The dangers of NATO’s power play

The past two years has seen a significant rise in the tension between Russia and NATO. Aggravated by Russia’s annexation of the Crimea, the tension surrounding Russia’s belligerent behaviour has caused an upsurge in sabre rattling from Central and Eastern Europe to the Nordic and Baltic Regions.

From predictions by former NATO deputy commander, British General Sir Alexander Richard Sherriff, that NATO will be at war with Russia by 2017, to the pronouncements by Swedish Armed Forces’ Maj. Gen.Anders Brännström that: “we could be at war within a few years”, security is paramount for the countries surrounding Russia.

NO DENIAL: HOW NATO CAN DETER A CREEPING RUSSIAN THREAT

Russia’s Vladimir Putin disregards arms control agreements, places sophisticated weapons close to NATO’s borders, and deliberately sows uncertainty over his intentions. He is creating no-go areas in parts of Eastern Europe, making NATO allies nervous and challenging Europe’s security order. But NATO can still deter him.

If Russia Started a War in the Baltics, NATO Would Lose — Quickly

If  Russian tanks and troops rolled into the Baltics tomorrow, outgunned and outnumbered NATO forces would be overrun in under three days. That’s the sobering conclusion of war games carried out by a think tank with American military officers and civilian officials.

“The games’ findings are unambiguous: As currently postured, NATO cannot successfully defend the territory of its most exposed members,” said a report by the Rand Corp., which led the war gaming research.

Will NATO trigger a war with Russia?

Heads of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) are considering sending 4,000 ground troops in to Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia as a response to Russia’s actions in the Crimea and Ukraine. Could war be on the horizon? What are the alternatives to securing peace?       

If there is one thing we have learnt from history it is that wars are costly and messy affairs. Despite this, is seems as if NATO’s brinksmanship strategy may push America and its European partners into a threatening confrontation with Russia, a situation they have been working hard to avoid.

Russia Targets NATO With Military Exercises

Russian military exercises, the latest in a series across the country, have taken on a threatening posture. While the most recent installment is not the largest exercise Russia has conducted, the areas involved and the forces included seem to have been deliberately chosen to send a warning to NATO; the exercise itself seems to simulate a full-scale confrontation with NATO through the forward deployment of nuclear armed submarines, theater ballistic missiles and strategic bomber aircraft. Strategic weapon systems, including assets that are part of Russia's nuclear capabilities, have also been deployed to locations near NATO's borders.

Why Moldova Urgently Matters

"NATO's Article 5 offers little protection against Vladimir Putin's Russia," Iulian Fota, Romania's presidential national security adviser, told me on a recent visit to Bucharest. "Article 5 protects Romania and other Eastern European countries against a military invasion. But it does not protect them against subversion," that is, intelligence activities, the running of criminal networks, the buying-up of banks and other strategic assets, and indirect control of media organs to undermine public opinion. Moreover, Article 5 does not protect Eastern Europe against reliance on Russian energy. As Romanian President Traian Basescu told me, Romania is a somewhat energy-rich island surrounded by a Gazprom empire. The president ran his finger over a map showing how Romania's neighbors such as Bulgaria and Hungary were almost completely dependent on Russian natural gas, while Romania -- because of its own hydrocarbon reserves -- still has a significant measure of independence. In the 21st century, the president explained, Gazprom is more dangerous than the Russian army. The national security adviser then added: "Putin is not an apparatchik; he is a former intelligence officer," implying that Putin will act subtly. Putin's Russia will not fight conventionally for territory in the former satellite states, but unconventionally for hearts and minds, Fota went on. "Putin knows that the flaw of the Soviet Union was that it did not have soft power."

NATO: Russia might achieve goals in eastern Ukraine without invasion

(Reuters) - NATO's top military commander in Europe said on Monday he no longer thought regular Russian troops would enter eastern Ukraine, predicting Moscow could achieve its goals through the unconventional forces stirring up trouble there.

NATO: The Evolution of the Alliance

NATO was originally created as a counterweight to the might of the Soviet Union after World War II. The deep yet fractious roots that enabled the alliance to prosper have also presented challenges to its leadership and management. More than an organization, NATO is best envisioned as an overarching structure made up of individual, autonomous parts, each with different thought processes, competencies and imperatives. NATO adapted to survive beyond the Cold War but its continued existence remains under threat.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was conceived and designed as an intergovernmental military alliance, based on the principle of collective defense. At its inception four years after the end of World War II, NATO was primarily seen as a deterrent against Soviet aggression in Western Europe, keeping vulnerable states in a Western orbit and checking the rise of Eurasian power.

The head of NATO says Europe has misread Vladimir Putin for years and now must scramble to push back

By Sohrab Ahmari

 
Until recently, members of the Russian delegation to NATO were free to roam at will about the Western alliance's headquarters here on the outskirts of the Belgian capital. The Russians had an awkward habit of listening intently to others' conversations at the cafeteria, yet their presence was tolerated in the name of dialogue.

Not anymore. In response to Vladimir Putin's annexation of Crimea, NATO earlier this month suspended all practical cooperation with Moscow. Now most of the 70 or so Russian personnel enjoy about the same level of access to the alliance headquarters as journalists. It's a small but significant sign of what NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen calls "the new security environment" in Europe. 

Searching for Deterrence: Ukraine Crisis Exposes Gaps Between Berlin and NATO

DPA

Once the Cold War ended, Western militaries reduced their focus on military deterrence in Europe. As a consequence, the Ukraine crisis has caught NATO flat-footed as it rushes to find an adequate response to Russia. Germany has been reluctant to go along.

NATO's Putin Conundrum: Berlin Considers Its Alliance Options

DPA

German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen has demanded a stronger NATO presence in Eastern Europe. But that makes some in Chancellor Merkel's government uncomfortable. As the alliance moves to reassure eastern allies, Berlin considers its options.

NATO Must Focus on South Atlantic, Arctic to Remain Relevant

The coming end of the Afghanistan operation that has defined NATO for the past decade marks the end of an era for the alliance. Its mission in the next decade will look drastically different. 

Geopolitical Journey: Nostalgia for NATO

Several years ago, I wrote a series of articles on a journey in Europe. It was intended both to be personal and to go beyond recent events or the abstract considerations of geopolitics. This week I begin another journey that will take me from Portugal to Singapore, and I thought that I would try my hand again at reflecting on the significance of my travels.

As I prepare for my journey, I am drawn to a central question regarding the U.S.-European relationship, or what remains of it. Having been in Europe at a time when that relationship meant everything to both sides, and to the world, this trip forces me to think about NATO. I have been asked to make several speeches about U.S.-European relations during my upcoming trip. It is hard to know where to start. The past was built around NATO, so thinking about NATO's past might help me put things in perspective.

NATO and the costs of star wars

Over the last decade, the US has spent tens of billions of dollars constructing a shield to stop nuclear missiles from North Korea or Iran reaching its soil. So far, the shield does not work. Fortunately for the Americans, neither Pyongyang nor Tehran has nuclear missiles that could hit the US. Unfortunately, however, America's missile defence programme has upset China and Russia, two countries that do have nuclear arsenals that could reach its homeland. America's European partners in NATO should try to convince Washington to scale back its missile defence ambitions for the next few years. Not only would this allow the US government to spend its shrinking defence budget on more pressing military needs. It would also improve European security by reducing tensions between NATO and Russia. 
Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US has been increasingly worried about nuclear attacks by 'rogue' states. In 1998, a study group chaired by Donald Rumsfeld predicted that North Korea and Iran could field intercontinental ballistic missiles within five years. Today, however, Iran has neither intercontinental missiles nor a nuclear bomb. In March of this year, a report from the Pentagon's intelligence agency (erroneously declassified) assessed "with moderate confidence" that Pyongyang could build a nuclear device that fits on a missile. But there is still no evidence that North Korean missiles are sophisticated enough to reach the US. 

Kerry: NATO should consider response to Syria WMD threat

US Secretary of State John Kerry said on Tuesday that NATO needed to consider its role in the Syrian crisis, including how it would respond to a potential chemical weapons threat.
"We need to continue to consider NATO's role as it relates to the Syrian crisis," Kerry told a meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Brussels, adding that the planning that the alliance had already done was appropriate.

US Patriot missile battery crews arrive in Turkey

The "Patriot" surface-to-air missile system is presented during a media day by the German Armed Forces in Warbelow, northern Germany, on December 18, 2012. (AFP Photo / Bernd Wustneck)

A group of 27 US troops has arrived in Turkey to operate NATO Patriot surface-to-air (SAM) missile batteries. At least six of those will be deployed along the country’s border with Syria.

The troops arrived in the southeastern province of Gaziantep on Thursday and were taken to a local hotel by Turkish security forces, local media reported.

NATO says anti-missile defense for Turkey does not open door to Syria no-fly zone

NATO agreed Tuesday to send new American-made air defenses to Turkey’s volatile border with Syria, a boost to an alliance member on the front lines of the civil war and a potential backstop for wider U.S. or NATO air operations if Syria deteriorates further.

View Photo Gallery — NATO foreign ministers meet at the Alliance's headquarters in Brussels on Dec. 4, 2012. NATO foreign ministers will agree on Tuesday to send Patriot missiles to beef up Turkey's air defenses and calm Turkey's fears that it could come under missile attack from Syria. Click through for photos of fighting in Syria.

The military alliance’s approval of Patriot anti-missile batteries for southern Turkey represents NATO’s first significant military involvement in the 20-month-long crisis, even if at the very margins. NATO and U.S. officials insisted that the system is entirely devoted to defending Turkey and is not a precursor to military intervention in Syria. The system would provide no protection for Syrian civilians or rebels fighting to unseat President Bashar al-Assad.

NATO to remain in Afghanistan until 2014 despite calls for quicker withdrawal

NATO’s top official said Thursday the alliance remains committed to help enable Afghan forces assume full responsibility for the country’s security after 2014, when coalition troops are due to end their combat mission.

The statement by visiting Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen comes amid speculation that the U.S.-led alliance could accelerate its withdrawal plans.

Nato express regret after airstrike kills civilians

Nato officials have expressed their regret after civilians were killed in an airstrike in Afghanistan which was targeting known insurgents.

Afghan government officials said that Nato planes had killed eight women and girls from a remote part of Laghman province's Alingar district, a claim initially rejected by the US-led coalition.

However, the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) - as the coalition is known - later acknowledged that civilians had been killed and expressed its regret over the airstrike. It insisted known insurgents had been the target.

"ISAF takes full responsibility for this tragedy," a statement said.

Villagers drove the bodies to the Laghman provincial capital, claiming they were killed by Nato aircraft while they were out gathering firewood before dawn.

Life after NATO

NATO's announcement that it will pull out its 130,000 troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2014 and hand over control to Afghan security forces has been open to criticism.

On the one hand it was seen as giving hope to the Taliban, allowing them to believe that all they need do is to sit patiently and wait as Western forces withdraw. On the other, it was seen as jeopardising attempts to strengthen the Afghan state, by creating disincentives for Afghan officials to invest time and money in the country’s future.