We live in times of turmoil and instability. All corners of the world are affected. Located far north, with a population of 5 million people, Norway is contributing along many lines of efforts to foster security and stability in our region, but also in other corners of the world. At the core of this engagement lies decades of strong transatlantic relations.

This week, Norway's Minister of Defense Sreide will meet with her counterparts, including newly appointed US Secretary of Defense Mattis, at the NATO Defense Ministers' meeting in Brussels to discuss today's security challenges and the way forward. At the same time, G20 Foreign Ministers will be meeting in Hamburg, where Foreign Minister Brende will represent Norway. Then, hundreds of decision-makers from heads of states, including Prime Minister Solberg, foreign and defense ministers, academics and experts will convene at the Munich Security Conference to debate critical security challenges, including the rise of illiberalism globally.

Strong transatlantic relations and global peace and security are top priorities for Norway. Because of this, Norway will be represented in full force at the aforementioned conferences.

Promoting stability requires a broad set of measures, including targeting economic and social development, providing assistance to forge good governance and facilitating political dialog. And in some cases, it may also require military contributions.

Some military contingents are deployed as part of our strong commitment to NATO and the transatlantic relationship, a cornerstone for Norway's security. Others operate within the framework of the United Nations or in cooperation with the European Union. Norway has stood alongside the US and NATO in numerous international operations. We have contributed to operations in Lebanon, in the Balkans, in Mali, in Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq and Syria, to mention a few. Since the Second World War, more than 100,000 Norwegian soldiers have participated in more than 100 international operations all over the world.

Norway is still actively contributing to support the Afghan government's efforts to stabilize the country and to counter terrorism by providing Special Forces to Kabul with a focus on capacity building. Since 2007, Norway has established, advised and supported a national Afghan Counter-Terrorism Police Unit. Every day they target terrorist networks, prevent attacks and respond to attacks against civilian and government targets. During my tenure as ambassador to Afghanistan, I witnessed firsthand the success of this cooperation. I visited several bases and spoke with the soldiers about their experiences. I also met with the "Afghan Crisis Response Unit" that, for the first time ever, included Afghan women training and participating within the Special Forces. This was a groundbreaking development, very important with regard to the future success of the country.

We also take part in US-led counter -ISIL coalition operations in Iraq and Syria. The coalition campaigns against ISIL are yielding considerable results. ISIL and its so-called Caliphate are rapidly losing territory.

As part of this campaign, Norway deployed a contingent of Special Forces to Jordan, in order to train, advise and assist local Syrian Sunni Arab forces to regain territory currently occupied by ISIL in southeastern Syria. Norway has also provided a military contingent operating out of Erbil (Iraq), training Kurdish Peshmerga forces.

The Norwegian government is considering future contributions to ongoing operations, as well as assisting NATO's mission in Iraq. As new challenges appear, we stand ready to join our NATO allies in sharing the burden and participating in joint efforts.

The offensive operations against the strongholds of Mosul and Raqqa are challenging and will take time, but we will succeed. To ensure lasting stability in Iraq and Syria, inclusive political processes are necessary.

Unfortunately, failed states and poorly governed areas along NATO's southern flank remain a major security challenge both to Europe and to the US. As a contribution to address these challenges, Norway provided a tactical airlift detachment to the UN Operation in Mali (MINUSMA) throughout 2016. Moreover, Norway also provides personnel to MINUSMA and UN's first modern Intelligence Unit. The establishment of this unit has been a significant success.

As a member of NATO, Norway takes its commitment to its allies seriously. We also take our commitment to security and defense seriously. As part of the Alliance's enhanced Forward Presence, Norway will, in May, deploy a mechanized company to Lithuania, as part of the German-led allied battalion. Norway is also providing a small force contribution to NATO's British-led Very High Readiness Task Force for 2017. We currently also sustain a limited participation in several other operations, including the UN Mission in South-Sudan, NATO's operation in Kosovo and the NATO HQ in Sarajevo.

Throughout Europe, Norway assists to ensure day-to-day situational awareness and to rescue operations. We contribute on a regular basis to NATO's Standing Maritime Forces (SNMG and SNMCMG) by providing the command ship and the commander to SNMG that consists of frigates and destroyers. Every six months we join NATO's Mine Counter Measures Group to conduct minesweeping and clearance in Northern European waters. Moreover, in response to the increasingly challenging influx of migrants from the Middle East, North Africa and parts of Asia, we are participating in the EU-led maritime operation in the Mediterranean, which patrols the southern perimeter of the EU's border.

Our Armed Forces maintain a high, but often overlooked level of peacetime activity at home that, in its own way, is an important contribution to transatlantic security. 24/7/365 the Norwegian Navy, Coast Guard and Air Force patrol vast Arctic Ocean areas over which we have jurisdiction. In total, these maritime areas are equivalent in size to 90% of the Mediterranean. Norwegian fighter jets are on 15 minutes Quick Reaction Alert on behalf of NATO. Our military border guard patrols and monitors the border with Russia. We maintain a robust posture in our neighborhood, which is important for stability in this area. We are NATO in the north.

Norway's continued commitment to peace and security will remain one of our top political priorities. As international developments evolve and unfold, I hope that by sharing this information I'm also offering a better understanding of my country's military contributions around the world in order to maintain peace and security.

Read the rest here:

Norway: NATO of the North - Huffington Post

Second, we are clearly not in a time to expand freedom in the world a point British Prime Minister Theresa May made in Washington last week. On the contrary, we need to defend and preserve freedom in our lands.

In order to reinforce our Western world, Nato must invite to become members countries that are alike in the defense of our values and with the willingness to share the burden in this civilizational struggle. Nato should invite without delay Israel, Japan, Singapore and India to become members.

Defense expenditures should be revised and increased, but ceilings and burden sharing are not the problem. We dont expend more because current leaders do not feel compelled to do so. Furthermore, to spend more on the same will not change our ability to confront the threats and challenges we face.

There is a myriad of things that can be done to put Nato back on track. Interior ministers should join defense ministers at council level and in summits.

Thats easy. But above all, what Nato needs is a vision and an impulse to transform from the new US President and administration. Yes, MrPresident, we agree with you that Nato has become obsolete. But we believe you can make it relevant again. Your allies will follow.

Mr. Bardaji is the Executive Director of the Friends of Israel Initiative and the former National Security Adviser to the Spanish government. Colonel Kemp is a board member of the Friends of Israel Initiative and the former Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan

Originally posted here:

Nato needs to reform into a global alliance against Islamic terrorism or become obsolete - Telegraph.co.uk

WASHINGTON Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis will travel to NATO headquarters for the first time next week, a visit that will be closely monitored by allied nations concerned over President Trumps commitment to the trans-Atlantic strategic partnership.

Mattis will leave DC on Feb. 14 for Brussels, where he will attend his first NATO ministerial. He will also host a meeting of the defense ministers involved in the counter-ISIS coalition before traveling to the Munich Security Conference Feb. 17, the Pentagon announced Friday.

Pentagon spokesman Capt. Jeff Davis could not confirm if Mattis would have one-on-one meetings with all of the international counterparts, in part because the secretarys schedule was still in flux. But Mattis will undoubtedly prove a popular attraction for NATO countries seeking reassurance that the U.S. is not going to abandon them in the future.

The relationship between NATO and the new U.S. president has been tense ever since then-candidate Trump hinted in a July interview that his support for NATO nations would be conditional based on whether those countries had fulfilled their obligations to us.

While Trump has since downplayed those comments, the allied nations remain nervous, especially in light of a detente between the Trump administration and Russia.

Since his nomination was first made official, members of Congress and defense experts have made no secret that they view Mattis as a check on Trumps national security plan. Comments such as those of Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Jack Reed, D-R.I., who cited Thomas Jefferson in saying Mattis would be the saucer that cools the coffee, were scattered throughout Mattis congressional testimony and Mattis himself did not push back against them.

But how much Mattis can do to push back against Trump, or even if it is his job to do so, is up for debate, said Mark Cancian, a defense expert with the Center for Strategic and International Studies who had worked with Mattis previously.

Its not the role of any Cabinet secretary to manage the president. The president is in charge, everyone else is expendable, except arguably the first lady. So ultimately, Trump will be making these decisions, Cancian said.

On the other hand, Mattis has made it clear hes willing to disagree with the president, Cancian added, citing Trumps repeated comments that he believes torture is effective but would defer to Mattis on the issue. And Trump seems to be comfortable with that. He has a Cabinet, many of whom have disagreed with his statements during their confirmation hearings, and Trump has said hes good with that.

In his first statement after becoming secretary, Mattis emphasized that recognizing that no nation is secure without friends, we will work with the State Department to strengthen our alliances.

That theme also sticks out in the public statements released by the Pentagon about Mattis first international calls. A series of readouts from his first week in office-- summary reports released by the Pentagon after major discussions between the secretary of defense and his international counterparts, in which the Pentagon puts forth the public spin it wants on discussions -- shows a clear trend in wording:

I think Mattis is signaling that alliances are still important. He has a lot of experience as a warfighter and as a combatant commander, and understands the importance of having allies and intelligence, integrating that with combat operations, Cancian said. On the other hand, thats doesnt mean the administration cant push the allies to do more, to increase their share of the burden, and there are many ways they can do that. So the two dont necessarily have to be incompatible.

Read more here:

With allies seeking reassurance, Mattis heads to NATO - DefenseNews.com

A Gallup survey of central and eastern European attitudes toward NATO contains some interesting findings. For instance, it found that only 21% of Montenegrin respondents associate NATO with protection of their country, while 29% perceive it as a threat and 35% associate it with neither protection nor threat. There is evidently little popular enthusiasm for NATO there, and there is still quite a lot of residual hostility that dates back to the 1999 NATO bombing campaign. Last week, the main opposition party called for a referendum on joining the alliance, and suggested March 24the anniversary of the bombing campaigns startas the date. Expanding the alliance is a bad idea in any case, but if most people there dont want to join it is even harder to justify.

There are several other reasons why bringing Montenegro into the alliance makes no sense, but the apparent lack of popular support for the alliance makes it a poor candidate for membership. If almost a third of the people in Montenegro thinks of the alliance as a threat to their country, that will make it an exceptionally weak member that the alliance doesnt need and shouldnt want. The U.S. doesnt need to take on any more security commitments than it already has, and it definitely doesnt need to take on an ally when a large bloc of its citizens dont want to join.

See original here:

Don't Bring Montenegro into NATO - The American Conservative

ISLAMABAD

Russia is hosting a conference in Moscow this week that will bring together Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, India and Iran to discuss a possible solution of the conflict in Afghanistan.

This meeting is part of Russia's effort at playing a more pro-active role in Afghanistan for the first time since its invasion of the country in 1979. Its efforts, however, have encountered controversies at the very outset.

The last conference Moscow hosted on Afghanistan in December included only China and Pakistan, prompting a strong protest from the Afghan government.

The one this week is more inclusive of the regional stakeholders, but excludes the United States or NATO, leading to speculation that Russia is more interested in undermining the Unites States than in solving the regional problems.

At a recent Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, chairman Senator John McCain said Russia is propping up the Taliban to undermine the U.S.

Given how troubling the situation is in Afghanistan, any efforts by any outside stakeholder to look for regional solutions to the war there should be welcomed, said Michael Kugelman, deputy Asia director at the Washington based Wilson Center. The question he asked, however, was what is Russia trying to do.

Is it genuinely trying to rally the key players to come up with an actionable plan to wind down the war? Or is it just trying to scale up its role in Afghanistan to undercut U.S. influence?

Other regional analysts, however, are looking at the development with more optimism.

This framework does include all the regional players that have a major stake in Afghanistan, according to Amina Khan of the Institute for Strategic Studies Islamabad, a Pakistani government run think tank.

Terrorism is a global phenomena but I think regional countries need to play a more pro-active role, she added.

At the last trilateral, Russias primary focus was on the presence of the Islamist militant group Islamic State in Eastern Afghanistan. Moscow does not want its influence to spread to the Muslim population in the Caucasus bordering Russia.

However, Gen. John Nicholson, the man leading the U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, told the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee recently that Russia is trying to publicly legitimize the Taliban with a false narrative that the Taliban is fighting Islamic State, not the Afghan government.

However, Russia is not the only country in the region worried about IS influence and using the Taliban as a hedge. Iran also has started supporting the Taliban to keep IS influence away from areas bordering Iran. China has had contacts with the Taliban for a while, hosting several secret meetings between the Taliban and Afghan government officials or peace envoys.

Expectations from the upcoming conference, meanwhile, are low at this stage.

The fact that three countries have been added to the list at this point for the first time means it's still going to be in the initial stages of getting to know each other, and getting to hear each others narrative and try to make sense of it. I dont see anything big coming out of this, said Omar Samad, former Afghan ambassador to the U.S.

Several similar efforts have fallen victim to the tension and mistrust between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Whether this process succeeds, will depend on whether Russia and China can persuade the two to work out their differences.

Read more from the original source:

Russia Gathers Stakeholders, Sans US or NATO, for Afghanistan Conference - Voice of America

Dozens of US Chinook, Apache, and Black Hawk helicopters have been unloaded in the German port city of Bremerhaven, as NATO continues boosting its combat presence in Eastern Europe to counter the perceived Russian threat.

The shipload of American military hardware included 49 helicopters and several trucks from the US 10th Combat Aviation Brigade stationed at the base in Fort Drum, New York, according to DPA news agency. Most equipment will then be transported to the NATO base in the German town of Illesheim, while other pieces of military hardware will be sent to other countries like Lithuania and Romania.

Today, we are downloading a portion of the combat aviation brigade and it will be moved to Germany and Eastern Europe and will be scattered between Latvia and Romania, while a big chunk of it will be stationed in Germany, Major General Duane Gamble, the Commander of the 21st Theater Sustainment Command, which is lead organization for the US Army Europes logistic support and other sustainment activities, told journalists.

The general added that the mission of the air grouping is to train with our NATO allies and to strengthen our alliance together. He also said that one of the key training objectives here is to continue to refine our agility in different [ways].

For 70 years, the US has been one of the cornerstones of NATO and there is no better way to train with our NATO partners than on the continent of Europe, he stressed, adding that the US troops will be deployed to four NATO countries: Belgium, Germany, Latvia, and Romania.

The deployment marks another phase of Operation Atlantic Resolve, which began in April 2014, following the Crimean referendum to split from coup-stricken Ukraine and join Russia. Atlantic Resolve is perceived by Washington as a demonstration of continued US commitment to the collective security of Europe in the view of an alleged Russian assertiveness.

US troops will be constantly stationed in the Eastern European countries on a rotational basis in this operation. It particularly involves deployment of 94 US helicopters and 2,200 US soldiers to various military facilities in Eastern Europe between February and November 2017, German media report.

In January, 2,800 pieces of US military hardware, including US Abrams tanks, Paladin artillery, and Bradley fighting vehicles, and 4,000 troops arrived in Europe as part of the operation. These forces then moved on to Poland to participate in military drills in late January, and then were deployed across seven countries, including the Baltic States, Bulgaria, Romania, and Germany. A headquarters unit is stationed in Germany.

Read more

More than 50 units of US military equipment, including four battle tanks and 15 infantry fighting vehicles, were then delivered to Estonia in early February. The personnel of the Charlie Company of the 68th Armored Regiments 1st Battalion from the US Army 4th Infantry Division arrived in the town in late January.

In July 2016, NATO members agreed to the biggest reinforcement since the Cold War, posting four multinational battalions to Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland.

Germany, Canada, and Britain are also contributing to the significant NATO buildup in Eastern Europe, and are sending battalions of up to 1,000 troops each to Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.

In late January, Germany began deploying troops to Lithuania. The German command said it was sending about 200 military vehicles and 30 tanks, including Marder armored infantry fighting vehicles and Leopard 2 battle tanks, along with 450 troops. The movement of forces will continue until late February, it added.

The move came amid joint US-Polish military drills, involving the 3,500-strong 3rd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, from Fort Carson, Colorado near the Polish town of Zagan. The troops demonstrated resolve to deter any unlikely potential aggression from Russia.

While NATO members continue to point to the perceived Russian aggression, calling it a source of instability, Russia consistently denies the allegations. Moscow also criticizes the NATO buildup on its borders, as well as in Poland and Germany, by saying that it increases the risk of incidents and poses a threat to Russian national security.

Read more

This deployment is of course a threat for us, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksey Meshkov said on February 9, adding that it is obvious that the steps by NATO gravely increase the risk of incidents [between NATO and Russian forces].

NATOs increased activities in the Black Sea also provoked angry reactions from Russia. Regarding NATOs activities here our Western colleagues prefer to deal with virtual and generally non-existent threats, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said, referring particularly to the recent Sea Shield 2017 held by Romania.

According to the Romanian Navy, about 2,800 troops from Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Turkey, Canada, the US, and Ukraine took part in the maneuvers. The naval drills involved 16 warships and 10 warplanes. The exercises were held in the eastern part of the Black Sea, not far from Russia's borders.

Since the spring of 2014, NATO warships, including missile cruisers from the US and other allied nations, have been patrolling the Black Sea on a rotational basis, never leaving the area unattended.

Here is the original post:

US military helicopters arrive in Germany amid NATO buildup in E. Europe (VIDEOS) - RT

You turn to Democracy Now! for ad-free news you can trust. Maybe you come for our daily headlines. Maybe you come for in-depth stories that expose government and corporate abuses of power. Democracy Now! brings you crucial reporting from the front lines of protests around the country like the standoff at Standing Rock, as well threats to education, refugee and immigrant rights, the environment and LGBTQ equality. We produce our daily news hour at a fraction of the budget of a commercial news operationall without ads, government funding or corporate sponsorship. How is this possible? Only with your support. Democracy Now! celebrates our 21st anniversary this week, and our daily global independent news hour is more important now than ever before. Today a generous funder will triple your donation. That means when you give $7 right now, Democracy Now! will get $21that's $1 for each of our 21 years. Pretty exciting, right? So, if you've been waiting to make your contribution to Democracy Now!, today is your day.It takes just a couple of minutes to make sure that Democracy Now! is there for you and everybody else for years to come.

We rely on contributions from you, our viewers and listeners to do our work. If you visit us daily or weekly or even just once a month, now is a great time to make your monthly contribution.

Please do your part today.

Continued here:

UN: 26 People Killed in NATO & US Airstrikes, the Majority Women & Children - Democracy Now!

The future of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization may be in question thanks to U.S. President Donald Trump's dismissal of it as "obsolete," but NATO is still useful in at least one sense. Attitudes toward it form the most obvious border between the so-called "Russian World" -- a construct used by Russia to describe its desired sphere of influence -- and that part of the post-Communist world that no longer looks to Moscow for guidance and may never do so again.

A quarter of a century after the Soviet breakup, Russia islaying claim to superpower status again, using many of thesame methodsperfected during the Cold War. In some ways, it's too late to the party. Its old empire -- both the czarist versionand the two-speed Eastern Europe built by the Communists, in which some nations were absorbed into the Soviet Union and others supported as its closest Comecon satellites -- has decomposed too much to be revived. President Vladimir Putin's Russia needed a new idea for restoring Russian power, and it appeared to find one in the "Russian World" ideaespousedby the Russian Orthodox Church.

The concept is broad and nebulous. It includes interest in the Russian language and culture, but also adherence to conservative religiousvalues and a cultural confrontation with the supposedly godless and dissolute West. In 2007, Putin set up a foundation to create Russian cultural centers overseas, similar to the U.K.'s British Council or China's Confucius Institute. The foundation, called Russky Mir, now has more than a hundred branches globally.

"The Russian world is an independent civilization that is capable of promoting certain ideals," legislator Vyacheslav Nikonov, grandson of Joseph Stalin's foreign minister Vyacheslav Molotov, wrote in acollectionof articles published by the foundation. "The Russian world shouldn't be about memories of the past, but about dreams of the future."

There is a flip side to this vision: The apprehension of countries once ensnared in Russia's orbit and now wary of being dragged back in.As the Estonian intelligence service wrote in its recently released 2016 annualreport:

Despite Vladimir Putin's declaration that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century, the Kremlin's goal is not restoration of the Soviet Union. Using modern political, economic and military instruments for restoring its sphere of influence is considered a much loftier purpose.

The "Russian World," after all, is not only about soft power. It includes what is often termed "hybrid war": If a nation tries to leave its realm, Russia will fight to stop it through propaganda targeted at Russian speakers. It will also use force, as it has shown in Ukraine.

NATO, with its untested but powerful mutual security guarantee, is the only shield protecting potential "Russian World" countries from a forcible reinduction into Moscow's sphere of influence. At least for now, it limits Russian influence to soft power. So, attitudes toward the military bloc are a good gauge of a country's attractiveness to Putin's Russian World project. If NATO is popular in a nation, the Kremlin will still pull all the strings available to it,perhaps even spread some cash or attempt to influence an election -- but it won't work as hard as it will in a nation where a negative attitude toward NATO gives it a bigger opening.

Gallup has released the results of a survey on NATO, taken in Eastern European countries in 2016. Viewed from a "Russian World eligibility" point of view, it provides some predictable results and some surprising ones.

NATO vs. "Russian World"

Answers to the question "Do you associate NATO with the protection of your country, a threat to your country or neither?" (percent)

Source: Gallup

Ukraine, despite three years of war waged on its territory by Russian-backed separatist rebels and, at decisive moments, by Russian troops, still has an anti-NATO plurality. It's easy to see why Putin is unwilling to desist in Ukraine: He still hopes to win the big prize.

The Baltic states, especially Estonia and Lithuania, are not as interesting to the Kremlin. They have pro-NATO majorities; a Russian hybrid invasion would be too costly and pointless for Russia to maintain. Even in Latvia, with its large Russian minority, almost half of the population is pro-NATO, which disqualifies the small nation as a potential part of the "Russian World" for anything but cultural purposes.

It's far more productive for the Kremlin to concentrate on the more anti-NATO post-Soviet states, such as Armenia and Moldova, and on Balkan nations such as Serbia and Montenegro. No wonder Russian activity in these countries has recently been on the increase. Even NATO members Bulgaria and Greece, where significant minorities see the bloc as a threat rather than a protection, are promising arenas for Russian influence-wielding -- whereas post-Soviet Georgia, where the anti-NATO minority is tiny, is probably a lost cause.

It's possible, then, that in trying to reconstruct Putin's strategy, experts are mistaken when they concentrate on post-Soviet nations in the moribund Commonwealth of Independent States as potential targets. The Estonian intelligence report, for example, states that "Russias ambition is to strengthen its influence in the CIS area and ensure Russian-controlled integration therein via the Eurasian Union." That's probably obsolete thinking. Russia will seek to play a role everywhere people are not mentally "anti-Russian"enough to believe in NATO as a protective shield, and that includes, at least in the near term, the Balkans rather than the Baltics.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

To contact the author of this story: Leonid Bershidsky at lbershidsky@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Mark Gilbert at magilbert@bloomberg.net

See more here:

A NATO of the Mind Limits Putin's Sphere of Influence - Bloomberg

Soldiers of armored infantry battalion Panzergrenadierbataillon 122 of the Bundeswehr, the German armed forces, in Lithuania | Johannes Simon/Getty Images

Opinion

If Europe tries to protect the alliance only by buying American commitment through increased defense spending, it will fail.

By Jean-Marie Guhenno

2/11/17, 4:13 AM CET

Updated 2/11/17, 2:00 PM CET

Europeans have every reason to worry about U.S. President Donald Trump. He has declared NATO obsolete. Hes spoken more glowingly about Russian President Vladimir Putin than about most WesternEuropean leaders. And hes suggested he will apply his transactional vision of diplomacy to his countrys alliances. A president who has unabashedly made America First his guiding principleis telling Europeans Americas commitment to themwill depend on their willingness to pay for it.

The Continents leaders should listen carefully. For too long, European countries have not been serious enough about their own defense; most spend much less than the 2 percentof GDP goal set by NATO. If they do not change course, a president who has little understanding of soft power and, in his own words, only respects strength, will not take them seriously.

A European security landscape defined in bilateral talks between Russia and the U.S. is a serious possibility, one that would be terrible news for the Continent. Trump might care most about fighting Islamic terrorism; for Russia, the priority remains dividing Europe to gain the upper hand.

If Europes only response is to buy American commitment through increased defense spending as NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg has indicated alliance members should do it will fail. NATO cannot sustain itself as a political alliance if it is guided by monetarytransactions. Its European members must show unity of purpose and vision: The time has come to create a European pillar of NATO.

* * *

Today, there is no shared vision of what NATO stands for, and apparently little interest in the White House for the principles that gave substance to the NATO security commitment during the last 67 years. The transatlantic solidarity defined by Article 5 of NATOs founding treatyis only credible if it is underpinned by a set of shared values.

NATO is about North Americasengagement in Europe, and Europeans, working with Canada, must take the initiative in proposing a vision adapted to the 21st century. Otherwise, they run the risk that a president who has little time for the Continent will see his European allies simply asadjuncts to an America First strategy and blatantly ignore their interests.

Germany and France, whose military capacities are increasingly compatible and complementary, should take the lead once elections in bothcountries have taken place.

The idea of a European pillar is not new, but was deemed unnecessary for many years because the alliances members shareda solidconsensuson its functions. As a proposal, apillarnow makes sense in terms of realpolitik. With a U.S. president who appears more than happy to play nations against one another, European countriesare unlikelyto make themselves heard unless they can present a coherent, united position.

The move wouldalso benefit intra-European political dynamics. Europeans are unlikely to support increased defense spending if it is perceivedsimply as aresponse to American bullyingand support for Washingtons somewhat incoherent policies. Increased effort must come with a renewed sense of political ownership for NATOs European members.A stronger EU that regains political momentum by making its own security a political priority, is an indispensable partner to a strong NATO.

The specifics of a more integrated effort, whether aEuropean headquartersor an expanded role for the European Defense Agency, or ideas to implement the EU global strategy in the area of security and defense as agreed by EU member countriesin November, should be discussed between EU nations.

National governments will want to retain a central role in matters of national security, butthe European institutions can help coordinate the effort and give it a broader European dimension.

* * *

A European pillar will first have to decide on its membership. Germany and France, whose military capacities are increasingly compatible and complementary, should take the lead once elections in bothcountries have taken place.

A caucus needs to emerge within NATO. It should include the six founding members of the EU, as well asmore recent members, which could agree on two founding principles: that the emergence of a European pillar is made necessary by the changed strategic landscape; and that a European pillar should be conceived as a means to strengthen NATO, not as an alternative to it. In fact, one of its key goalswill be to keep the U.S. engaged.

That core group should in time be opened to other members of the EU and should establish close consultation mechanisms with EU non-NATO members, such as Sweden, and with NATO nonEU members, such as Norway and Turkey.

Polish soldiers pose during a welcome of U.S. troops in Zagan, Poland | Natalia Dobryszycka/AFP via Getty Images

An informal political approach is probably the only viable path to this European pillar, since a formal institutional approach would likely stall veryquickly. A formal arrangement withTurkey, for example, will remain difficultuntil its problems with the bloc the question of Cyprus reunification remains a sore point are solved.

And within theEU, serious differences have emerged on what role the Unionshould play in its own defense. Separated from the question of EU membership, a European pillar within NATO could bring countries with varying degrees of EU adherence into the fold. TheUnited Kingdom one of the Continents most important military powers for example, is about to leave the EUbut couldfind its strategic interests best served by a close relationship with the new group.

In an era of rising nationalism, creating a European pillar ofNATO may sound ambitious. But opinion polls show that Europeans, while critical of many aspects of the EU, considerdefense to be an area that warrants more, rather than less, cooperation. The EU will not get out of its present malaise by renouncing its ambitions. On the contrary, it needs to be more ambitious if it wants to respond to the security concerns of its citizens. The exceptional circumstances confronting Europe require an exceptional response.

Jean-Marie Guhenno is president andCEO of International Crisis Group, the independent conflict prevention organization.

Continued here:

Why NATO needs a European pillar POLITICO - POLITICO.eu

At least 11 civilians have been killed in an airstrike in Afghanistans Helmand province, local media report. The NATO-led mission has confirmed to RT that it recently conducted airstrikes there, but claimed there is no evidence civilians were killed.

The alleged airstrike took place in the Sangin District of Helmand province late Thursday or early Friday, according to Afghan media.

There has been fighting in and around Sangin over the last few weeks, and US Forces have conducted strikes to support and defend our Afghan partners. As with all claims of civilian casualties, we will investigate them to determine the facts and whether civilians were hurt or killed as a result of our operations, Charles Cleveland, a spokesman for NATO-led Resolute Support, told RT in a statement.

Cleveland stressed that the US take every precaution to prevent and mitigate civilian casualties and we take every allegation seriously.

With that said, we have no evidence that civilians were killed in these strikes, rather just claims from the Taliban that civilians were killed as a result of our strikes in Sangin, he said.

In the meantime, United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) said it was looking into reports of civilian casualties from airstrikes in Sangin.

Earlier, Pajhwok Afghan News agency cited the Taliban, which claimed that over 20 civilians had been killed and scores wounded in airstrikes conducted by foreign forces in Sangin. The group also reportedly said that B52 long-range strategic bombers had been involved in the operation.

However, in a statement on the Twitter account of the Resolute Support mission, Cleveland said that B52s had not been used in the Helmand operation.Officials confirmed on Friday that at least 11 members of one family, including eight men and three women, were killed when a rocket hit their house in the Sangin district on Thursday night, according to TOLONews.

According to RT contributor Bilal Sarwary, who spoke to Helmand provinces chief and locals, two families suffered in the airstrike, and the death toll reached 25 people.

Two families were affected by this airstrike. Two homes were hit, killing at least 25 civilians and injured six others, he said, adding that the casualties include women and children.

Mohammad Karim Atal, the head of Helmands provincial council, told the channel that 11 members of one family were killed in the airstrike, though he said it was not immediately clear which forces had carried out the airstrike.

The Afghan army will also be investigating the incident, Atal said.

On Thursday, US Army General John Nicholson told the US Senate Armed Services Committee said that NATO should boost its troop presence in Afghanistan.

READ MORE: Re-escalation in Afghanistan: Top US general calls for 'a few thousand' more troops

I have adequate resources in my counterterrorism mission, Nicholson said, adding In my train, advise and assist mission, however, we have a shortfall of a few thousand. This is in the NATO train, advise, and assist mission, so it can come from America or its allies.

About 8,400 US troops and about 6,400 NATO soldiers remain in Afghanistan since NATO sharply reduced the number of its troops there in 2014. US-led forces entered Afghanistan to remove the Taliban from power more than 15 years ago following the September 11 attacks.

NATO had to investigate another airstrike in November of last year, when scores of civilians, including children, were reportedly killed during an operation in Kunduz. NATO forces in Afghanistan said the airstrikes were conducted to defend friendly forces under fire.

Visit link:

11 civilians reportedly killed in Afghanistan airstrike, NATO-led mission says 'no evidence' - RT

By Foo Yun Chee | BRUSSELS

BRUSSELS NATO accused Russia of escalating a disinformation campaign since the Kremlin's 2014 seizure of Ukraine's Crimea region, saying Russian websites such as Sputnik and RT had posted false stories, the alliance's spokeswoman said on Saturday.

There is increasing concern among senior NATO and European Union officials over Russia's ability to use television and the Internet to spread what they say is fake news.

The defense alliance of 28 democracies says it has recorded more than a score of Russian myths in the last two years which it has attempted to knock down with factsheets, interviews, rebuttals and videos.

"NATO has been dealing with a significant increase in Russian propaganda and disinformation since Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014," spokeswoman Oana Lungescu said in an email.

She said a website set up by NATO in 2014 "catalogs 32 Russian myths about NATO systematically used by Sputnik, RT and a range of other outlets owned or controlled by the Russian government".

Lungescu said the most recent disinformation occurred earlier this month when Russian news website life.ru published a fabricated voice recording of NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg with a Russian prankster pretending to be Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko.

"Such a call never took place and this was an obvious example of disinformation," she said.

The Kremlin, Russian government, RT, Sputnik and Life could not immediately be reached for comment.

The Russian authorities have in the past denied seeking to interfere in the internal affairs of other states. Russian state-funded media deny acting as the propaganda arm of the Kremlin. They say they present an alternative viewpoint that is ignored by the mainstream Western media.

Lungescu cited another example of disinformation in July last year when Sputnik, RT and other Russian websites issued reports about a fire raging at a NATO base in Izmir, claiming it was a deliberate sabotage after the failed coup in Turkey.

"We engaged with Sputnik, RT and others to correct, as there was a forest fire at some distance from the base, but with no connection to it."

(Additional reporting by Christian Lowe in Moscow; editing by Mark Heinrich)

BEIJING Combining public bluster with behind-the-scenes diplomacy, China wrested a concession from the United States as the two presidents spoke for the first time this week, but Beijing may not be able to derive much comfort from the win on U.S. policy toward Taiwan.

ATHENS/BERLIN Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras warned international lenders on Saturday not to heap new burdens on his country but said he believed the drawn-out bailout review with them would end well.

UNITED NATIONS The United States has objected to United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres' choice of former Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayyad as the body's new representative to Libya.

See original here:

NATO says it sees sharp rise in Russian disinformation since Crimea seizure - Reuters

When Jrgen Bornemann was a junior army officer in West Germanys Bundeswehr, he spent many months of every year practicing getting his unit from its base to likely conflict zones near West Germanys border with East Germany. His unit was not alone. Entire divisions were moved within West Germany, Bornemann, who went on to become a lieutenant general and director general of NATOs international staff, told me. (A division consists of some fifteen thousand soldiers.)

Practicing movements involving tens of thousands of troops towards potential hot spots was, in fact, a main component of NATOs Cold War defense planning. NATO was constantly practicing, fine-tuning deploying fifty thousand troops across the Atlantic and moving them across Europe, said Ian Brzezinski, an assistant secretary of defense under George W. Bush. It was a demonstration, but it was also a way of making sure the wheels were always greased.

By comparison, todays NATO troop movements look rather modest. Exercises are less frequent and typically involve brigade-size forces, around five thousand troops each. In 2015 we had an exercise [Trident Juncture] that involved thirty-six thousand troops, but it took a long time to plan and only took place in Italy, Portugal and Spain, Brzezinski pointed out. And as Bornemann notes, with many years having passed without large regular exercises, officers lack the knowledge of how to do it. They often lack the equipment, too. During the Cold War, Germanys Deutsche Bahn kept thousands of rail cars available for Bundeswehr transportation. Thats no longer the case.

Equally worrisome is the speed at which the exercising troops advance. Referring to NATOs Very High Readiness Joint Task Force, which consists of five thousand troops, a senior NATO official told me, Sometimes we have ten nations participating. Its not just a matter of the number of troops and vehicles moving. We have to be able to go from anywhere to anywhere. Its extremely complex, whereas during the Cold War everyone knew which route they would be taking.

With battle zones so much harder to predict than during the Cold War, its difficult to know where to pre-position equipment. We dont know where well need it, whereas during the Cold War we knew exactly where wed need it, the NATO official said.

Cold War NATO commanders also knew the specifics of every bridge, railroad, road, tunnel, airport and seaport on NATO territory. They could easily access the information in the alliances Capability Catalogues, a meticulously maintained encyclopedia that detailed every piece of infrastructure that could be used by the military. But we let the Capability Catalogues go, the NATO official told me. As a result, commanders have incomplete information about the infrastructure they need to use in order to move their troops. Though bridges and railroads may seem secondary, logistics is the pillar of any military exerciseand any military engagement.

Newer NATO member states capabilities never added Capability Catalogues, and were also left with Communist-era infrastructure. Some of them have rebuilt their infrastructure in a lot of places where some of the older Allies havent, but some of the bridges in some of the former [Warsaw Pact] nations will probably need upgrading at some stage, the NATO official said. Were talking sometimes seventy or eighty tons of armor, so you put that on top of a flatbed and then youve got the issues of going across a bridge. Since the 2014 Wales Summit, NATO has again been collecting capability entries from its member states, and the official says the alliance is making progress towards a complete set of catalogues.

And troops need to regularly use the infrastructure. We used to move armor up from Greece into Kosovo and the Balkans, for example, the NATO official pointed out. Its not new for NATO to be able to do that, we just need to get to where we were before in terms of being up to speed and having that situational awareness.

In recent months, the alliance has made crucial progress in another area: border crossings. Until last year, many NATO member states didnt issue automatic clearance to alliance troops entering their territory. Now that issue has been resolved.

Still, NATO is decidedly less swift than Russia, which can deploy tens of thousands of soldiers on several days noticeand has the advantage of large military bases not far from three NATO member states: Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. By contrast, NATOs best and largest armed forces units are based in western Europe, where the United States still maintains a respectable military presence.

Thats where NATOs decisionmaking speed plays a crucial role. After the Cold War, decisionmaking power for NATOs exercises shifted from commanders to the civilian North Atlantic Council, which operates at distinctly unmilitary speed. Military commanders have been aware of the problem caused by slow decisionmaking for a long time, but political decisionmakers have had their heads in the sand. Brzezinski said, Its changing now, but is it changing fast enough?

See the article here:

Is NATO Really Ready for a War? | The National Interest - The National Interest Online

I save things. One of these days, I really must pare all the stuff I have accumulated, but I have a penchant for connecting memories with things, or I convince myself that somebody other than me thinks all these items are important or collectible.

I have a fairly large window sticker, oval, that states: NATO Your Best Bet For Peace. I have no idea where I got it, but it may have been at the Knoxville Worlds Fair.

NATO was formed in 1949 as the counterpoint to the Soviet Unions Iron Curtain. The basic premise is that an attack by an enemy on any member nation is considered an attack on all and the members must support each other. However, that doesnt mean everybody goes to war.

NATO members may judge for themselves what kind of aid to give and how to deliver it.

Fine-tuning the NATO military command structure was overseen by the Supreme Commander of Allied Forces from World War II, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower. That was in 1951. Ike got the job done just in time to become our president in 1952.

There is another article of the NATO charter that mandates consultation if a member nation feels threatened. Turkey has invoked that article four times, Poland once the only instances of official come-help-us military consultation in NATO history.

NATO was the right thing to do when the Iron Curtain appeared impenetrable. The Iron Curtain is gone, but plenty more curtains some without catchy nicknames persist. I have my window sticker, just for reassurance.

I must say Ronald Reagans Trust but verify sounds better every day.

Then theres the USS North Carolina. Its an awesome battlewagon. Ive visited the ship and I have collected several trinkets over the years. But rummaging through some stuff looking for other stuff, I came across a fact sheet that jogged my memory about just how important the North Carolina was in WWII.

It was the only American battleship to engage in all of the 12 major naval offensives in the Pacific. It was the first U.S. battleship to fire into Japanese territory. The ship traveled more than 300,000 miles during the war and consumed approximately 2 million gallons of fuel.

Thats slightly more than 6.5 gallons per statute mile. Well, the ship displaces 35,000 tons and carried an active-duty crew of 2,000.

If you havent been to Wilmington to see the battleship memorial, you should. After all, its not that far north from the Grand Strand, and lots of us go there when we can.

And in the good riddance department, an item that was saved from an 1888 copy of the Newton Enterprise newspaper that I am now saving. I redact last names, you know, just in case.

On Sunday, the thirteenth day of May 1988, William, aged eighteen years and my wife, Sarah, aged forty years, ran away from my home in Lincoln County. William is about five feet and six inches high, has dark hair, fair complexion, and black eyes, short black beard on his face and weighs about 165 pounds.

Sarah is a small spare-made woman with light red hair, fair complexion with warts on the back of the left hands, weighs about 112 pounds, and uses eyeglasses in reading or sewing. I think they have gone to South Carolina. Probably to some cotton factory.

I publish this not to bring them back to this county again, but to let the good people know who they are, wherever they may be. The announcement was signed by husband Joseph.

Ol Joe didnt leave much to the imagination, making sure people knew without a doubt Williams beard was on his face. I do wonder how many left hands, warts and all, Sarah had.

The irony is I found this forgotten item not long after hearing Rod Stewart sing on the radio about a woman named Maggie. It appears William was not as indecisive as Rod.

Excerpt from:

No worries, I have a NATO sticker - Morganton News Herald

German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen attends a meeting with U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis at the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia on Feb. 10. Mary F. Calvert / Reuters

Russia's deputy defense minister has called those NATO exercises a "threat."

But Von der Leyen disputed that characterization and deemed the NATO troop movements, which involve a U.S. Armored Combat Brigade, "appropriate."

"Russia knows that it is a reaction for the Russian annexation of Crimea and the hybrid war in Eastern Ukraine," she told NBC News. "Therefore it was important for us to make sure that our Baltic friends know their borders are secure"

Von der Leyen is the first defense minister hosted by Mattis at the Pentagon and their meeting lasted for about an hour, twice as long as scheduled.

Their conversation ranged from Syria to Ukraine, and also touched upon European defense spending levels. She said it was a "fair question" for President Trump to ask why so many NATO countries do not spend the targeted 2 percent of GDP on their military budgets.

"In an alliance there needs to be a fair share of the burden," she said. "We recognize that we need to raise the budget, because we need it in the Armed forces. We need to modernize the armed forces."

The German defense minister also suggested that Europe needs to consider establishing an EU army, to conduct missions that aren't core to NATO's mission.

"We need as Europeans to address problems where for example we do not see NATO," she said, "We have to bring over stability for example to Mali and Niger."

Ahead of Germany's planned election in September, she called on the press to help dismantle "fake news" stories, while suggesting that Russia may attempt to meddle in their democratic process.

"The Kremlin has no interest in having a too stable and too strong Europe, she said. "The free press is the strongest sword you have within these complex situations."

More here:

Germany's Defense Minister: Trump is Committed to NATO - NBCNews.com

Wall Street Journal

Trump Moves Toward Backing NATO Candidate Over Russian Objections Wall Street Journal The Russian government has vehemently opposed Montenegro joining NATO, keeping with its longstanding opposition to the alliance's expansion. Montenegrin officials have publicly accused the Kremlin of trying to deter its membership by instigating an ... and more »

Here is the original post:

Trump Moves Toward Backing NATO Candidate Over Russian Objections - Wall Street Journal

Baltic nations are increasingly worried that Russian war games set for this autumn will see President Vladimir Putin send as many as 100,000 troops to Belarus border with Lithuania and Poland -- the very edge of the Kremlins sphere of influence with eastern Europe.

At a recent Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Russia, Sen. Bob Menendez, D-New Jersey, said hed met recently with Baltic ambassadors who said the planned Zapad exercises, set for September, could involve that many Russian troops, which would be a significant increase on the number that took part in previous drills under the same name in 2013 and 2009.

U.S. Gen. Phillip Breedlove, who was the Supreme Commander for NATO until May last year, said the name for the exercise -- the Russian word for west -- combined with the fact that hes heard it could involve at least 100,000 troops -- possibly twice that many -- is a bit alarming.

Play Video

Since the end of the Cold War, the U.S. has been drawing down its military presence in Europe. But at the main docks in Bremerhaven in northern G...

Breedlove cautioned, however, that the Kremlin has not released figures of its own regarding how many troops will take part in the September exercises, and that Russian officials have been known in the past to spread misinformation to serve their interests.

The Russians have ordered 83 times... the rail cars that they ordered for Zapad (in 2013), Breedlove said at the Senate hearing, reports CBS Radio News correspondent Cami McCormick. So the size of this exercise will be demonstrably bigger.

Russia said 10,000 troops took part in the 2013 drills, which spanned across Russian territory and involved all branches of its military, but some Western defense analysts have said the actual number was likely closer to 70,000.

Nations have a right to exercise, Breedlove said on Thursday. Nations do not have a right, I think, to exercise irresponsibly on other borders and in configurations that represent offensive capability.

I think the problem with this exercise is size and scope, directly on the border, a name that orients it west, and the fact the unpredictability of it makes it very alarming, he said.

Europe and western Russia.

Google Maps

His remarks came as Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite told reporters after talks with her counterparts from neighboring Latvia and Estonia that they were all concerned, risks are increasing.

We are worried about the upcoming Zapad 2017 exercise, which will deploy a very large and aggressive force (on our borders) that will very demonstrably be preparing for a war with the West, Grybauskaite said in Riga, according to a transcript of her statements by the Reuters news agency.

This means that we will be talking with NATO about creating additional standing defence plans, about stationing additional military means and about creating a faster decision making process, she said.

Lithuanian Defence Minister Raimundas Karoblis told Reuters that the NATO alliance should be prepared to defuse any provocations during the Russian drills.

Presence of such an amount of troops (next to our borders), of course it creates some risks,Karoblis said. We will take also our countermeasures, including those with our allies, not to allow any provocations.

Its clear Russia really wants to re-establish its domination, and change defence system in all Europe. It is already threat for central Europe, particularly for Baltics, he added.

Play Video

Retired General James Mattis testifies on Capitol Hill as President-elect Donald Trump's pick for defense secretary. Watch his full opening state...

Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are all expected to push U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis to at least maintain the current U.S. military commitment to its NATO allies in eastern Europe. About 4,000 American troops have been deployed to Poland and neighboring nations in recent months, under orders to President Obama, in response to Putins annexation of Crimea.

While President Trump rattled European leaders by calling NATO obsolete before taking office, Mattis defended the alliance during his confirmation hearings as the most successful military alliance probably in modern history, maybe ever.

During the hearing, Mattis also described Russia as a principal threat to the U.S., but agreed with Mr. Trumps view that hed like to see engagement with its government.

Im all for engagement but we also have to recognize reality and what Russia is up to and theres a decreasing number of areas where we can engage cooperatively and increasing number of areas where were going to have to confront Russia, Mattis said. I have very modest expectations about areas of cooperation with Mr. Putin.

See the original post:

Putin planning to send 100K troops to Baltic border for drills? - CBS News

13News Now Mike Gooding has the story

Mike Gooding, WVEC 6:44 PM. EST February 10, 2017

nato_logo_.jpg (Photo: WVEC)

NORFOLK, Va. (WVEC) -- Could NATO be on its way out of Norfolk after 65 years here? A column in the publication, 'Defense News' suggested moving the 28-nation command to Washington, D.C.

One way or another, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has ben a part of Norfolk since 1952. The facility at Naval Support Activity off Terminal boulevard is NATO's only permanent headquarters outside Europe

The organization's current iteration here, Allied Command Transformation, dates back to 2003. Its past commanders include current Secretary of Defense James Mattis, who served here from 2007 to 2009.

The 28 partner nations are responsible for promoting and overseeing the continuing transformation of Alliance forces and capabilities.

Hampton Roads citizens get a small glimpse of ACT every spring during the annual NATO festival downtown. But, if Defense News writers Magnus Nordenman and Henrick Breitenauch get their way, the five-decade-plus local partnership would come to an end.

They write that NATO should move to Washington "to be closer to American decision-makers."

Not everyone agrees with that assessment.

"This is the right place for NATO allied Command Transformation to be, period," said retired rear admiral Craig Quigley. He now serves as executive director of the Hampton Roads Military and Federal Facilities alliance. He says Norfolk and its many nearby military commands is the perfect place for NATO, and, it should stay put.

And as far as he know, Quigley says nobody in NATO thinks otherwise.

"I'm not aware that article by those two writers was anything more than an academic exercise," he said. "I have never, ever heard of substantive plans to move he headquarters away from where it is right now."

Such a move would be a blow to the Hampton Roads region, which in the last decade has lost United States Joint Forces Command, the Navy's Second Fleet, and the Army's For Monroe.

13News Now put in a call to Supreme Allied Command Transformation's public affairs office, for a comment.

So far, they have not called back.

( 2017 WVEC)

Read more from the original source:

Article calls for NATO to move HQ from Norfolk to DC - 13newsnow.com

WASHINGTONThe point agency for buying software and technological capabilities for NATO wants to increase the number of small companies that support the allianceand is prepared to put its money where its mouth is.

Peter Scaruppe, director of acquisition for the NATO Communications and Information Agency, told Defense News in a Feb. 2 interview that his office does about a billion euros worth of business in a good yearthats a small number from the U.S., but for Europe that is a major player here.

But that number is set to grow in the next two and a half years, during which Scaruppe says his agency plans to spend around 3 billion (U.S. $3.2 billion) on contracts for requirement ranging across a number of areas, including cybersecurity and IT, but predominantly for command and control capabilities.

Command and control systems for missile defense, for example, and for air command and control systems we will have about 500 million in business in this area alone. We have a lot of communication systems in the pipeline, for example, in the maritime area, in the land command and control area.

The single biggest contract being worked is for satellite communications, which Scaruppe said could come out to about 1.5 billion over the next three years.

Software has been procured for NATO through common-funded financing; that means all 28 nations chip into a project, then the nation can use the software for a national purpose without having to buy it again because its been paid for by NATO already, he said.

In order to broaden the pool of suppliers, the agency is hosting its annual conference outside Europe for the first time. The event will be hosted April 24-26 in Ottawa, Canada, a strategic decision made in part because Canada has a lot of small and medium enterprises, and not the big-ticket industries that tend to appear at shows in the United States.

Roughly 80 percent of the agencies contracts are given to prime contractors, so the conference will feature a challenge where smaller companies can compete to tackle a specific technological problem, which Scaruppe hopes will result in new voices arising.

We need to make it easy on the smaller companies. A lot of them dont want to deal with us because of too much red tape and administration, and an intergovernmental installation like we are tends to have more red tape than a national government, Scaruppe said, adding that many smaller firms dont want to have to share intellectual property rights with the NATO governments.

If those concerns sound familiar, it's because they are echoes of long-running concerns from U.S. defense officialsmost notably former Defense Secretary Ash Carter, who made bringing technological innovation into the Pentagon a key part of his time in office. And just as Carter encouraged smaller companies to raise their concerns with the Pentagon, Scaruppe hopes to leave his conference with a handful of suggestions for improvement.

If we want the best, we need to address this. Were addressing this through the conference, were holding workshops where we want to address this, he said. We want to hear from industry, what are the challenges, and we will have our own experts here, including my own staff, to discuss how we can make it easier for industry to be a part of the successful bid.

See the article here:

NATO looks to contract $3.2 billion over next three years on C4, IT - DefenseNews.com

Nato says viral news outlet is part of "Kremlin misinformation machine" BBC News In the world of viral news, it's a relative baby - but it's already become so controversial that a Nato spokesperson told BBC Trending that Sputnik is an agent of Russian misinformation. Sputnik was set up in 2014 and puts out podcasts, radio shows and ... and more »

Follow this link:

Nato says viral news outlet is part of "Kremlin misinformation machine" - BBC News

NATO Deputy Secretary General Rose Gottemoeller welcomed the Moldovan President Igor Dodon to NATO headquarters on Tuesday (7 February 2017) for talks on the partnership between the Alliance and the Republic of Moldova. Ms Gottemoeller thanked Moldova for its contribution to NATOs KFOR peacekeeping mission, which also gives Moldovan troops valuable practical experience. She explained how the partnership between NATO and the Republic of Moldova helps improve peoples lives, for instance with training for almost 2,000 Moldovans in areas such as fighting corruption in the defence sector, border security and civil emergency planning.

The Alliance has spent 4.5 million euros on destroying pesticides, anti-personnel mines, surplus munitions and rocket fuel. The Deputy Secretary General said that NATO will open a new civilian Liaison Office in Chisinau this year to facilitate NATO support for the countrys reforms, as requested by the Moldovan government. She stressed that NATO fully respects Moldovas constitutional neutrality, as recognised in the Individual Partnership Action Plan.

See the rest here:

NATO backs stable, secure and neutral Moldova - NATO HQ (press release)