Military

NATO

¨         AFP reports security policy experts suggested Wednesday that while Finnish President Halonen has long rejected NATO membership for her country, recent comments indicate she has come to the difficult conclusion that Finland may have to join the Alliance after all.  According to the dispatch, in an interview with Portuguese daily Publico Tuesday, ahead of a visit to Finland by Portuguese President Sampaio,  Halonen noted that  "NATO has its doors open to us, maybe one day we will apply for membership."  The dispatch quotes a leading security analyst at the National Defense College in Helsinki saying Halonen's comments mark "a significant change in her attitude," which he attributed to ESDP.   The dispatch adds that at a press conference on Wednesday with Portuguese President Sampaio, Halonen went further, saying:    "Finland has not seen it necessary or had any need to make an application for NATO so far.  But we see very much the need for cooperating with NATO in Europe now, and also in the future.  We consider it very important for the present applicant countries, but also for the other countries, that NATO keeps its door open, because it helps peace."  Halonen reportedly insisted that Europe must now urgently define the different elements of European security, noting that "NATO is a very important part of that."  The dispatch also quotes a scholar who has written extensively on the issue saying Finnish politicians were becoming increasingly aware of a "paradox" between the country's neutrality and the EU's deepening security dimension.  "The EU's common defense and security policy is linked to NATO," the scholar reportedly stressed, adding:  "So the push for Finnish NATO membership will come from the EU side, for when it develops a common security policy, Finnish non-alignment will run counter to this process, thereby hurting Finland's national interests.  NATO membership will be needed, especially if Finland wants to be at the core of the European integration process, as it has said."  According to the dispatch, experts consider that the schedule for Finnish NATO membership now depended largely on the pace of the EU's development of a common defense and security policy. 

¨         "The savings being made in Belgium's defense budget are once again raising the question of relations with NATO, the only collective defense system of which the country is a member," charges La Libre Belgique.  The newspaper claims that while NATO is complaining about the lack of investments in equipment for the Belgian armed forces,  a 75 million euro saving has been imposed on the defense budget.  The government has decided to reduce the procurement and modernization budget by 32 million euro.  Quoting Defense Minister Flahaut stressing that "defense is the last priority for this government,"  the newspaper adds:  "Some circles close to NATO Secretary General Robertson have indicated that Belgium would only be taken seriously if it takes care of its armed forces.   If Belgium wants to take part in the development of  a European army and keep a significant place within NATO, it must, with its European partners,  invest to fill the technological gap with the United States."   Against this background, the newspaper quotes Gen. Ralston saying:  "The United States provides NATO with 100 percent of its jamming capability, 90 percent of aerial surveillance and almost 80 percent of the in-flight refueling capability." 

In a contribution to The Guardian, Dan Plesch, senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute,  criticizes President Bush pre-emptive attack doctrine and suggests that at the Prague summit, "NATO should call Bush's bluff."

Next month President Bush will address the NATO summit in Prague.  His advisers intend that Europe will agree that his doctrine of pre-emptive attack be added to NATO's policy toolkit.  But now is not the time for NATO to sign up to the Bush doctrine.  Instead, the strength of its 19 democracies must be applied to containing the U.S. administration and reinforcing NATO's historical role, Plesch writes. He adds:   Until now, NATO has operated within the UN context.  Deterrence and arms control are still central to its strategy.  In answer to criticism that NATO was prepared to use its nuclear weapons first in the event of a Russian attack, NATO used to argue that it would never be the first to use force. Now the U.S. administration is seeking to overturn this approach.  We cannot allow this to be done.  There is a traditional process that the U.S. has used in the past to get agreement at NATO from reluctant allies.  It consists of distracting attention from the main issues, which are then agreed in secret documents which the Europeans do not have to account for to their parliaments.  The reality is that the U.S. has a long-term strategic interest in Europe and, in fact, the more independence Europe shows in defense policy, the more, not less, likely the U.S. is to want to stay involved.  Were the U.S. to pull out of Europe, it would leave a yawning gap in its global command structure.  For SACEUR, NATO is just part of his responsibilities, which stretch from South Africa to Siberia.  Four other U.S. officers are tasked with controlling the rest of the world and "shaping" their regions to suit U.S. interests.  Full Spectrum Dominance is the central idea in U.S. military planning.  You may want the Pentagon to take home its nukes and troops if we reject its strategy and back the international criminal court, but they aren't going anywhere. So this is bluff can be called. 

BALKANS

An op-ed in the International Herald Tribune opines that the electoral victory of nationalists in Bosnia-Herzegovina suggests it is time for the international community to make a serious re-examination of what is happening in that country and admit that the Dayton accords  were not the solution.

The republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina is an artificial state improvised at the Dayton negotiations.  It was imposed on the people of that unhappy country under American and NATO pressures, to stop inter-ethnic slaughter, says the article, adding:  "With a low electoral turnout and final results yet to be announced, the three individuals apparently elected to the collegial presidency all represent the nationalist parties..  Compromises and coalitions will be necessary before the final complexion of the government becomes clear, but liberal, secular and multiethnic forces have lost. It now seems necessary for the international community to admit that the Dayton solution was not a solution.  It was a way to end a war..  Democratic values may better prosper if Bosnia-Herzegovina is partitioned once again.  Realism demands that this be discussed."

EU

¨         According to Reuters, Greece said Thursday there was no reason why the EU should not set a date to start accession talks with Turkey at its December summit.  A day after the European Commission said Turkey was not ready yet, Foreign Minister Papandreou reportedly told Greek radio: " I believe a positive message to Turkey must be sent from (the EU summit in) Copenhagen."  Asked if this message could even be a specific date for the start of negotiations, he reportedly said:  "Why not, we can even that."