News Summary & Analysis
1
July 2004
GENERAL
JONES-OLYMPICS
- Gen.
Jones discusses Olympic security with Greek officials
AFGHANISTAN
- Dutch
government willing to lead PRT in Afghanistan
- UN,
Afghans divided on election date deadline
|
GENERAL JONES-OLYMPICS
- AP reports
that during an informal one-day visit to Athens Thursday,
Gen. Jones discussed Olympic security plans with Public Order
Minister Voulgarakis and the Greek General Staff. “We
had a meeting on issues dealing with NATO’s contribution
and had a very good discussion. We will have more meetings
with (Gen. Jones) and other officials until the Olympics start
on the issue of forces that will be deployed for security,”
the dispatch quotes Voulgarakis saying. NATO will
help safeguard the Olympics, supplying AWACS, ships and an
anti-chemical warfare unit, it notes.
AFGHANISTAN
- NRC
Handelsblad, June 29, reported that at the Istanbul
summit, Prime Minister Balkenende told NATO heads of state
and government that as of mid-September, the Netherlands would
send 120 to 150 troops to Afghanistan to run a PRT in the
northern province of Baghlan. Troops would come mainly
from the Peel-based guided-arms air force squadron and will
be supplemented by army and navy troops. They will stay for
one year, Balkenende reportedly said. The daily stressed that
the Second Chamber, which still has to approve the
Baghlan mission, reacted positively to the government’s
plan. It added, however, that Parliament will not
be able to decide on the mission until next week, at the earliest,
after the start of the parliamentary recess.
- According
to AP, the UN said Thursday Afghan and UN officials
are divided on whether national elections can go ahead as
planned in September. The dispatch notes that President
Karzai has insisted there should be no fresh delay in the
vote. It adds, however, that a spokesman for the UN, which
shares power in Afghanistan’s electoral management body,
said there was no agreement yet on when the vote will happen,
stressing: “There is indeed a debate. Of course, if
the debate goes on, that will have an impact on the election
date.” Afghan members of the commission reportedly either
declined to comment or could not be reached Thursday. The
dispatch stresses that under Afghan law, polling day
must be set 90 days in advance. That makes Friday the last
chance to announce a Sept. 30 election. Some commission
members have suggested that the vote will be in October—the
last month before villages in the Hindu Kush mountains can
be cut off by snow, adds the dispatch.
In
the wake of the Istanbul summit, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung
looks at NATO’s future.
The article says: “If official statements by the NATO
leadership are taken at face value, then Americans and Europeans
have found their way back to realism, and the Alliance is on
its way to recovery. NATO is said to be getting increasingly
more important and is the ‘indispensable’ security
organization of the 21st century, the promises say. One would
like to exclaim: that would be nice. But is it really out of
the woods?” Stressing that the Iraq conflict was not the
only thing to disrupt the Alliance, the article continues: “The
ultimate test consists in the transformation from a defensive
alliance to a potentially worldwide deployable security organization,
which takes on threats where they develop. The projection of
stability becomes one of NATO’s core tasks…. Whether
NATO will actually find its way to new unity and determination
with stability projection and a bundle of partnerships depends
also, but not solely, on a successful resolution of crises.
If the United States continues to organize its global political-military
actions with easily-led ‘coalitions of the willing,’
… the Alliance relations would corrode and the Alliance
would turn into a tool box, whose parts would be more important
than the whole. There are indications that the Bush administration
is in the process of rediscovering the value of the organization,
but the trend toward bilateralization still prevails. To be
sure, it makes little sense for the United States’ European
partners to complain about this method if they themselves still
encourage it: by not fulfilling their obligations, or only insufficiently,
and by opening up their defense budgets for other ministries
to loot. More and more European members are thus withdrawing
from the circle of those who are even capable of partnership.
Keeping NATO together is therefore being undermined by the two
sides. And yet, regardless of the crisis symptoms, NATO is attractive.
In Istanbul the heads of state and government of by now 26 member
nations met for the first time. Croatia, Albania and the Former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia are the next candidates; Georgia
and Azerbaijan are also pushing toward the West…. Analyzing
together, deciding together, acting together—that would
be a formula with which NATO could assure the continued existence
as a partnership of convenience. Even if that would not yet
get at the core problem, the serious imbalance in military strength,
it would be the right political approach for dealing with the
crises of the present—together.”
|