Washington: NATO is reassessing its situation with regards to China, a top American envoy to the powerful military grouping has said, asserting that Beijing is on its radar more than ever in the past.

China can be a peaceful partner but it is not projecting that at the moment, Kay Bailey Hutchison, US Permanent Representative to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), told reporters at a virtual meeting here.

"China could be a peaceful partner, a good trade partner, but they're not showing that right now, and I think NATO partners are looking at this, and NATO is beginning to assess what China is doing as well," she said.

"It's much more on our radar screen, and I think it should be because we should assess the risk, hope for the best but prepare for the worst," Hutchison said on the aggressive behaviour and provocative actions of China against Taiwan, Japan and India.

On whether a risk of an actual military confrontation was on the horizon, she said, "I think NATO is now looking to the East."

Everything that has been happening with the 5G networks is being dealt with in the US and Europe throughout the alliance, Hutchison said.

"We're trying to keep our communications secure and seeing that some of the Chinese competitors do not have the capability to control the contractual obligations that are made by communications providers all of those things, including the Belt and Road Initiative, are raising concerns, concerns among our allies, about what is the intent of China," she said.

The United States is very clear that it wants China to be a partner in the world order and it is known that China has stolen intellectual property, violated tariff and subsidies set down by the world courts and the World Trade Organization, Hutchison said.

"So we know that China has the capability to compete on a level playing field, and we're asking them to do that, but we're also turning a wary eye to their behaviour right now in the South China Sea, militarising islands that they said would never be done, as well as the clampdown on Hong Kong," she said.

Read more:

China is on NATO radar more than ever, says US envoy - Economic Times

Russia will see Poland as a threat if NATO facilities are deployed in that country. The spokesman for the President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Peskov said this to the Channel One reporters, as RBC reports.

"As a country ready to provide its territory for the military infrastructure of third countries or for an organization such as the North Atlantic Alliance, this poses a threat to us," Peskov said.

He noted that at the moment, Russia does not consider Poland a country of danger. However, "a consistent drift of NATO's military infrastructure" toward Russian borders is undesirable for Moscow. According to Peskov, this is forcing Russia to strengthen measures to guarantee security.

On June 19, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov called NATO's "provocative" actions in the Baltic states and Poland.

In March of this year, Polish Foreign Minister Jacek Czaputowicz announced the creation of up to six new NATO military facilities for various purposes in the country.

In addition, in May, the United States announced its intention to redeploy part of its military contingent from Germany to Poland.

Read more from the original source:

Poland to turn into threat for Russia in case of strengthening of NATO presence, - Peskov - 112 International

On 19 June 2020, NATO Deputy Secretary General Mircea Geoan participated in an online discussion of the Copenhagen Democracy Summit. The session about the Military Backbone of Democracy covered the current global security issues we face today and the resulting new challenges for global multilateral cooperation, including the COVID-19 outbreak. The Deputy Secretary General gave his perspectives on how the military and security partnership is important for democracy.

Speaking about COVID-19, he underlined that while all countries have been challenged by the pandemic, NATO nations have come together to support each other. He stressed that military forces from across the Alliance have transported medical personnel and hundreds of tons of supplies, facilitated the construction of almost 100 field hospitals.Speaking about the economic recovery, the Deputy Secretary General underlined that the security and defence sector can also be a powerful engine for economic recovery, as investments in critical infrastructure, logistics, and military mobility can boost jobs, investment and innovation.The Deputy Secretary General concluded that it is important for international peace and security that all countries act within the framework of international law to ensure stability and predictability and promote cooperation.

See the original post here:

NATO Deputy Secretary General stresses the importance of security partnership for democracy - NATO HQ

During the early morning of 15 June, Typhoons from RAF Coningsby met up with two US Ai Force (USAF) B-52 bombers off the North of Scotland as they arrived from their base in the USA to conduct a long-range strategic training mission in the annual NATO BALTOPs exercise in the Baltic region.

The Typhoons welcomed the B-52s as they entered UK airspace and then escorted them across the North Sea as they were refuelled by USAF KC-135 tankers from RAF Mildenhall. The Typhoons from XI(F) Sqn were supported by a Voyager tanker from RAF Brize Norton, with coordination being provided by RAF Sentry and Sentinel aircraft from RAF Waddington.

As the B-52s from the 5th Bomb Wing, Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota left Danish airspace, they conducted additional training with French Mirage 2000 and then RAF Typhoon jets from the Baltic Air Policing mission as they flew over Latvia and Estonia.

Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said:

NATO remains the best guarantor of our collective security and we continue to stand alongside our allies in the Baltics. That is why, despite the ongoing pandemic, the RAFs participation in this multinational exercise is vital for enhancing Allied capabilities and demonstrating our combined strength.

The following day Typhoons from the RAF Lossiemouth based 6 Sqn deployed in Lithuania, switched from the BALTOPS exercise to intercept a SU-24 Fencer E and two SU-35 Flanker M Russian aircraft operating off the Baltic coast. This was followed on the 18 June by another Typhoon scramble to deter and intercept a Russian IL-20 COOT A intelligence gathering aircraft over the Baltic Sea.

Wing Commander Stu Gwinnett, the 135 Expeditionary Air Wing commander that is carrying out the NATO Air Policing mission said:

This weeks missions have highlighted the flexibility of the NATO Baltic Air Policing mission; whether its working with the US Bomber Task Force or reacting to live Baltic airspace incursions, we are ready to react. This is a testament to the flexibility, training and professionalism of the deployed RAF personnel here in Lithuania and our ability to work with our NATO partners.

Reflecting on the air activity this week Air Chief Marshal Mike Wigston, the Chief of the Air Staff said:

In a week that has been a painful reminder of the dangers of what we do, we have also demonstrated air and space power on a global scale, operating at range, at speed, and precisely. Royal Air Force command and control, surveillance, refuelling and fighter aircraft working alongside our NATO allies, patrolling our skies and protecting our shared freedom.

See original here:

RAF Fighter Jets, Surveillance and Refuelling aircraft have been in action across Europe this week in support of NATO allies - GOV.UK

Defense News' Sebastian Sprenger explains why NATO and partner forces are training, despite the pandemic.

COLOGNE, Germany Buoyed by the recent Allied Spirit exercise in Poland, U.S. Army officials in Europe are eyeing a resumption of their training schedule amid the continued danger of the coronavirus and talk in Washington of removing almost 10,000 troops from Germany.

We continue to fight for opportunities to train, Brig. Gen. Christopher Norrie, the head of 7th Army Training Command based at Grafenwhr, Germany, said in an interview. That is, so long as relevant health protocols can be followed, he added.

The exercise at the Drawsko Pomorskie Training Area in northwestern Poland, which ended on Friday, served as something of a trial balloon on whether live training can be done at all. The drill was an offspring of the larger Defender Europe-20 training campaign that had to be curtailed somewhat when the novel coronavirus outbreak swept through Europe in March.

There is some momentum that we expect to build coming out of Allied Spirit in preparation for the remainder of the summer, Norrie told Defense News. All of the resources are aligned, the commands in place.

The general idea of these exercises is to demonstrate a U.S. commitment to Europe vis-a-vis Russia, which officials here believe is feeling out the limits of NATOs resolve on the continent.

In that context, the river-crossing drill takes on a relevant strategic flavor. The area in Poland, a critical strip of land connecting Western Europe to the Baltic states, is riddled with rivers and lakes.

Sign up for our Early Bird Brief Get the defense industry's most comprehensive news and information straight to your inbox

Subscribe

Enter a valid email address (please select a country) United States United Kingdom Afghanistan Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, The Democratic Republic of The Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote D'ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guinea Guinea-bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Micronesia, Federated States of Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory, Occupied Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and The Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia and Montenegro Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and The South Sandwich Islands Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan, Province of China Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States United States Minor Outlying Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Viet Nam Virgin Islands, British Virgin Islands, U.S. Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe

Thanks for signing up!

By giving us your email, you are opting in to the Early Bird Brief.

Whats more, the exercise saw a fictitious enemy composed of Polish and U.S. troops mount a defensive strategy aimed pushing soldiers back from the body of water at center of the event, Zly Leg Lake.

Elements of the 1st Cavalry Division, based at Fort Hood, Texas, also participated in the event, by way of a data link through the Joint Multinational Readiness Center at the Hohenfels Training Area in Bavaria.

The fact that we would commit to doing this live in such a demanding, relevant environment against such a determined opposing force is a very tangible expression of our commitment not only to our own organization and our own formations, but also in support of our NATO partners and allies throughout Europe, Norrie said.

Germany is something of a hub for U.S. Army training and staging in Europe, though that status is now in question given a push by U.S. President Donald Trump to move 9,500 troops from the country to Poland.

Little has trickled down about exactly what is in store, however. Kay Bailey Hutchison, the U.S. representative to NATO, said no final decisions have been made. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, meanwhile, told reporters he had no information about how and when the Trump administration wants to proceed.

Military leaders, too, are still in the dark. Gen. Jeffrey Harrigian, the head of Air Forces in Europe told reporters last week that he had received no instructions toward a drawdown from Germany.

As a one-star officer, the current drawdown debate is above his pay grade, Norrie admitted. There is no change in mission to provide lethal, credible, ready combat formations in support of U.S. Army Europe and U.S. European Command, and we continue to focus on that, he said.

In creating the command's training curriculum, the officials study reports of adversary activity worldwide, including tactics in the domains of hybrid warfare, countering drones, and electronic warfare, according to Norrie.

One relatively new tack is aimed at reducing units' electromagnetic footprint in the field. That includes eliminating vulnerabilities stemming from the use of personal electronic equipment like phones or smart watches.

Those lessons partly stem from reports from eastern Ukraine, where Russian-backed separatists were able to track Ukrainian forces through their communications activity, directing drone-aided long-range fires at the formations.

Original post:

US Army training resumes in Europe amid pandemic and the threat of troop cuts - DefenseNews.com

The world needs stronger American leadership, former NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen told Euronews, warning of a resurgence in authoritarianism across the world.

He was speaking from the Copenhagen Democracy Summit, an annual event that he hosts and which aims to strengthen democracies worldwide through debate.

"We lack a clear, global American ideological leadership. We know from experience that when the Americans retreat, they will leave behind a vacuum, and that vacuum will be filled by the bad guy, and that's exactly what we are witnessing right now," Rasmussen told Euronews in a live TV interview.

Take the Middle East, he said, citing conflict, upheaval and the resurgence of Russia, Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia in the region ever since the United States disengaged from Syria.

"The world needs a policeman to restore international law and order and I don't see any other candidate for that role than the United States," Rasmussen said.

In the meantime, he suggests setting up an alliance of democracies led by what he would like to call the D10 a group of leaders similar to the G7 that would bring together not the worlds economic heavyweights, but "democratic heavyweights like India, Australia and South Korea."

US President Trump is pulling troops out of Germany, and according to his former national security adviser John Bolton, he was on the brink of pulling out of NATO altogether. French President Emmanuel Macron also warned last year that NATO was nearly "brain dead."

Rasmussen deplored that statements like these undermine "the political credibility of the alliance".

"Of course, Europe should take more care of its own security, that goes without saying," he added. "But I consider European security linked to America."

"This is exactly why we established NATO many years ago because we need American close cooperation with Europe to ensure our security."

Visit link:

The world needs a policeman, the bad guys are filling the US vacuum, says ex-NATO chief Rasmussen - Euronews

HELSINKI The Nordic countries are pushing to deepen trans-Atlantic defense collaboration with the United States in the High North amid fears that the Trump administrations mixed messages on NATO could lead to a diminished presence by the alliance in Northern Europe.

Concerns over NATOs capacity to counter potential threats by Russia in the strategic High North and Baltic Sea regions has reignited interest by the Nordic countries, led by Sweden, to explore the development of joint naval, air and mechanized rapid-response infantry units. Nordic leaders have been tentatively discussing the possible formation of common capacities since 2016. However, little in terms of real substantive plans have emerged from the cross-border dialogue to date.

Nordic collaboration in defense continues to evolve. We are looking to find new ways to cooperate in practical areas that can deliver improved security in the High North and Baltic Sea areas, said Antti Kaikkonen, Finlands defense minister.

Non-aligned Arctic states Sweden and Finland have already conducted bilateral talks to consider the formation of joint fighter squadrons and Arctic-specific, modular-designed, rapid-response brigades. The long-term expectation is that neighboring NATO states Denmark and Norway would join the group under the umbrella of the existing Nordic Defense Cooperation pact.

Of the four Nordic defense partners, Norway is the most enthusiastic supporter for an enlarged role for U.S. and NATO forces in the Arctic High North.

Faced with Russias continued scaling-up of its defense infrastructure on the Kola Peninsula, coupled with a surge in multi-branch exercises by Russian forces closer to its borders, Norways immediate response has been to raise spending to bolster military preparedness and capacities.

Aside from a strong desire to see the United States play a more robust role in the security of the region, Nordic governments are also interested in deepening defense cooperation with Germany.

Sign up for our Early Bird Brief Get the defense industry's most comprehensive news and information straight to your inbox

Subscribe

Enter a valid email address (please select a country) United States United Kingdom Afghanistan Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, The Democratic Republic of The Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote D'ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guinea Guinea-bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Micronesia, Federated States of Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory, Occupied Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and The Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia and Montenegro Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and The South Sandwich Islands Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan, Province of China Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States United States Minor Outlying Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Viet Nam Virgin Islands, British Virgin Islands, U.S. Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe

Thanks for signing up!

By giving us your email, you are opting in to the Early Bird Brief.

Nordic defense ministers conducted a video-link conference with the German Defence Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer on June 18. The meeting focused on key security and defense issues, including regional security and future challenges in maintaining a healthy trans-Atlantic alliance.

Germany is an important actor and partner not alone in Europe, but also in the Baltic Sea region. We share common interests regarding the security situation in Northern Europe. This is a well-developed cooperation we want to expand, said Peter Hultqvist, Swedens defense minister.

For Norway, the potential threats posed by Russia to long-term security in the High North regions is encapsulated in the governments Long-Term Defense Plan 2020-2024 (LTDP) for Norways Armed Forces, released on April 17. The 123-page document refers to Russia a total of 58 times in the context of presenting a military threat and provoking instability in the High North and Baltic Sea theaters.

The plan aspires to combine Norwegian capability working in partnership with a strong commitment and presence by the U.S. and NATO to counter any future security threat by Russia in the High North, said Norwegian Defence Minister Frank Bakke-Jensen.

"Norway needs to have a regular and predictable presence in the High North. We want to ensure stability and retain the influence we have in the security development in our own neighborhood. We are strengthening both our military capacity on the one hand and cooperation with NATO and the US on the other," Bakke-Jensen said.

The LTDP document observes that Russia currently poses a bigger threat to regional security than has been the case for several decades. Significantly, the Norwegian government is also busy improving channels of communication between Oslo and Moscow in order to enhance its working relationships with Russias leaders and military top brass.

The potential of Russias military power has significantly changed in the last number of years. The countrys behavior has become increasingly assertive and venturous. Russia is prepared and willing to apply a wide specter of military and non-military means to fulfill its goals, the LTDP report concludes.

In practical terms, the plan adds $1.73 billion to the Norwegian Armed Forces, or NAF, budget over the next 8-years. The extra monies will be used for major capital investment programs to reinforce the overall capability and fire-power of the NAFs Arctic-based Brigade North.

Critical procurements for the NAF will include new armored combat vehicles and long-range precision weapons. A new mobile unit dedicated to chemical, biological, radioactive and nuclear defense will be established.

Importantly, Norways ramped-up military spending addresses capacity shortcomings in core areas naval and air-defense strength. To this end the NAF will add four new-build submarines to its naval fleet by 2030. The Army will upgrade its existing NASAMS air-defense system with modern sensors and acquire a long-range air defense system to counter threats from short-range ballistic missiles. The NAF will also form a new extreme climate maritime special force unit called the Special Operations Task Group.

In the unified Nordic defense domain, national governments support the expansion of more regular joint training and multi-branch exercises in cooperation with NATO in the High North and the Baltic Sea theaters.

In May, Swedish JAS 39 Gripen fighters joined Norwegian F-35s as part of a wider, long-range strategic bombers task force mission that included American B-1B Lancers from the 28th Bomb Wing out of Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota.

The May 20 exercise was notable in that it was the first time US strategic long-range bombers participated in exercises over Swedish airspace. For the Swedish Air Force, the mission included refueling of JAS 39 Gripens from American KC-135 Stratotankers.

Although not a NATO-member, Sweden signed a host-country agreement with NATO in 2014 allowing Allied Forces to conduct joint training exercises in the country.

Exercises like these are important. They enable us to demonstrate interoperability and our role as a reliable and relevant partner. The trans-Atlantic link and combined exercises with U.S. air units serve to increase our capability and create security and stability in the High North and Baltic Sea regions, said Maj. Gen. Carl-Johan Edstrm, the Swedish Air Forces commander.

See more here:

Nordic militaries rekindle old alliances, as Russia warms to the region - DefenseNews.com

Welcome to Further Details, a recurring column where we investigate what purpose an oft-overlooked product element actually serves. This week: the extra keeper and length of material on the underside of NATO watch straps.

NATO straps are a fun, inexpensive and easy way to add some color and uniqueness to a watch. Military in origin, theyre now wildly popular despite having some quirky features that are not at all practical for civilian use. NATOs are such a hit, however, that many people probably never question one key element of their design: why is there an extra length of strap that folds under the watch?

A one-piece strap that simply passes under the spring bars and over the body of the watch would seem to work just fine, but NATOs have yet another layer of material that sits between watch and wrist. Its typically folded at the buckle and sewn to the straps underside with a keeper on its end through which the main strap must be threaded. (If youre not familiar with how a nato strap works, its perhaps best explained visually.)

If you ask a watch enthusiast what its for, theyll enthusiastically tell you that if a spring bar fails during strenuous military use, the watch wont simply fall off your wrist as would occur with something like the standard two-piece strap. However, this doesnt explain the NATO straps design at all: a single-pass strap (i.e, one without the extra length in question) would do the same job just as well.

Not only does this part of the NATO strap design seem unnecessary, but it creates further bulk by causing the strap to sit higher on the wrist so much so that if you want to make a small watch wear more prominently, a NATO strap serves as a good solution. Designed to possibly be worn over a sleeve (which would be eccentric for modern casual wearers), yet more bulk is created by the necessity of tucking the straps end back in. There better be a good reason for all the extra fuss associated with NATO straps!

The purpose of the NATO straps length is well understood (see above), but it seems that not many people have a definitive explanation for the extra keeper. Its been suggested that quartermasters used to hang watches on pegs by the buckle end and that this keeper would prevent the watch heads from sliding off. That doesnt seem like a compelling enough reason for the design, but it does hint at the idea that this can keep the watch head from sliding off the strap.

Most likely is that the military felt it was necessary to keep the watch head from sliding around on the strap while being worn. Single-pass straps existed before the NATO was created for the British military in 1973 indeed, a sort of fabric proto-NATO was used as early as WWII on A-11 and other military watches but its easy to imagine that watch heads sliding around on straps was a problem they wanted to solve. This would further be an issue for watches with wider lug widths than that specified in the government spec for NATO (G-10) straps. While probably not a big concern for most properly sized straps today, it might have made a difference in military situations.

In the end, its the NATOs overkill and over-design that many watch wearers enjoy anyway. Even if various aspects of the strap dont feel practical for the modern watch wearer, we can be sure that the military had a purpose in requiring this design. NATO straps just feel purposeful anyway, and thats one more reason to love them.

Zen Love is Gear Patrols watch writer. He avoids the snooty side of the watch world, and seeks out food in NYC that resembles what he loved while living in Asia for over a decade.

Read more here:

Why Does the Popular NATO Watch Strap Have This Mysterious Feature? - Gear Patrol

SHEPPARD AIR FORCE BASE, Texas During these uncertain and unprecedented times, it takes a strong, no-nonsense leader to take on the responsibility of the Euro-NATO Joint Jet Pilot Training mission here.

A fighter pilot with combat experience took on that role June 19, 2020, when Col. Robert F. Haas Jr. assumed command of the 80th Flying Training Wing, home to the only internationally manned and operated pilot training program.

Maj. Gen. Craig Wills, 19th Air Force commander, officiated the change of command ceremony via remote technology as Col. Russell D. Driggers relinquished command after two years leading the organization.

Haas said he is humbled by the opportunity to lead the unique wing, and his desire is to meet and exceed expectations of the Air Education and Training Command and the Air Force. That begins, he said, with the men and women who are Team ENJJPT.

I have been an (introduction to fight fundamentals) instructor pilot, a (specialized undergraduate pilot training) squadron commander, I was a SUPT operations group commander, and now Im finally joining the ENJJPT team, he said. Know this. There is no higher bar than being a member of the ENJJPT team in the pilot training business.

The colonel said his path, just as the programs mission, is illuminated by mission needs, accepting smart risks to accomplish the mission, believing in safe and disciplined flying operations, and wholeheartedly subscribing to diversity. He said he cant think of another organization that represents those areas better than ENJJPT.

Wills said Haas has a phenomenal reputation as a fighter pilot as well as in the roles of an instructor, operations leader and commander. He said his previous Air Force experience has prepared him to lead such a diverse organization that trains combat pilots for 14 NATO countries.

With tours at Aviano (Air Base, Italy) and Ramstein (AB, German), Bob has a deep understanding of NATO and he has long-lasting relationships that will certainly serve him well in this capacity, the general said. He is a straight shooter, no-nonsense leader, deep thinker and gets the job done and takes care of his people along the way.

Wills applauded Haass accomplishments as the 71st Operations Group commander, his role before taking command of the 80th FTW. The general said Haas was at the forefront of AETCs innovation efforts when it comes to UPT 2.5, an effort to maximize pilot training through the use of conventional training methods and innovative platforms such as virtual, augmented and mixed realities.

The 80th FTW and ENJJPT, he said, has played a lead role in implementing those technologies into the classroom.

In short, youll find no leader thats better prepared to assume command of this fine wing than Bob Haas, Wills said. Hes a NATO warrior, hes a strategist, hes an innovator, hes a thinker and a leader who will take this program to the next level.

The 19th AF commander also thanked Driggers for his leadership of the wing the past two years, part of which included figuring out how to continue the mission in the midst of COVID-19.

Russ, Im immensely proud of the work you and the ENJJPT team have done in the face of this unprecedented threat, he said. You found smart ways to split into pods to keep the operation flowing. In fact, (ENJJPT) set the bar very high early on.

Wills applauded Driggers for leading the wing through the pursuit of innovative technologies in pilot training to produce combat pilots better and faster, for building strong local relationships that helped with encroachment issues, and for being a key voice in the ENJJPT Steering Committee and fostering trust among its members during a challenging time.

Driggers, just as he did when he took command of the wing two years ago, spoke about gratitude, giving and gravity. The list of thank yous was long and deserving, and the amount of effort and dedication given to the program, the products, the students and the partner nations by members of Team ENJJPT was unwavering, he said. The gravity of the program, especially during COVID-19, was never lost on those in the organization.

The Legion of Merit is a reflection of what the wing has accomplished. Its a reflection of what yall have done, he said of the award presented to him during the ceremony. For me, its something I get to put on my uniform and wear as a daily reminder of you and what you have achieved.

Following the ceremony, Driggers promoted to the rank of brigadier general, frocked.

Read the original post:

Haas assumes command of 80th FTW > Air Education and Training Command > News - Maxwell-Gunter Air Force Base

What Trump thinks of ... Emmanuel Macron

President Donald Trump meets French President Emmanuel Macron on Dec. 3, 2019, in London. | Evan Vucci/AP Photo

"Trump didn't really like either [Canadian Prime Minister Justin] Trudeau or [French President Emmanuel] Macron, but he tolerated them, mockingly crossing swords with them in meetings, kidding on the straight," Bolton writes of the 2018 G7 summit in Canada.

But Trump's attitude toward the French president is not always consistent. "Trump mused that at some point [Macron] should meet with Iranian President [Hassan] Rouhani, flattering Macron as the best of the Europeans," Bolton writes.

At the 2017 NATO summit, Trump accused Macron "of always leaking their conversations, which Macron denied, smiling broadly." Trump later refused to answer Macron's question on what the U.S. was planning to do regarding trade with China.

Meanwhile, during negotiations about the Iran nuclear deal in 2019, Bolton says Trump told him, "Everything he [Macron] touches turns to shit."

President Donald Trump speaks with German Chancellor Angela Merkel during the NATO summit on Dec. 4, 2019, in Watford, England. | Evan Vucci/AP Photo

The president's view of the German chancellor appears to reflect both respect for the country she leads and irritation with its foreign and security policy.

"[Trump] had great respect for Chancellor Merkel, noting that his father was German, and his mother Scottish," Bolton writes in a chapter on the 2017 NATO summit in Brussels.

At the same meeting, Trump "kissed [Merkel] on both cheeks," before saying "I love Angela," following a commitment by European NATO members to boost defense spending.

But the U.S. president has made no secret of his objection to the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project. Its very sad when Germany makes a massive oil-and-gas deal with Russia. Were protecting all of these countries, and they make a pipeline deal," Bolton quotes Trump as saying during a meeting with NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg. "Were going to have to do something, because were not going to put up with it. Germany is captured by Russia.

President Donald Trump and Britain's Prime Minister Boris Johnson at the G7 summit on Aug. 25, 2019, in Biarritz, France. | Stefan Rousseau - Pool/Getty Images

Describing Trump's trip to the United Kingdom in 2018 to talk to then-Prime Minister Theresa May, Bolton writes that the president and he would have liked to help the U.K. with the Brexit process, but found it hard.

"Implementing the [Brexit] vote had been disastrously mishandled, thereby threatening political stability in Britain itself," he writes. "We should have been doing far more to help the Brexiteers, and I certainly tried. Unfortunately, apart from Trump and myself, almost no one in the Administration seemed to care. What a potential tragedy."

During the same trip, Trump bragged toward May about his state visit to China the previous year.

"He said he was greeted by a hundred thousand soldiers and said, 'There's never been anything like it before in the history of the world.'" Bolton writes.

And the former White House official claims that Boris Johnson is Trump's joint-favorite world leader alongside Shinz Abe, the prime minister of Japan.

President Donald Trump meets with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker on July 25, 2018, at the White House. | Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images

On Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission until last year, Trump said he thought he was "a vicious man who hated the United States desperately."

"The EU is worse than China, only smaller," Trump said, according to Bolton, even arguing to Merkel that the bloc had been set up to "take advantage of the US."

See the article here:

What Donald Trump really thinks of European leaders - Politico

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg addressed Foreign Ministers of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS on Thursday (4 June 2020), at a meeting co-chaired by Italy and the United States and held via video-conference.

We have made enormous progress; Daesh has lost control of the territories it once held; but the threat of terrorism remains, the Secretary General said. That is exactly why NATO continues to support the international fight against terrorism and is ready to further step up its efforts; in February, NATO Defence Ministers took the decision to enhance NATOs training mission in Iraq; they also agreed to look at what more NATO can do in the wider Middle East region; we remain committed to these decisions, he added.

COVID-19 and the security situation have impacted our operations; and NATOs train and advise mission has been partially paused, but we are now rebuilding our capacity and activities; going forward, our objective remains the same: building self-sustaining Iraqi Security Forces, able to prevent the return of Daesh, stabilise their country, and fight terrorism, the Secretary General highlighted. The Secretary General noted the importance of moving forward in close coordination and consultation with the Global Coalition and the Iraqi government.

More than 35 Foreign Ministers attended the meeting.

The rest is here:

NATO Secretary General addresses Foreign Ministers of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS - NATO HQ

President Vladimir Putin approved a strategic document on the fundamentals of Russias nuclear deterrence policy on Tuesday (2 June), naming the creation and deployment of anti-missile and strike weapons in space as one of the main military threats to Russia.

The document outlining Russias policy on its nuclear deterrent was published online amid arms control tensions between Moscow and Washington over the future of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), the last major pact regulating their nuclear arsenals.

According to the new strategy, Russias nuclear weapons policy is described as being defensive in nature and designed to safeguard the countrys sovereignty against potential adversaries.

However, in line with Russian military doctrine, it outlines four scenarios in which Moscow would order the use of nuclear weapons, two of them new and involving potential instances of nuclear first-use scenarios.

The two established protocols permit nuclear use when an enemy uses nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction on Russia or its allies, and in situations when conventional weapons threaten the very existence of the country.

In reverse, the two new provisions include cases in which the government receives reliable information that a ballistic missile attack is imminent or in the case of enemy impact on critically important government or military facilities of the Russian Federation, the incapacitation of which could result in the failure of retaliatory action of nuclear forces.

The main threats for Russia are described as follows: the increase of the potential of NATO in territories and waters close to the country, bringing new weaponry close to Russia, including new anti-missile systems, deployingstrike weapons in space and deploying nuclear weapons in non-nuclear countries.

Some US officials are eyeing Poland as a new home to the US nuclear arsenal in Europe, after German Social Democrats reopened the debate about whether the country should remain under Washingtons protective nuclear umbrella. And the latest twist has already displeased Russia, Polands mighty eastern neighbour.

The publication comes only a week after an US decision to to exit theOpen Skies Treaty, allows its signatories to conduct short-notice unarmed surveillance flights to gather information on each others military forces and installations, thereby contributing to inspections of conventional arms control and strategic offensive weapons and reducing the risk of conflict.

Open Skies is the third major security agreement, after the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), a landmark 1987 pact with Russia banning a whole class of medium-range ground-launched nuclear-capable missiles of 500 to 5,500 kilometres,and the Iran nuclear deal, which Washington decided to scrap in recent years.

Both, the US exit and Russias new strategy, come at a time as the last remaining major nuclear arms control treaty between the United States and Russia, New START, is due to expire in February 2021 and Moscow has already warned there is not enough time left to negotiate a full-fledged replacement.

The Trump administration has pushed for a new arms control pact that would also include China, but while Moscow has deemed such a solution unfeasible, arms control experts believe it would be too difficult to achieve.

Exercise tensions

At the same time, the Russian military on Monday (1 June) had accused the US and its NATO allies of conducting provocative military drills near the nations borders, according to statement that reflected simmering Russia-NATO tensions.

Russia will not conduct major military exercises near the borders with NATO member countries this year, Sergei Rudskoy, chief of the main operational department for Russias General Staff, said according to Interfax.

Rudskoy alsosaid NATO has stonewalled Russias written proposal to scale down each others military activities.

He said Russia has moved large-scale drills scheduled for September, Kavkaz-2020, deeper inside the country and is ready to adjust the locations of exercises on a parity basis with the Western military bloc.

He pointed torecent NATO drills in the Barents Sea that he called first since the Cold War, as well as increasing nuclear-capable strategic bomber flights near Russian borders and US intelligence flights near Russian bases in Syria.

NATO had called off its planned exercises amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

Before the health crisis, Europe was preparing for what security officials have called the most extensive transfer of US soldiers to Europe in the past 25 years, with around 37,000 soldiers taking part in the US-led military exercise Defender Europe 2020 for the transfer of troops to Germany, Poland and the Baltic states.

[Edited by Georgi Gotev]

See the rest here:

Russia revamps its nuclear policy amid simmering tensions with NATO - EURACTIV

Alliance fleets aren't getting bigger to match Moscow's moves in the region, so it's time to think differently.

Its been six years since Russia annexed Crimea, the first time since 1945 that European borders were changed through military force. The annexation halved Ukraines coastline and, along with the subsequent deployment of anti-ship and anti-air missiles, advanced Moscows big geostrategic goal of turning the Black Sea into a Russian-controlledlake.

This is a direct threat to U.S. and NATO security interests. The Black Sea has long been a geopolitically and economically important crossroads between Europe, Asia, and the Caucasus. Today, the seas floor is crisscrossed with oil and gas pipelines and fiber optic cables. Three of the six Black Sea countries Turkey, Bulgaria and Romania are in NATO. Another two alliance partners and aspiring members Ukraine and Georgia have suffered the direct impact of Russian aggression. Ukrainian solders die fighting for their country every week. One-fifth of Georgias internationally recognized territory is under Russian occupation, including a sizeable amount of Georgias Black Seacoastline.

Soon after Russias invasion of Ukraine, the United States and several other NATO members stepped up their presence in the Black Sea. But that presence waned, and notwithstanding Secretary-General Jens Stoltenbergs 2017 pledge to send more alliance ships to the region, it remainsinsufficient.

Part of the problem is the 1936 Montreux Convention, which limits the number, transit time, and tonnage of naval ships from non-Black Sea countries that may operate in the Bosphorus. For example, non-Black Sea state warships in the strait must not displace more than 15,000 tons apiece. No more than nine non-Black Sea state warships, with a total aggregate tonnage of no more than 45,000 tons, may pass at any one time, and they are permitted to stay for no longer than 21 days. To be sure, NATO navies have shrunk since the Cold War, reducing the number available for Black Sea operations. Yet the limits remain a problemnonetheless.

Subscribe

Receive daily email updates:

Subscribe to the Defense One daily.

Be the first to receive updates.

There are four creative ways that the Alliance should consider to get around these restrictions and increase its presence in the BlackSea:

1. Establish a Black Sea Maritime Patrol mission modeled on the successful Baltic Air Policing mission, in which non-Black Sea members would commit to a regular and rotational maritime presence in the Black Sea. This would be the fastest and most effective way to increase NATOs presence there, but a lack of political will, coupled with the reduced size of Europeans navies, makes itunlikely.

2. Germanys Danube option. According to Article 30 of the 1948 Convention Regarding the Regime of Navigation on the Danube, only Danubian countries can operate naval vessels in the Danube River. However, if a Danubian country wants to enter a stretch of the Danube River falling outside its territorial jurisdiction, then it must first get the permission of the relevant Danubianstate.

As the Romanians routinely show with their three frigates, warships of 8,000 tons or less can travel 50 miles upriver to the port of Braila. The only Danubian country that is not on the Black Sea, but still has a navy, is Germany. Therefore, by Romania inviting Germany into its section of the Danube River, it would allow the German Navy reset the clock on the 21-daylimit.

Last year, Germany sent just one ship a 3,500-ton Elbe-class tender into the Black Sea for a total of only 18 days. This Danube option, unique to Germany because it is a Danubian state, would allow it to step up the plate in a way other members of the Alliance cannot in the BlackSea.

3. The Danube-Black Sea Canal option. This man-made canal in Romania might offer an opportunity for non-Danubian and non-Black Sea states to reset the clock on the 21-day limit in the Black Sea in a similar way that Germany could do so using the Danube River. However, the canal is relatively small at 90 meters wide and can only handle ships up to 5,000tons.

In 2019, a total of 13 naval vessels displacing less than 5,000 tons from Canada, France, Spain, Italy, Greece, the U.S. and the UK entered the Black Sea in ships that could, in theory, operate in the canal. However, this option would likely require money to modernize and adapt the canal for duel civilian-military use. Also, force protection measures such as air defense capabilities would need to be considered. NATO should work with Romania to conduct a feasibility assessment on the possibility of using thecanal.

4. A NATO-certified Center of Excellence on Black Sea Security in Georgia. There is no precedent for such a center in a non-NATO country, but there is nothing practically or legally preventing it from happening. Establishing one could improve NATO-Georgia relations while demonstrating how important the Black Sea region has become for Europes overall security. The Center would provide an opportunity to engage in meaningful dialogue and training in how to address the challenges associated with Black Sea security. It was also serve as another way to fly the NATO flag inGeorgia.

Some of these proposals are easier than others. Some would require only additional political will. Some are unconventional and would require a change in traditional thinking. Some might require additionalfunding.

All of these proposals require full involvement and consultation with Turkey, the NATO member with sovereign control of the straits. It should be explained to Ankara that nothing NATO will do in the Black Sea is meant to undermine this control. The goal is to increase NATOs presence in the Black Sea to deter, and if required defeat, Russianaggression.

One might reasonably ask about the feasibility of placing a very expensive warship into a narrow canal or river. There are three reasons why this is not anissue.

First, any ship entering the Black Sea has to travel through a very narrow body of water anyway. At its narrowest point, the Bosphorus Strait is 700 meters wide. This strait is also very congested, with civilian maritime traffic reducing maneuverability evenmore.

Secondly, ships using the Bosphorus are prohibited from launching aircraft while transiting. This makes air defense and other force protections measures that are routine when a warship transits through a narrow body of water more difficult. This would not be a problem on the Danube River or the Black Sea-DanubeCanal.

Finally, the use of the Danube River or the canal would only be done during peacetime. After all, during a time of war Turkey has even more control over the entry and exit of the BlackSea.

While NATOs interest in Black Sea security is increasing, the overall presence of non-Black Sea NATO warships is not keeping up the pace. Something needs to change. The economic, security, and political importance of the Black Sea and the broader region is only becoming more important. NATO members need to be protected. The Alliance needs to chart a path to membership for Georgia and Ukraine. NATO must be prepared for any contingency withRussia.

The Alliance is required to defend Sofia and Bucharest in the same way it must defend Seville and Brussels. Just because the geo-political circumstances of the Black Sea make NATOs mission there harder, does not mean the region can be ignored. With Russia increasing its military capability in the region, now is not the time for NATO to growcomplacent.

Until NATO starts thinking creatively about complex challenges like increasing its presence in the Black Sea, Russia will continue to have the upperhand.

View original post here:

To Boost NATO's Presence in the Black Sea, Get Creative - Defense One

The Capitals brings you the latest news from across Europe, through on-the-ground reporting by EURACTIVs media network. You can subscribe to the newsletter here.

Before you start reading todays edition of the Capitals, feel free to have a look at the article Russia revamps its nuclear policy amid simmering tensions with NATO.

We would like to remind you that everyone at EURACTIV is keen to continue delivering top-quality content that covers the EU in a clear and unbiased way, despite being heavily impacted by the current crisis. As we, at EURACTIV, firmly believe that our readers should not have to access content via a paywall, we are asking you to consider making a contribution and thank all of you who already have. If you are interested in making a one-time or recurring donation, all you need to do is followthis link.

Now that many European countries have started lifting lockdown measures and opening borders, make sure you stay up to date with EURACTIVs comprehensive overview, which is regularly updated with the help of our network of offices and media partners. Also, check our country update pages, such as the ones for Austria and Croatia.

THE HAGUE

TheDutch government is unlikely to fulfill its NATO defence spending obligationswithin the next four years. The news comes after parliamentarians called Dutch defence minister Ank Bijleveld in for questioning on the so-called recalibration of the defence memorandum.Alexandra Brzozowski has the story.

Travel restrictions will be eased, meanwhile. From 15 June, the Netherlands is set to relax its advice on travel to most European countries in the Schengen area. The scale will go from code orange (only necessary journeys) to code yellow (security risks). The Dutch government is set to announce more details later on Wednesday.

///

BERLIN

US Ambassador resigns. After weeks of speculation, US Ambassador to Germany, Richard Grenell, has formally resigned from his position. During his two-year tenure in Berlin, he had been the subject of ire for many in the country for his approach, described as unconventional and undiplomatic. He particularly focused on German defence spending and NATO commitments, and recently accused the country of eroding NATO solidarity. There is speculation that Grenell will join President Trumps 2020 reelection campaign. (Sarah Lawton | EURACTIV.de)

///

PARIS

Forbidden demonstration against discrimination. Thousands of demonstrators gathered on Tuesday evening (2 June) in front of the Paris courthouse following a call for mobilisation by the Justice for Adama collective, and despite the protest being banned due to the COVID-19 health crisis.

24-year-old Adama Traor was found dead in the gendarmeries courtyard in Beaumont-sur-Oise following his arrest in July 2016. While the conclusions of the latest medical report, sent at the end of May to the judges investigating the case, exonerate the police, Traors family questioned the violent methods of the gendarmes. The movement reflects a distrust of the police, particularly in the Parisian suburbs, where there are many incidents and complaints of discrimination, and as American cities flare up after the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis. (EURACTIV.FR)

///

BRUSSELS

Last deconfinement phase under discussion. Belgiums National Security Council is set to discuss the implementation of Phase 3 of the deconfinement process, which could start from next Monday (8 June). Alexandra Brzozowski has the details.

///

LONDON

Parliament ends remote working. MPs faced the bizarre spectacle of queuing for over 40 minutes in socially-distanced lines outside the House of Commons to vote for an end to voting from home on Tuesday (2 June). Benjamin Fox reports from London.

///

VIENNA

Government finally promotes COVID-19 tracing app. Austrias COVID-19 tracing app known as Stop-Corona developed by the Austrian Red Cross was again endorsed by the government after being one of the first of its kind in Europe on Tuesday (2 June). However, during a press conference, Health Minister Rudolf Anschober (Greens) said discussions about mandatory use are off the table, but nevertheless emphasised the apps importance for opening up the country further.

Although the app had got off to a good start, an increasing number of people began to have concerns about their privacy, particularly after conservative VP-politicians showed support for the apps mandatory use in early April. Since then, the app has vanished from the governments official information and Gerry Foitik, federal commander of the Austrian Red Cross, has repeatedly voiced frustration with the political communication surrounding the app. (Philipp Grll | EURACTIV.de)

///

HELSINKI

Refugee camp returnees open political trenches. Three Finnish women and their nine children landed in Helsinki after escaping from the Syrian al-Hol refugee camp, according to a statement by Finlands foreign affairs ministry on Sunday evening (31 May). Although these women were presumed to be married to ISIS fighters and may pose a future security risk according to the Finnish Intelligence and Security Service (SUPO), they could not, as Finnish citizens, be legally denied entry into the country. Pekka Vnttinen has more.

EUROPES SOUTH

ROME

Opposition protests on Republic Day. Hundreds of protesters took to the streets of Rome in an anti-government protest organised by the right-wing Lega, the far-right Fratelli dItalia and the centre-right Forza Italia on Republic Day yesterday (2 June), for the first time since Italians celebrated the birth of the Italian Republic in 1946. Protesters defied social distancing rules marching next to each other. EURACTIV Italys Valentina Iorio has more.

///

MADRID

Zero coronavirus-related deaths since Sunday. On Tuesday (2 June), Spain reported zero COVID-19-related deaths in the last 48 hours for the first time since March, as well as 71 new coronavirus infections, according to the health ministrys reports. In other words, it has been two consecutive days since the new infection rate has been below 100 for the first time since the outbreak.EURACTIVs partner EuroEFE reports.

///

ATHENS

US, EU condemn Turkey but sanctions off the table for now. Both Washington and Brussels condemned Tuesday (2 June) Turkeys announcement that in three months it will start gas drilling activities in territories which are part of Greeces Exclusive Economic Zone.

EU spokesperson Peter Stano said that while sanctions were still on the table, it was premature to have such a discussion now. Meanwhile, Enlargement Commissioner Olivr Vrhelyi has confirmed that Ankara will join the club of EU-hopeful countries that will receive EU funds under the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA). Why does Europe hesitate?

VISEGRAD

BRATISLAVA

Getting ahead of the Trianon centenary. Trianon cannot become a burden that would prevent Slovaks and Hungarians to look to the future, Slovak Foreign Minister Ivan Korok said during his visit to Budapest, where he met his Hungarian counterpart, Foreign Minister Pter Szijjrt, according to the TASR agency.

The approaching centenary of the Trianon Peace Treaty (June 4) from 1920 through which Hungary lost substantial territories after the WWI, including those that now form Slovakia is a sensitive issue on both sides of the border. EURACTIV Slovakias Zuzana Gabriov looks into what the two ministers had to say.

///

WARSAW

Poland to open borders within days, maybe weeks. It is a matter of days, maybe weeks, until Poland reopens borders between the countries of the region, foreign minister, Jacek Czaputowicz, said on Tuesday (2 June) during a summit of foreign ministers with the Baltic states in Estonia. Alexandra Brzozowski has the details.

NEWS FROM THE BALKANS

SOFIA

Anti-Bulgarian election campaign in Skopje under fire. The anti-Bulgarian campaign in Northern Macedonia in recent days is due to the upcoming elections there, Foreign Minister Ekaterina Zaharieva has said.

Part of the reason for the anti-Bulgarian speech in Macedonia is the nationalist approach, which they think still works during elections. But when you aspire to be part of the European family, it should not occur to any politician to say so. This rhetoric, aimed at a neighbouring and friendly country, is full of fake news and hate speech, Zaharieva told national television (BNT). (Krassen Nikolov | EURACTIV.bg)

///

BUCHAREST

///

ZAGREB

Post-lockdown migrant pressure. The pressure of illegal migrants along the border between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia in the northwestern Bosnian canton Una-Sana is rising as lockdown measures are being loosened, the local police authorities said on Tuesday (2 May). EURACTIV Croatias Karla Junicic takes a closer look.

///

In other news, a grant agreement for the Early Warning and Crisis Management System project worth HRK63 million (8.3 million), of which 85% will be drawn from EU funds, was signed on Tuesday (2 June) by the countrys interior ministry.

The crisis management system should facilitate the process of informing citizens, via mobile phone, about threats and measures that must be taken to reduce casualties and material damage, according to Deputy Prime Minister and Interior Minister Davor Bozinovic and Environment and Energy Minister Tomislav Coric, who signed the agreement. (Karla Junicic, EURACTIV.hr)

///

LJUBLJANA

Is Austria dragging its feet on reopening Slovenia border? Slovenes in Austrias Carinthia region, united in the Slovenian Consensus for Constitutional Rights (SKUP) initiative, demand that Austria opens its border with Slovenia, writes the leading newspaper Delo.

Austria has already announced the reopening of borders with Germany, Hungary, Czech Republic and Slovakia, Delo has said, adding that there is no official announcement yet for Slovenia, while Austrian media say this is expected to happen on 15 June. EURACTIVs Zoran Radosavljevi looks into it.

///

BELGRADE

Varhelyi heralds major investments in Western Balkans.EU Enlargement Commissioner Oliver Varhelyi said on Tuesday (2 June) that major investments in economic growth linked to the COVID-19 recovery would be made to support the Western Balkans.

Along with increasing EU guarantees up to 130 billion for investments in southern and eastern EU neighbours and the West Balkan region, he said that an additional 10.5 billion would be set aside through the EU Development Fund to support the neighbourhood. EURACTIV Serbia reports.

///

In other news, Serbia has only partially implemented two of recommendations of the Council of Europes Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), according to ECRIs press release published Tuesday (2 June). The two recommendations are linked to prohibiting the use of hate speech by government officials and MPs and to hiring a proportionate number of Roma in the public administration. Read more.

///

US Ambassador to Serbia Anthony Godfrey has commented on the killing of George Floyd, an unarmed African-American man who died at the hands of a Minneapolis police officer. Read more.

***

[Edited by Sarantis Michalopoulos, Daniel Eck, Benjamin Fox]

See the original post here:

The Netherlands likely to scrap NATO spending target - EURACTIV

AVIANO AIR BASE, Italy Brig. Gen. Jason E. Bailey is scheduled to take command of Avianos 31st Fighter Wing during a virtual ceremony Friday, wing officials said.

Bailey takes over command from Brig. Gen. Daniel T. Lasica, who will assume command of the 9th Air and Space Expeditionary Task Force-Afghanistan, as well as concurrent leadership roles with NATO and Air Forces Central Command.

Lasica, who arrived at Aviano in June 2018, will now be responsible for the integration of air and space power in support of NATOs Resolute Support mission.

Bailey returns to Aviano after previously serving as the commander of the 31st Operations Support Squadron, as well as an instructor pilot and chief of wing plans and programs from 2011 to 2013.

Bailey is a 1995 Air Force Academy graduate who has also served overseas as the flight lead and flight commander of the 80th Fighter Squadron, Kunsan Air Base, South Korea; commander of the 455th Expeditionary Operations Group at Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan; and commander of the 52nd Fighter Wing at Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany.

Bailey will command the only permanently assigned Air Force fighter aircraft wing in NATOs southern region. With approximately 4,200 active duty military members, nearly 300 U.S. civilians and 700 Italian civilian employees, the wing conducts and supports air combat operations, and maintains munitions for NATO.

llamas.norman@stripes.comTwitter: @normanllamas

Brig. Gen. Daniel T. Lasica, outgoing commander of the 31st Fighter Wing at Aviano Air Base, Italy.U.S. AIR FORCE

article continues below

Follow this link:

Bailey to take command of Aviano's 31st Fighter Wing - Stars and Stripes

President Donald Trump's recent decision to withdraw from the 1992 Open Skies Treaty, which has helped keep the post-Cold War peace, raises the long-term risk of armed conflict in Europe. While unfortunate, abandoning this 34-nation confidence-building measure is consistent with Trump's years-long policy of confidence-demolition.

First proposed by President Dwight Eisenhower in 1955 and negotiated under the George H.W. Bush administration, Open Skies allows signatories, including the United States and Russia, to fly unarmed observation aircraft over one another's territory. This helps build a measure of transparency and trust regarding each countries' military forces and activities, thereby enhancing stability and reducing the risk of conflict.

Under the terms of the treaty, every detail of each flight is agreed to ahead of time by both the surveilling and the surveilled party, from the flight plan to the plane's airframe to the type of camera. These flights allow short-notice coverage of territory that is not readily photographed by satellites, which cannot be immediately shifted from fixed orbits and which cannot penetrate cloud cover optically.

No treaty adherent has benefited more from its transparency than the United States, which together with its allies overflies Russia far more often than Russia can overfly NATO countries.

Master Sgt. David Dines reloads the film magazine on a panoramic camera in an OC-135B observation aircraft while flying over Haiti, January 16, 2010. US Air Force/Senior Airman Perry Aston

The administration's May 22 notification that it will formally leave the treaty in November is fundamentally at odds with the interests of the US and its allies. In response to Trump's decision, 10 European nations, including prominent NATO allies like France and Germany, issued a statement expressing "regret" and said they will continue to implement the treaty, which "remains functioning and useful."

The administration is correct that Russia has violated the treaty by restricting overflight of certain areas, namely the Kaliningrad exclave and Russia's borders with the contested regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia, which only Moscow recognizes as independent states. Those violations, while they must be addressed, do not negate the fundamental value of the treaty and certainly do not justify withdrawal.

As some members of Congress have pointed out, the notification of withdrawal is also illegal. The Open Skies Treaty was the brain-child of Republican presidents and enjoyed bipartisan support, so Congress last year included a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act which Trump himself signed requiring the administration give 120 days' notice before announcing intent to withdraw from the treaty. The deliberate decision to ignore this requirement is yet another sign of the Trump administration's willingness to flout congressional authority.

Even setting questions of legality aside, the substance of the announcement is internally inconsistent.

The administration simultaneously argued that the treaty is not useful because Open Skies aircraft can't detect anything that is not already visible from satellites, but also that Russian planes were vacuuming up valuable information about nonmilitary infrastructure in the US. It argued that Russia's activities were inconsistent with the "spirit" not the letter of the treaty, while ignoring the fact that the US and its NATO allies have collected similar information in more than 500 flights over Russian territory since the treaty came into force.

Exiting the treaty will further isolate Washington from its NATO allies, all of whom urged the Trump administration to remain. Indeed, the decision seems intended to reinforce the message Trump has been sending to NATO throughout his presidency: that the 70-year-old alliance cannot rely on the United States.

NATO members that possess less advanced intelligence capabilities than the US have placed great value on the mandatory sharing among all Open Skies signatories of the images collected from surveillance flights. No NATO ally is likely to join the US in withdrawing.

Navy Lt. Bethany Baker monitors the OC-135B observation aircraft's location using a GPS and laptop, over Haiti on January 16, 2010. US Air Force/Senior Airman Perry Aston

There may be little immediate effect from the US withdrawal. In fact, there were no Open Skies flights conducted at all in 2018, yet this did not provoke any military disaster. Still, in the long run, withdrawing from the treaty will undoubtedly damage the national security of the US as well as its allies and partners in Europe.

The treaty's value has been demonstrated repeatedly during moments of crisis, as when Open Skies flights observed a massive Russian military buildup on the borders of Ukraine in 2014. The sharing of such images, unlike those obtained by satellites, is immediate, and in this case may have deterred a more open Russian invasion of Ukraine. The next time crisis strikes, such as heightened tensions on Russia's borders with Georgia or Ukraine, NATO will not be able to mobilize an overflight as rapidly as it could with advanced US aircraft.

All the national security benefits of withdrawing from the treaty will accrue to Russia, which will be able to schedule more collection flights over its neighbors and NATO members, including over US bases and military deployments in Europe. And NATO's diminished capability to fly over Russia means Moscow will have greater latitude to deploy forces to its borders.

This will pose a particular risk for Ukraine, which is still in an active conflict with Russian-backed separatists in its eastern regions, and which pleaded with Washington to remain in the treaty. Russia, meanwhile, can continue to argue with increasing credibility that it is the United States that is stoking a new arms race.

Of still greater concern is what this decision reveals about the Trump administration's approach to the very concept of arms control.

When Russia violated the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, or INF, I acknowledged that US withdrawal from the treaty could be justified as a result. But I also argued that withdrawing from the INF without any action plan to redress Russia's violations was ill-advised, and only served Moscow's propaganda interests. The same critique applies doubly in this case.

Russia's violations of Open Skies are marginal, preventing coverage of less than 1% of Russian territory, and they are not central to the treaty's objectives, as was the case with Moscow's violations of the INF. In that case, Russia was not just playing games with the rules, but was repeatedly found to be building the very types of missiles whose elimination was the entire point of the INF.

President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Pablo Martinez Monsivais/Associated Press

The administration has made clear that it is ready to withdraw from any treaty that is not being implemented fully. Of course, it is also prepared to withdraw from agreements that are being implemented fully, as with the Iran nuclear deal. It appears to believe despite the complete absence of evidence to support it that this approach increases pressure on Russia and will force it to compromise on this and related nuclear issues.

The same preference for confrontation over restraint seems also to be the motivating factor for the administration's dithering on the urgent need to renew the New START Treaty, the only remaining treaty that verifiably limits the strategic deployed nuclear arsenals of the United States and Russia.

Trump says he would prefer a better deal involving not just Russia but also China. But because a complex new agreement simply cannot be concluded before the treaty's expiration in February 2021, many experts suspect Trump's rationale is simply a pretext for leaving New START.

In another sign that Trump's team is prepared to escalate tensions, The Washington Post recently reported that White House officials discussed the potential of resuming US nuclear weapons testing, which would break a moratorium that has been in place since 1992.

A senior official speaking to the Post claimed that by demonstrating the US ability to "rapid test" a nuclear device, it could put pressure on Russia and China in future arms control negotiations. In fact, such a move would instead give a green light to China, Russia, North Korea, India and Pakistan to break their own nuclear test moratoriums, which could help them develop new and more dangerous warhead designs. This would unquestionably undermine American and global security, and yet the Trump team considers it a feasible option.

Trump has brought to crucial arms control issues the same approach he has brought to domestic politics, not to mention his personal legal and business issues: petulance, egomania, bullying and short-sightedness. Members of Congress from both parties have an opportunity in the coming days and weeks to take a principled stand, not only in favor of continued Open Skies adherence, but also against reckless tests of nuclear weapons for the purpose of political messaging.

Thomas Countryman is chair of the board of directors at the Arms Control Association in Washington, D.C. He was a career U.S. Foreign Service officer for 35 years until retiring in 2017, having most recently served as acting undersecretary of state for arms control and international security.

Read the original post:

Trump's decision to ditch another treaty with Russia is a reckless own goal - Business Insider

President Donald TrumpDonald John TrumpNew York Times: Reporter who called for CDC chief's resignation went 'too far' GOP's Don Bacon and challenger neck-and-neck in Democratic poll Cheney defends Fauci: 'We need his expertise' to defeat coronavirus MORE is in London today for a short summit tomorrow with fellow leaders of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Auspiciously it lands on the 70th anniversary year of NATOs founding in the tense early days of the Cold War where it along with the Marshall Plan signaled a deep and long-term American commitment to Europes democracy-based freedom and stability. This investment allowed fellow democracies and peaceful nations to safely evolve, creating a global environment where U.S. interests and businesses could flourish.

The summit comes at a pivotal time accentuated by French President Emmanuel MacronEmmanuel Jean-Michel MacronNeeded: A blueprint for a post-vaccine world Merkel defends WHO during call with international leaders Notre Dame restoration halted due to coronavirus MOREs recent declaration that the alliance was brain-dead where the United States traditionally guiding role and philosophy appears more confusing than affirming for our allies in NATO and worldwide. The Trump administrations transactional messaging and unilateral actions, often broadcast publicly rather than negotiated privately, are shredding allied confidence in U.S. reliability and creating malign openings for potential adversaries. They weaken an extraordinary assemblage of allies and partners that despite differences have mostly supported the United States since WWII through thick and thin. This is strategic.

As a long-time NATO interlocutor, I want to relate the following experience that buttressed to me that the U.S. military despite the current political noise still maintains strong, credible relations with their allied counterparts. A month ago, I revisited NATOs mostly-forgotten Kosovo Force (KFOR) mission after participating in a progressive security conference in Belgrade, Serbia. I served in Kosovo during 2003-2004 as the senior KFOR intelligence staff officer during a difficult period that culminated in violent riots that left 35 Serbian Orthodox churches and monasteries destroyed by Albanian mobs. For balance, we must recall that KFOR was established in 1999 after the U.S.-led NATO intervention to stop the ethnic cleansing of mostly Kosovar Albanians at the hands of dominating Serbia.

During my week in Pristina I was heartened to see troops from multiple NATO and Partner nations working in close coordination to ensure a safe and secure environment for all the citizens Albanian, Serbian, Roma living in Kosovo. Unknown to many, there are still over 600 American soldiers, mostly New Jersey National Guardsmen, currently serving there, an integral part of NATOs 3,500 soldier multinational force of 28 nations. Commanded by an Italian Major General, KFORs Deputy is a Swiss, and Chief of Staff an American, both Brigadier Generals.

The alliance matters to this still volatile Balkan region. So does the American presence within and anywhere the alliance serves. I cant overstate how moved I was to see American soldiers literally assaulted in South Mitrovica with hugs and tears by wizened Albanian gentlemen after seeing our small group with their U.S. flags on their shoulders.

Over my 38-year military and government career, I served with allies in diverse locations worldwide such as West Germany, South Korea, Kosovo, Afghanistan and within complex Moscow. An unforgettable personal moment while working NATO policy issues on our Joint Staff was in March 1999 when I stood proudly with our new Polish allies in Warsaws Pilsudski Square the exact second they entered the alliance. NATO came to our aid after 9/11 and served with us in Afghanistan, Iraq and numerous other locations. A little-known fact is that there has never been conflict between NATO members over its long 70-year history, except for the clash over Cyprus in 1974 between Greece and Turkey. Based on these hands-on global experiences I am an unabashed Atlanticist and internationalist.

I fervently believe that after the natural creativity and adaptability of our population and our nations natural resources, that our greatest strength, precious really, is the network of mostly like-minded allies and partners worldwide that weve worked with in unison to ensure a better and more stable planet.

We learned the bitter lessons of isolationism after WWI, where after Pearl Harbor we entered WWII unprepared for an existential no-quarter fight against a vicious array of dictatorial states. As the post-WWII and Cold War eras increasingly wobble, we dare not make that mistake again.

For our Russian counterparts, I will simply say that NATO does not want conflict but will fight hard if pressed. Ideally the stability it brings Europe benefits Moscow too NATOs existence is not just about Russia. Working to weaken, corrode it and the European Union from within and without, only strengthens resolve. There will always be coalitions of the willing.

I also caution that a Europe bereft of credible security structures as the blood-soaked 20th Century has proven, would likely break into right-leaning mini-pakts, ententes and treaties that over time could boomerang badly for a stretched Russia. Better to identify positive convergences of interest and work collectively on those, while also focusing on root causes where we remain at dangerous loggerheads. The next generation, all of us, will face difficult mutual challenges.

As we move to this weeks London NATO Summit, the overall alliance while physically strong seems wounded, perplexed and unsure of its direction. NATOs and Europes mission priority whether focused east toward traditional Russia threat concerns, south toward the roiling Mediterranean, or on terror is debated. Looking worldwide, at a critical time in Asia our ties with traditional allies such as Japan and South Korea are also eroding and being exploited.

I worry that the imperfectly unique quality of altruistic hardness our country has exuded for most of the past century our magnificent American Brand is fading, replaced by a perception by some that we are becoming a more domineering and transactional hegemon. Are some traditional allies and partners still knitted to us because they feel they have to, rather than because they want to? A core question I think. We must at all costs cherish our allies and reverse this debilitating perception.

Retired Brig. Gen. Peter B. Zwack, former U.S. defense attache to Russia (2012-2014) with a 34-year U.S. Army military career, is a Wilson Center Global Fellow at the Kennan Institute.

Link:

Why NATO is worth preserving for US, Europe and even ...

Its almost Nato as usual when Emmanuel Macron calls Nato brain dead. Its Nato as usual, and Donald Trump as usual, when Trump, who not long ago called Nato obsolete, chastises his bromantic partner Macron for being insulting and disrespectful. It is unusual for Nato when Trump calls off a press conference and calls blackface artist Justin Trudeau two-faced. But its back to Nato as usual for the American president to do the British prime minister a big favor by blowing out a press conference: the last thing Boris Johnson wants when hes facing a general election next week is for Trump to offer his thoughts on the ramifications of Brexit and the private habits of Prince Andrew, or to remind the British electorate that, in his eyes at least, Johnsons fraternity nickname is Britain Trump.

Uncertainty over the purpose of Nato is one of its oldest traditions. Founded in 1949, the task of the Atlantic alliance has been unclear since the collapse of its Soviet-run rival, the Warsaw Pact after 1989. Which is to say, no one has been entirely sure what Natos mission is for nearly half of its existence. Nor does Natos history shed much light, apart from confirming that theres no mission without mission creep and that French doubts about Nato are not a passing mood of Emmanuel Macrons, but a long-standing hostility.

The germ of Nato was conceived in 1947, when Britain and France signed the Treaty of Dunkirk, a mutual defense pact against possible aggression from the Soviet Union and if you can imagine such a thing West Germany. This pairing expanded into a west European group, the Brussels Treaty Organization. In retrospect, the entry of a major military power like Luxembourg into the alliance was a key factor in containing Soviet aggression in western Europe.

The United States and Canada put the North Atlantic into the Treaty Organization when they joined in 1949. This agreement established the near-sacred principle that Nato is something the American pay for even though theyre not sure what theyre getting, and something the Europeans depend upon even though theyre not sure what theyve got. The initial American goal was to build a buttress against communism in order to avoid a large and permanent American garrison in western Europe. Most of the western European states preferred to hide in the United Statess skirts while grumbling in Trudeau-like fashion about how hard it is to be a junior partner.

Like all families, Nato has had its scandals and, like all families, no one talks about them when the family gets together. In 1965, Charles de Gaulle withdrew France from Nato. Not inaccurately, de Gaulle reckoned that the Americans were using Nato to control western Europe and the British were using Nato to catch a free ride. As the term rogue state had yet to be invented, it wasnt applied to France in the following decades, even though France was a vigorous proliferator of nuclear technology and never happier than when making trouble for the Anglo-Saxons.

Only in 1995, did Franois Mitterrand bring France back into Nato but without Frances nuclear submarines. To this day, Frances biggest weapons are currently reserved exclusively for the use of its shortest leader, Emmanuel Macron. Britains nuclear weapons, by contrast, are always at the disposal of the American president, providing the British have the budget to change the batteries on the launch pad. This illustrates another essential truth about Nato: the British and the French were on the same page when they signed the Dunkirk Treaty, but not so often after that.

By 1995, Nato had turned into the militarists equivalent of the tourists package-tour company: a quick way of pulling everyone together for a last-minute excursion to somewhere hot. Natos first mobilization came only in 1990, as the Cold War was ending, but Nato made up for its late start in the two-decade interventionist spree of the 1990s and 2000s.

The results of successful deterrence being a sequence of non-events, the proofs of Natos Cold War value are in inverse proportion to their cost. The results of Natos post-Cold War adventures include fiascos like the bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, the endless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the trashing of Libya. These disasters, though, are not the reason for Macrons brain dead remark.

Macron is said to have told aides that Nato will cease to exist in five years. At the same time, hes calling for Nato to focus its energies on Frances front in the forever-war against Islamism, in its former colonies in West Africa. Either way, Macron does not want Nato to continue with its historic missions, antagonizing the Russians and bombing recalcitrant Middle Easterners. His understanding of the emerging world order is not dissimilar to those of Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. Macron blames the EUs migrant trouble on American regime change policies. He describes Nato, in expanding up to Russias borders, as violating the terms of the deal reached in 1990. He accepts Putins annexation of Crimea: when Nato got as far as Ukraine, Putin decided to stop that expansion. He fears that Europe, by which he means France, is losing its geopolitical autonomy as its share of global GDP shrinks.

All this reflects a longstanding French preference for a multipolar world in which second- or third-tier powers can leverage their post-imperial connections and second-strike nuclear subs. But none of this is alien to Donald Trumps view of the world. Trump also recognizes the 21st-century world as multipolar, with each major power asserting its Monroe Doctrine in what Macron calls a zone of privileged interests. Trump has also managed to avoid conflict with Russia. Trump also sees the reduction in Europes global autonomy, and Frances in particular: this week, he upbraided Macron by referring to Frances unemployment levels.

Yet France cannot afford the military that is a premise of geopolitical autonomy. Britain cant afford it either. Germany, which can afford it, doesnt want to buy it. For the European states, there is no current alternative to geopolitics without autonomy: an American-led and American-funded alliance. And Americas generals, to whose advice Trump is not immune, prefer Natos outsourcing to the options of retreating from the world or advancing into it with more garrisons.

Rather than burying Nato, Trumps insistence that its other 28 members honor their treaty obligations may yet save it. There is a difference between stability and inertia. If Nato responds to Trumps stimulus, it will almost certainly be around in five years time which is more than you can say for Macron or Trump. Call it the fraternity of nations. Isnt it bromantic?

More:

Trump is saving Nato | Spectator USA

COLOGNE, Germany Though the Arctic falls outside the Western military alliances traditional focus, NATO officials have begun paying closer attention to the region. Camille Grand, NATOs assistant secretary general for defense investment, spoke with Defense News about how the conversation has changed due to climate change and economic competition.

How does NATO view the Arctic region?

What we see is twofold: First of all, because of climate change and because of economic competition in the region, we see more of a great game of power, where the Russians, the Chinese are interested in access to the Arctic, to the sea routes and to the potential natural resources. So that is one element that we see as the long-term, overarching development, and therefore NATO has been paying more and more attention to what we prefer to call the High North.

And we are, along with our Nordic members like Norway and Denmark, paying attention to how much activity is going on in the region. Ive seen in my last few years at NATO an increased focus on that. Whereas the working assumption 10 years ago was that it was more of an area preserved from strategic competition and risks, today it is not as obvious as that. Quite on the contrary, we see activity going on in the region.

Is it inevitable that there will be conflict in the High North?

All this being said, the point is not to describe a likely conflict in the region. It is still a region where the extreme weather conditions most of the year make the case for more cooperation than conflict, where waging military operations is extraordinarily complicated. But overall, I would say that we are paying more attention to the region. And whats interesting for me is that member nations that are party to the Arctic Council traditionally were a bit guarded on the fact that NATO should play a role. But now they are more in favor of seeing NATO, lets say, show its flag in the region as well.

Why do you think that is?

I think it is primarily driven by what I see as an increased level of Russian activity in the High North, and it speaks to an interesting maritime dimension in the opening of the northern routes for shipping and so on, although that is still very complicated. But at the end of the day, it is about what is happening there, looking at whats happening in the Northern Atlantic, including more monitoring at sea and in the air. Thats a new focus area there. You do see jets being scrambled and a bit of a cat-and-mouse game with long-range missions by the Russian Air Force. So you do see things happening there that deserve our attention.

Sign up for our Early Bird Brief Get the defense industry's most comprehensive news and information straight to your inbox

Subscribe

Enter a valid email address (please select a country) United States United Kingdom Afghanistan Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, The Democratic Republic of The Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote D'ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guinea Guinea-bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Micronesia, Federated States of Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory, Occupied Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and The Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia and Montenegro Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and The South Sandwich Islands Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan, Province of China Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States United States Minor Outlying Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Viet Nam Virgin Islands, British Virgin Islands, U.S. Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe

Thanks for signing up!

By giving us your email, you are opting in to the Early Bird Brief.

How does NATO, as an organization, tackle questions relating to the region?

In the NATO political structures, we dont have committees that deal with the south, the north, the Mediterranean and so forth. So the issues are dealt with through our normal processes for planning, for operations and for political debates. We have not established a working group on any region. Sometimes it will take the form of a dedicated paper or strategy. I dont think we are there yet with the High North. But I have seen that become part of the broader conversation, which was probably not the case five or 10 years ago.

You might remember that Trident Juncture, our biggest exercise last year, took place in Norway, which is a way to practice how to operate in these conditions. The fact that the largest NATO exercise took place in Norway says something. Our close relationship with our partners Sweden and Finland also plays in favor of paying more attention to the High North.

The Norwegians are quite keen on making clear that they do have infrastructure to receive alliance support if needed.

Excerpt from:

NATO's Camille Grand on the alliance's Arctic tack - DefenseNews.com

Latvias most important intelligence service, the Constitution Protection Bureau (SAB), named China and Russia as the main cyber threats to NATO and the European Union.

SABs 2019 report focused mostly on the threat from the Russian Federation. According to the report, Russia funds think-tanks and pseudo-academic organisations to counter the legitimacy of Latvias and other Baltic countries statehoods.

However, there were also references to the increasing influence and attacks from China, which was mentioned as a growing cyber and espionage threat. China was not mentioned in the 2017 report, while in the 2018 the document mentioned Beijings cyber operations aimed at obtaining data, mainly through economic intelligence.

According to the 2019 report, the number of Chinas cyberattacks is increasing and poses a serious problem for the security and economic interests of Latvia and other Western countries.

The document says that, over the last five years, China has greatly invested in its cyber activities, and that hacker groups controlled by the Chinese secret services have improved their technical tools. It also says that Chinas cyberattacks are carried out against public institutions, private companies, the academic community, government institutions, the military and defence sector, as well as NGOs.

The report suggests avoiding products and services from countries running offensive cyber programmes against NATO and EU members, such as Russia, China, North Korea and Iran.

Beijings embassy in Latvia rejected the report as unfounded and irresponsible, adding that unjustified speculation and stigmatisation is undesirable.

Visit link:

Latvian intelligence names Russia and China as biggest threats to EU and NATO - New Europe