• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

NATO-MINISTERIAL MEETING

Electronic media highlighted that in opening remarks, NATO Secretary General Robertson urged NATO member states to support an historical partnership with Russia and adapt to meet the threat of international terrorism.

The BBC World Service expected that during the two-day meeting, the sides would move toward finalizing a new NATO-Russia council, which would put Russia on an equal footing with NATO’s existing members for the first time. A related CNN broadcast carried a correspondent characterizing the creation of the new council as "an historic step forward that heralds a new era of substantial cooperation between former enemies." The program stressed that the agreement will not affect the Alliance’s core mutual defense role, and noted that Alliance officials insist safeguards are built to ensure Moscow will not be able to veto NATO decisions if the new warm relationship goes awry.

Electronic media also stressed that Alliance ministers planned to discuss how to adapt allied forces to meet new threats from terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, as well as the criteria for inviting a new wave of central and east European candidates to join the Alliance later this year.

Against this background, the BBC World Service asserted that Lord Robertson’s aim is to help shape a radical transformation of the Alliance to ensure that it remains relevant amidst the geo-political disorder of the 21^st Century. If all goes according to plan, by the end of this year, NATO will have established a new relationship with Russia, and it will have agreed to what will probably be the largest single intake of new members in its history, said a correspondent. But, he continued, Lord Robertson’s ambitions go further: "While insisting that NATO still plays a key role in security matters, he has sounded increasingly defensive as he has sought to downplay suggestions that the war in Afghanistan has left the Alliance on the sidelines. Lord Robertson, with the making of most of the Alliance’s major players, wants to transform NATO’s agenda to focus more on pressing threats, like international terrorism and the spread of weapons of mass destruction." Reuters observes meanwhile that with the transatlantic military and technological gap widening, the Alliance faces a struggle to remain relevant at a time when Washington prefers to go it alone or form ad hoc coalitions rather than share decision-making with the allies. Recalling that NATO invoked its Article V mutual defense clause for the first time in its history the day after the suicide attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon but was sidelined form the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan, the dispatch notes: "Six months ago, NATO Secretary General Robertson sounded defensive as he sought to assert NATO’s continued ‘relevance’ to global security. In Reykjavik Tuesday, the term "relevance" was replaced by a new buzzword "transformation" as Lord Robertson tried to project an image of a changing NATO seeking new capabilities, new members and new partnership. A related article in Die Welt reports that in Reykjavik the United States wants to initiate an examination of the Defense Capability Initiative (DCI). NATO officials are hinting that between Reykjavik and Prague a slimmer version of DCI will be approved, with few core areas, which are supposed to be realistic, and which will most of all be in tune with the war against terror, says the newspaper. The BBC World Service carried a defense correspondent saying that existing efforts to improve capabilities had had mixed result and NATO now wanted to define a much narrower range of targets, which may well involve some of its smaller members pooling capabilities or giving up some categories of military activity altogether.

Focusing on accession, a commentary in Die Welt asserts that the concern is great that NATO will become a hollow alliance, suitable at best for gentle peacekeeping, but not for conflicts and catastrophes arising in the "Islamic crisis arc." The Reykjavik meeting is to perform preliminary work for the Prague summit and solve unsolvable contradictions: the larger NATO is also to be slimmer, Russia is to be inside and outside, the United States is to be given the leadership and, at the same time, is to ask two dozen governments for their opinion, says the newspaper, adding: "The war against terrorism will not suffice as the organizing principle. Enforcing peace as in the Balkans remains a serious mission. Yet alliance defense must continue to set the standard. The British Empire was never greater than before its decline. NATO must not mistake size for strength. In truth, it concerns to be or not be: a hollow, nominal, ultimately superfluous alliance—or a renewed Atlantic Alliance that guarantees security, anchors America in Europe, makes Russia a partner, and maintains balance among the Europeans."

• The forthcoming return of NATO AWACS taking part in Operation Eagle Assist to Geilenkirchen appears to be returning the attention of some media to NATO’s invocation of Article 5 after the Sept. 11 attacks and to its contribution to the war against terrorism. The deactivation of Article 5 is questioned by many NATO officers, says Die Welt, adding: "On 16 May, the seven AWACS which conducted reconnaissance missions in U.S. airspace are returning to their home base in Geilenkirchen. The question about the deactivation of the mutual assistance clause is laying on the hands: Everyone is asking the question, but no one wants or is able to answer to it. Formally, there is no time set for the deactivation. Activation remains in effect until it is terminated by the NAC." "The timing is a coincidence. Just one day after the meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Reykjavik, the Alliance is ending its most important operation in the fight against terrorism," writes Sueddeutsche Zeitung, adding: "On Thursday, the seven European AWACS aircraft which have been performing missions in U.S. airspace are returning to their hangars in Geilenkirchen. Washington has relinquished the assistance of the old world. This will make it even more difficult for the Euro-Atlantic NATO Alliance to declare its relevance. The former opponent, Moscow, has become a partner, and against the new, anonymous enemy, NATO can achieve little or nothing. However, at home, at the command center in Mons, only annoying security controls are a reminder of the gravity of the situation since last September. ‘We have to produce security internally as well as externally,’ says a high-ranking NATO expert, defining the mission since Sept. 11. At least on paper, this mission is not new. The fight against terrorism has already been declared a NATO mission since the Washington summit in 1999. But European diplomats are suspecting that the Atlantic Alliance could be turned into a worldwide operating alliance. With the war on terror, one is either global or useless."

BALKANS

• The EU’s objective to take over from NATO the peacekeeping mission in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is considered unrealistic among the military from both NATO and the EU, wrote Die Welt, May 13. "You cannot think of an EU-led operation in the Balkans otherwise than in close coordination with NATO," the newspaper quoted Gen. Rainer Schuwirth, Director General of the EU Military Staff, saying and adding that this means: resorting to "assets and capabilities" of the Alliance, especially of the Americans: helicopters, reconnaissance satellites, transport capabilities, search and rescue units. Noting that Gen. Schuwirth insists that "it is exactly this intersection which matters," the newspaper continued: "And this intersection is the problem. Cooperation between the EU and NATO has not yet been formalized. It is obstructed by petty squabbling between Greece and Turkey. Until there is a final agreement, the EU and NATO are not allowed to talk to each other, at least not officially. ‘We all hope,’ explains Gen. Schuwirth, ‘that we will have a formal agreement—rather tomorrow than the day after tomorrow.’ Only then can the real work start at the EU Military Staff."

PFP-COOPERATIVE OCEAN 2002

• AFP reports the Lithuanian Defense Ministry announced Monday that seven nations had began naval war games in Lithuanian waters, practicing joint operations and demining skills as part of NATO’s PFP program. The Ministry reportedly said that under Cooperative Ocean 2002, 10 ships from Britain, Estonia, Finland, France, Latvia, Lithuania an Sweden are to test their ability to conduct joint operations until May 16. They will be joined by another eight ships from Germany, The Netherlands and Norway for mine searching exercises from May 16 to 30. Some 250 square miles are to be cleared of explosives left in the Baltic sea from the two world wars. "This will be one more opportunity to test our ability to operate hand in hand with NATO. It is also very important that the goals of war games meet the requirements of peace time. The Baltic sea is known for intensive fishing and traveling, and we know it is loaded with explosives, so cleaning of is necessary," the dispatch quotes Defense Minister Linkevcius saying.

 FINAL ITEM