|
SHAPE
News Summary & Analysis
20 August
2004
IRAQ
- Italy’s
ANSA news agency quotes Deputy NATO Secretary General Rizzo
saying in an interview Thursday that the NATO training mission in
Iraq had
started with “classes” at some Iraqi headquarters and
through contacts with the Defense Ministry. “This NATO group
has been in Iraq since Aug. 15 and is starting its work…. (It)
has started training at Iraqi headquarters, which is already a practical
implementation. It is also meeting with Iraqi authorities, to include
the defense minister and his staff, to verify what the training needs
are, at various levels,” Rizzo reportedly said. “A proposal
will be formulated by this group of experts and should be examined
by the NAC on Sept. 15,” he added. According to the dispatch,
he warned that it would be pure speculation before that date
to assess how many NATO instructors will be eventually involved,
or if training
will be conducted at the NATO Defense College, the NATO School at
Oberammergau, or at the Joint Warfare Center at Stavanger. Rizzo
reportedly did not anticipate any renewed confrontation on the issue
within NATO. Noting that the most controversial issue is about the
chain of command, he said: “I do not anticipate major discussions.
I do not believe it is a difficult problem…. What we have is
a good agreement, because the decision by the heads of state in Istanbul
was to have a NATO role in the training of the Iraqi armed and security
forces. And training does not mean, by definition, participation
in operations. Ultimately, the NAC will always have control over
the operation.” The dispatch reports that Rizzo would not elaborate
on extraction capabilities the mission would need if attacked or
subject to hostage situation.
UNITED STATES-TROOP BASING
- BBC News quoted Gen. Charles Wald, deputy head of EUCOM, saying
Thursday the United States will not move EUCOM, which monitors
an area covering 91 countries, from Germany amid plans for a redeployment
of
the U.S. troop presence in Europe and Asia. According to the program,
Gen. Wald also indicated that the withdrawal of about 30,000 soldiers
from the heavier armored fighting divisions will not take place before
2006, so that the views of the German government can be taken into
account.
President Bush’s announcement that the United States plans
to bring home up to 70,000 troops from Europe and Asia within a decade
is still generating interest. Media continued to express the view
that the U.S. decision puts pressure on Europe’s defense plans.
“
U.S. troop withdrawals from Europe call for EU’s own defense,” commented
Helsinki’s Hufvudstadsbladet, Aug. 18, explaining: “Europe’s
threat pictures include Moslem migrations, terrorism and Yugoslavia-type
crises. If isolationist ideas again become popular in a war-weary
United States, the result could be that not only Europe but also
Asia will have to take care of their own conflict. The EU would therefore
need a defense force, or at least a joint command.”
“
The U.S. decision is a good reason for the European NATO countries
to put their future role under revision,” wrote Norwegian daily
Viby Jyllands-Posten, Aug. 18, The newspaper acknowledged, however,
that the announced troop withdrawals “make sense.” It
continued: “It makes no sense either politically or militarily
to have large contingents of U.S. troops standing by in Europe; much
less at a time when the demands on the U.S. defense have drastically
changed their nature. The military requirements radically changed
after Sept. 11, 2001. The United States no longer has any use for
a large number of overseas bases and military installations. Instead,
it needs forces with great mobility and striking power.”
In Die Welt, Aug. 19, German historian Michael Stuermer pondered
the significance of the planned U.S. troop withdrawal.
One must think carefully about what one prays for--the prayers could
be granted, Stuermer wrote, adding: “The contemporary form
of the old ‘Ami go home’ is the idea that Europe is chosen
to form a counter pole under France’s leadership and a helpless
going along by Germany…. Whoever believes to be able to unite
Europe, without or against the United States, will destroy it. The
United States, like other nations, is its own best friend. Among
its interests have always been Europe’s security. During the
Cold War, the form for it was NATO. Today, the United States operates
the Alliance as a tool chest, while the Europeans view it as a wonderwork
that delivers security at the bottom without one having to contribute
on top, for instance investments, military transformation, strategic
solidarity. The Istanbul summit did not change that. NATO is larger
and more helpless than ever before. A strategic alliance, however,
in which no one can rely any longer on the other, has it best times
behind it.”
|
