is insteadproviding non-combat military trainers and intelligence assistance.

In the Baltics,there is overwhelming public support for a stronger NATO presence,says political scientist Margarita eelgyt,who teaches at Vilnius University.

"In the last year,86 per centof Lithuanians were very much in favour of us having these [NATO] forces.And there is a quite high percentage of Lithuanians thinking that these forces would help us to withstand Russian potential aggression," she said.

"So it's a very big reassurance for the people who constantly feel unsafe due to Russia,and now, also,Belarus."

Read more from the original source:
On NATO's front lines, a difference of opinion on how to best respond to Russia - CBC News

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was the heart of the U.S.-led, anti-Soviet military alliance during the decades of the Cold War, and remains central to Western diplomatic and military cooperation.

Like many of the key institutions in international power politics, NATO has its origin in the years after World War II. The treaty for which it is named was signed in 1949, initially by the United States, Canada and 10 countries in Western Europe, with several other European powers and Turkey joining over the next few years.

Of the treatys 14 articles, the most critical is Article 5, which declares that an attack against one member state is an attack against them all.

That article committed the NATO countries to mutual defense, placing Western Europe under U.S. protection in the face of a Soviet Union that was cementing its domination over Central and Eastern Europe and appeared then only to be growing in power and ambition.

After the Soviet Unions collapse in the early 1990s, the alliance took on a wider role. NATO forces made up of troops volunteered by member states operated as peacekeepers in Bosnia in the 1990s, and bombed Serbia in 1999 to protect Kosovo, where the alliance still has troops.

The first invocation of Article 5 came in defense of the United States, after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. NATO countries joined in the invasion of Afghanistan, where for more than a decade the alliance played a major role alongside the United States in the war that followed. The organizations headquarters are in Brussels, and it carries out missions around the world, basing Patriot surface-to-air missiles and AWACS surveillance planes in Turkey.

Over the past three decades, more than a dozen countries that belonged to the Soviet sphere during the Cold War have become first partners and then members of NATO. It now has 30 members, including three Baltic states that were once directly part of the Soviet Union.

In 2008 it promised membership to Georgia and Ukraine, two former Soviet republics bordering Russia, though without a timetable for achieving it. In 2011, the alliance bombed Libya with the aim of protecting civilians from the forces of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, which paved the way for rebels to depose and kill him.

But the expansion of NATO has increasingly generated pushback.

Former President Donald J. Trump, who frequently accused NATO countries of freeloading on American military spending, told aides he wanted to withdraw from the alliance. And President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia has portrayed NATOs growth as both a betrayal pointing to warm words from U.S. officials in the dying days of the Soviet Union and a threat.

Read the original:
What Is NATO? - The New York Times

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov says Moscow has run out of patience after diplomatic talks fail to produce a breakthrough.

Russia has strongly repeated its demand that NATO will not expand eastwards, despite the rejection of that by the military alliance amid a Russian troop buildup near Ukraine.

It added on Friday that it would not wait indefinitely for the Western response.

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov described Moscows demands that NATO will neither expand nor deploy forces to Ukraine and other ex-Soviet nations as essential for the progress of diplomatic efforts to defuse soaring tensions over Ukraine.

He argued that the deployment of NATO forces and weapons near Russias borders poses a security challenge that must be addressed immediately.

We have run out of patience, Lavrov said at a news conference. The West has been driven by hubris and has exacerbated tensions in violation of its obligations and common sense.

Lavrov said Russia expects Washington and NATO to provide a written response to its demands next week.

Amid the tensions, Ukraine sustained a massive cyberattack on Friday, which hit websites of multiple government agencies.

This weeks negotiations in Geneva and a related NATO-Russia meeting in Brussels were held amid a significant Russian troop buildup near Ukraine that the West fears might be a prelude to an invasion.

Russia, which annexed Ukraines Crimean Peninsula in 2014, has denied having plans to attack its neighbour but warned the West that NATOs expansion to Ukraine and other ex-Soviet nations is a red line that must not be crossed.

Washington and its allies firmly rejected Moscows demand for security guarantees precluding NATOs expansion, but Russia and the West agreed to leave the door open to possible further talks on arms control and confidence-building measures intended to reduce the potential for hostilities.

The negotiations took place as an estimated 100,000 Russian soldiers with tanks and other heavy weapons are massed near Ukraines eastern border.

The United States and its allies urged Russia to de-escalate by pulling troops back to their permanent bases, but Moscow has rebuffed the demand, saying it is free to deploy forces on its territory wherever it deems necessary.

The Russian Defence Ministry said on Friday that troops stationed in eastern Siberia and the far east region have been scrambled for movement across the country as part of snap drills to check their readiness to perform their tasks after redeployment to a large distance.

The ministry noted that special attention will be given to the assessment of the countrys transport infrastructure to ensure the movement of troops, adding that the troops will conduct drills involving firing live ammunition after the redeployment.

Russia seized the Crimean Peninsula after the removal of Ukraines Moscow-friendly leader and in 2014 also threw its weight behind a separatist armed uprising in eastern Ukraine. More than 14,000 people have been killed in nearly eight years of fighting between the Russia-backed rebels and Ukrainian forces.

Link:
Russia demands US, NATO response next week on Ukraine - Al Jazeera English

Mr. Putins insistence that NATO stop enlargement and remove allied forces from member states bordering Russia would draw a new Iron Curtain across Europe, and that threat has concentrated minds. It may be just what a lagging alliance has needed.

NATO relies on momentum, and a lot of the momentum is generated by a sense of threat and fear, said Andrea Kendall-Taylor, a former senior intelligence officer dealing with Russia, now with the Center for a New American Security.

After last years fiasco of Afghanistan and the humiliation of France in the Australian submarine deal, she said, We were all thinking that we have serious problems in the alliance, and we might need to rethink the foundation of this relationship.

But in talks this week with the Russians, NATO leaders spoke with exceptional unity for a 30-member alliance whose commitment to collective defense was increasingly in question.

The talks allowed Mr. Putin to revisit Russian grievances over how the Cold War ended, in hopes of placing them back on the table for renegotiation 30 years later. His deputy foreign minister, Aleksandr V. Grushko, even warned the alliance off a policy of containment of Russia and insisted that free choice does not exist in international relations suggesting that Ukraine would have to bow to Russian wishes.

But the more the discussion evoked the Cold War with its firm dividing line through Europe, and its competing Russian and Western systems and spheres of influence the more it reminded European and American allies of NATOs purpose.

Deterring Russia is in the DNA of NATO, because Russia is what can bring existential threats to European nations, said Anna Wieslander, chair of Swedens Institute for Security and Development.

That threat now is more than territorial, she said. Russia is also trying to undermine NATOs democratic cohesion. Russia is targeting our elections, our social media, our parliaments and our citizens, and it is become more obvious now that Russia is not part of our value system, Ms. Wieslander said.

As it drafts a new strategic concept to be ready this year, NATO is concentrating on resilience against new hybrid and cyberthreats, highlighting its defense of the democratic institutions of member states, not just their territory.

NATO is its member states, and its what allies make of it, said Sophia Besch, a defense analyst in Berlin for the Center for European Reform. Its not out of business because we didnt let it, and weve changed its raison dtre to what are the major strategic concerns of the day.

The old joke was that if NATO is the answer, what is the question? Ms. Besch responded: Weve changed the question over the years to make NATO the answer. And now were back at the old question again, where NATO is more comfortable.

NATO is especially important now for those states bordering Russia, like the Baltic nations and Poland, a country which has had deepening strains with its European partners over the protection of core democratic principles, which Brussels has accused the government in Warsaw of eroding.

But the current crisis is a reminder, even in Poland, of the importance of the alliance as a whole, and not just the countrys bilateral relationship with the United States, said Piotr Buras, head of the Warsaw office of the European Council on Foreign Relations. Ukraine has proved especially vulnerable to Russian threats perhaps precisely because it is not a NATO member.

In Poland there was concern that NATO would lose its focus on Russian security threats, but now its obvious that this is the only framework that can protect us and provide long-term security, Mr. Buras said.

There was also anxiety that President Biden, in trying to stabilize relations with Russia to pivot toward China, would bargain away forward-based NATO troops in Poland and the Baltics that were deployed after 2014.

But there is no sign that the United States will give in on fundamental issues to NATO, like its open-door policy and its right to deploy forces in any member state, Mr. Buras said, and Washington has been rigorous in briefing its allies about all of its discussions with Russia.

Still, he said, the current crisis is a very clear consequence of the U.S. pivot to Asia and the realization of Russia that it might now take advantage of that reorientation of U.S. fundamental security interests, he said. And that issue will not go away soon.

Russia will continue to press for a new security framework in Europe, and Europe without the United States is not prepared to play any significant role, he said, so for Poland, NATO is the key and irreplaceable element.

Ominous warnings. Russia called the strike a destabilizing act that violated the cease-fire agreement, raising fears of a new intervention in Ukraine that could draw the United States and Europe into a new phase of the conflict.

The Kremlins position. President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, who has increasingly portrayed NATOs eastward expansion as an existential threat to his country, said that Moscows military buildupwas a response to Ukraines deepening partnership with the alliance.

Even as Polands battle with the European Union over the rule of law still festers, it is not an overt issue in the military alliance of NATO. But it was very noticeable that as the crisis over Ukraine mounted, President Andrzej Duda of Poland chose to veto a law, criticized by Washington, which would have stripped majority ownership of an independent television station from an American company.

As the security situation in Central Europe has worsened with Russian aggression and threats, Poland got what we finally wanted when we joined NATO, which is allied and American troop presence on our soil to finally bring NATO deployments beyond Germany, said Michal Baranowski, who heads the Warsaw office of the German Marshall Fund.

That is precisely one of Russias current demands that those deployments in Poland and the Baltic States be removed, a demand rejected by Mr. Biden and by NATO, to Polands relief.

Still, Mr. Baranowski said, the Russians have mobilized the largest military force in Europe since 1989, and thats scary. The alliance, he said, is closer to military confrontation, but at least we have not folded.

But the crisis has also highlighted the continuing dependence of NATO on Washington. For Ivo Daalder, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO, what is striking is how much this is the old NATO, where the U.S. is the glue, linchpin and indispensable leader of the alliance, bringing allies together, informing them and putting on the table the strategy we will pursue.

What is extraordinary, he said, is that more than 70 years after the alliance was founded, there appears to be no independent European strategy or even a European point of view different from what Washington brought to the table. NATO has divisions, of course, Mr. Daalder said. But all the divisions are dissolved, at least for today.

Whether that unity will last should Mr. Putin move farther into Ukraine is yet to be seen, said Kadri Liik, an analyst with the European Council on Foreign Relations in Berlin. She sees an unwillingness in Europe to understand that the world is shifting.

The wider public is not prepared for any change in the arrangements weve lived with for the past 30 years, she said. People think we can still sanction Russia into obeying the European security order, and that all it takes is Western unity and principles.

But the United States is leading the world differently, Ms. Liik said. Im just not sure we can expect to continue to live in the world that corresponds to rules and norms and expect America to enforce them.

That applies to Russia and Europe, too, she said. Were slowly headed back to a world of confrontation between systems with different views about obeying the rules and the use of power and force.

Ms. Kendall-Taylor believes that Mr. Putin saw an opportunity to take advantage of a shakier trans-Atlantic alliance, a divided Europe and a polarized America with a weakened president.

NATO unity is real but untested, she said. Its too early to declare all restored, because Russia not done anything yet, Ms. Kendall-Taylor said. Its a bit the calm before the storm.

Read the rest here:
Fear of Russia Brings New Purpose and Unity to NATO, Once Again - The New York Times