Monthly Archives: March 2017

BRUSSELS A war of words between Turkey and the Netherlands escalated over the weekend, sparking a diplomatic crisis between the two North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies ahead of critical polls in both countries.

The feud between Turkey and the Netherlands, which had been brewing for days, boiled over Saturday night, when Dutch authorities deported a Turkish minister from Rotterdam as she attempted to hold an unauthorized political rally.

Turkish reaction was swift: Government officials accused officials in the Netherlands of being fascists and Nazis. They said the Dutch ambassador to Turkey, who is currently abroad on leave, wasnt welcome back for a while, and threatened diplomatic, political and economic retaliation unless the Netherlands apologized for the incident.

Turkey is a partner. We are interested in normalizing relations but we cant be bullied, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Ruttes spokesman, Tim Versnel, said in an interview. The Netherlands would never meet Turkeys demand for an official apology, he added. The spat with Turkey, on which European countries depend to curb refugee flows from the Syrian war, comes ahead of Wednesdays Dutch elections and elections in France and Germany. In all three countries, nationalist politicians have been benefiting from anti-immigrant sentiment.

An expanded version of this report appears on WSJ.com.

The global sports industry is worth roughly $150 billion in revenue, but the competition for consumers' time and money is fierce. So sports organizations are offering new exclusive experiences that can add up to thousands of dollars per ticket.

Also popular on WSJ.com:

U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara fired after refusing Justice Department request to quit.

Authorities question CIA contractors in connection with WikiLeaks dump.

See the article here:
Tensions rise between NATO allies Turkey, Netherlands - MarketWatch

U.S. President Donald Trump and German Chancellor Angela Merkel will meet in Washington on March 14, with the future of NATO and the conflict in Ukraine among the key topics.

White House officials said Trump will also seek Merkel's views on Russian President Vladimir Putin during their first face-to-face meeting at the White House.

Merkel had a strong relationship with Trump's predecessor, Barack Obama, who called the German chancellor his "closest international partner."

Trump, on the other hand, once accused Merkel of "ruining Germany" by allowing in a large number of refugees, assailed Germany on trade issues, and called Democratic rival Hillary Clinton "America's Angela Merkel."

White House press secretary Sean Spicer did not address those issues, saying only there was "a lot of excitement on both sides of the ocean for this trip.

White House officials said Trump would press Germany on the need for NATO members to increase their defense spending -- something Germany has generally resisted.

They are also expected to discuss a common strategy on Ukraine.

The United States and other Western powers have imposed economic sanctions on Russia after its illegal annexation of Ukraine's Crimea Peninsula and for its support of separatists in eastern Ukraine.

Trump has expressed desires for better relations with Putin, something that has caused U.S. allies to question his commitment to Ukraine's sovereignty, along with his support for NATO.

White House officials said the U.S. leader wanted to hear Merkel's views on her interactions with Putin.

For her part, Merkel said on March 11 that she was coming to Washington not only as the German chancellor but as a representative of the European Union.

"I will, of course, point out that for us, our country and our membership in the European Union are two sides of the same coin," Merkel said in Brussels before her departure.

A Merkel spokeswoman said the meeting would be an opportunity for "an exchange of bilateral and international topics, and transatlantic ties, as we have always stressed, are very important."

Juergen Hardt, the German government's coordinator for transatlantic relations, told the dpa news agency that the building of trust would be Merkels main goal for the visit.

"Most important is that she succeeds in making clear that differences of opinion can be spoken on the basis of partnership, but not out of confrontation," he said.

Visit link:
Trump, Merkel To Discuss NATO, Ukraine, Putin During Washington Meeting - RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty

2017-03-12As NATO nations rework their defense strategies to deal with evolving threats, clearly the question is investment in relevant capabilities.

This means that although a % criterion for investment is certainly part of the equation, it is not the only criterion.

For NATO nations clearly it is the effective contribution to that nations own defense and to doing so in such a way that interoperability with other nations is enhanced both for the self defense of the nation and enhancements in overall coalition capabilities for defending against 21st century threats.

Thus, Article III investments become especially important going forward for the alliance.

Article III of the NATO treaty reads: In order more effectively to achieve the objectives of this Treaty, the Parties, separately and jointly, by means of continuous and effective self-help and mutual aid, will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack.

In an interview last month with the Norwegian Deputy Minister of Defense in his Oslo office, Mr. ystein B, emphasized the articles importance:

Article III is the obligation to have a strong national defense and to be able to be a net contributor to security.

There is no free ride in NATO, weve all got to do our part to be able to defend each other.

It is also about relevant and effective burden sharing, namely finding ways to enhance the capability of NATO nations to operate in the extended battlespace and to share data in enhanced distributed operations with evolving C2 innovations.

The point is that there can plainly be bad investments or investments not relevant to 21st century defense, and these criteria apply to all of the NATO nations, including the United States.

There can be clearly new ways to shape burden sharing which can provide for more effective ways to augment relevant defense capabilities.

One example has been the European Transport Command, which is finding ways to share capabilities across the lift and tanking fleet to provide for enhanced support to member states.

http://www.sldinfo.com/the-european-air-transport-command-supports-red-flag-2017/

Another example might be the North Atlantic NATO members finding a way to add Triton capabilities to their force.

Two of these states are buying the P-8, namely the UK and Norway, but perhaps Canada, Norway and the UK could buy a small fleet of Triton platforms to complement their Maritime Patrol Aircraft, and to share the data and to find ways as well to shape innovative C2 methods.

Another example is provided by a recent exercise conducted in Arctic waters.

According to an article published by the Norwegian Ministry of Defence on February 26, 2017, thisexample is detailed.

During Exercise Northern Sun 17 the NATO Submarine Rescue System has been tested in Arctic waters for the first time.

This is also the first time we have flown the equipment between Prestwick and Bogen, says Commander Ian Duncan, project manager for the submarine rescue system.

350 tonnes of material has been transported from its location in Faslane, Scotland by road to Prestwick airport and flown to Evenes with the help of 7 C-17, 2 Antonov 124 and 2 A300M aircrafts. From here it was fitted to the Norwegian coast guard vessel KV Sortland, from where the equipment is being operated during the exercise.

We have two sets of rescue systems.

One of them is an intervention system that includes a Remotely Operated Vehicle. This can survey the submarine and use its arms to cut through ropes and other items blocking the submarine hatches.

The other part of the rescue system include a submarine rescue vehicle that is attached to the submarine through the escape hatch so that the survivors can climb on board as well as a set of hyperbaric chambers for treating the rescuees if needed, says Duncan.

NATO Submarine Rescue System has the capacity to rescue up to 150 personnel from a disabled submarine 600 meters under the surface.

During the exercise the participating Norwegian submarine will dive down to about 100-150 meters below the surface.

During the exercise we are testing the submarine rescue vehicle system and the hyperbaric pressure system.

Divers and medical teams from Norway, France and the UK are participating.

The goal is to demonstrate that the system works in Arctic waters.

For the personnel on the Norwegian coast guard ship it is common to operate in Arctic waters, but the personnel operating the rescue system and the equipment itself are not used to the low temperatures, Duncan says.

Every year two exercises are carried out in each of the three countries to test out the procedures.

The submarine rescue exercise Northern Sun is a very important arena for training to ensure the safety of the Norwegian submarine crews. Under normal circumstances where we have submarines present in Northern Norway, it is natural that the rescue system is tested in the same area and under the same circumstances in which the submarines operates, says Christian Berg-Jensen, who is working with submarine operations at the Norwegian Joint Headquarters.

Our expectations for the exercise are that we get to train the rescue personnel, test the vessels and train the organisation and the concept in new surroundings and conditions, making sure that operating the rescue system under winter conditions in Northern Norway becomes the least possible challenge the day it really matters, says Berg-Jensen.

The NATO Submarine Rescue System is owned by Norway, France and Great Britain.

The three countries share the costs and manage the system together.

It is the only submarine system in the world owned by many nations.

The rescue capacities can be scrambled on a short notice anywhere in the world.

Within 72 hours the first person is to be rescued from the disabled submarine.

40 divers and 24 medical personnel from all the three countries work with the rescue system.

While other submarine rescue systems can only be used on one specific ship, the NATO Submarine Rescue System can be attached to a large number of vessels.

Having a credible rescue concept for perished submarines is vital for both the Norwegian Armed Forces as a whole and the personnel serving on the boat.

NATO Submarine Rescue System is a very important capability for our ability to ensure the safety of the crews on Norwegian submarines in that it provides a significantly improved chance of survival if an accident should occur, says Berg-Jensen.

https://forsvaret.no/en/newsroom/news-stories/northern-sun

Read the rest here:
Burden Sharing in NATO: Innovations in Shaping a Way Ahead - Second Line of Defense

However, the first country ofthe former Soviet bloc tojoin NATO was de facto the German Democratic Republic in1990. By agreeing tothe reunification ofGermany, Moscow secured commitment that the West would not deploy troops onthe territory ofthe former East Germany and NATO would not expand tothe east.

Then-German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher assured his Soviet counterpart Eduard Shevardnadze: "For us, it stands firm: NATO will not expand itself tothe East."

AFP 2017/ JANEK SKARZYNSKI

Meanwhile, inthe first half ofthe 1990s, the United States and the European Union were inno haste toadmit the three former Socialist countries intothe alliance. However, finally a way intoNATO forthem was opened.

In 1997, six years afterthe dissolution ofthe Warsaw Treaty Organization, then-NATO Secretary General Javier Solana announced that the alliance decided toinvite Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary toadmission talks.

Madeleine Albright, NATO and Eastern Europe

Many Russian political analysts agree that American politician and diplomat Madeleine Albright played a key role inthe integration ofthe former Warsaw Treaty countries intoNATO.

In 1993, Albright became Washingtons Ambassador tothe UN and in1997 she was appointed asSecretary ofState.

Speaking inthe Senate inApril 1997, Albright said: "Russia would likeus tomake absolute commitments aboutthe deployment ofnuclear and conventional forces onthe territories ofnew members. But we will not compromise onthis issue," Albright said.

The State Secretary noted that the US did not plan todeploy nuclear weapons toprotect Eastern Europe. She added that NATO would not permanently station "substantial combat forces" inthe region.

First Expansion

In the second half ofthe 1990s, relations betweenRussia and the West were relatively warm and Moscow did not regard the NATO enlargement asa direct military threat. In 1998, then-Russian Foreign Minister Evgeniy Primakov said it was rather a psychological problem.

"There are some real issues, and there is also the psychological factor. It should be considered. Russia is underpressure because the alliance is expanding and nearing our borders. At the same time, the Founding Act onRussia-NATO ties helped ease tensions," Primakov said.

Moscow was concerned overthe pace ofthe NATO expansion. In fact, the admission ofPoland, the Czech Republic and Hungary was fast-tracked.

What is more, the fast pace ofintegration was dictated bythe upcoming military operation inYugoslavia. The first bombs were dropped onMarch 24, 1999, just 12 days afterPoland, the Czech Republic and Hungary became NATO members.

Moscow was outraged withNATOs intervention ofYugoslavia. Foreign Minister Primakovs plane made the famous U-turn overthe Atlantic, marking the beginning ofa new stage inRussia-NATO relations.

Bargaining Chip

In Russia, there is a common notion that NATO is a monolith organization. In fact, there have always been differences withinthe alliance. During the Cold War, its unanimity was cemented withthe "Communist threat." But afterthe Soviet bloc collapsed, NATOs unity shattered.

Sputnik/ Sergei Guneev

In the mid-2000s, Warsaw and Prague turned a blind eye onmass protests and agreed onthe deployment ofcomponents ofthe US global missile shield. Launched in2001 byPresident George W. Bush, the initiative was regarded asa threat byMoscow.

Finally, the efforts ofthe Polish and Czech government toprove their loyalty toWashington backfired. In 2009, Barack Obama became US President and adjusted the strategy towardsWashingtons allies inEastern Europe, thus, showing their real role inUS foreign policy.

"The Russia connection is simply that we're working and indeed, a number ofcountries incentral Europe are working toreset the relationship withRussia," US National Security Advisor Antony Blinken said in2009.

Thus, Washington indicated that Poland, the Czech Republic and other former Warsaw Treaty states were just a bargaining chip inUS-Russia relations.

Disputes Over Russia

Oddly enough, NATOs unity has been further undermined bythe situation aroundRussia. The Czech Republic, Hungary and Bulgaria do not want a confrontation betweenthe West and Moscow.

Moreover, Czech President Milos Zeman has repeatedly called forthe removal ofanti-Russian sanctions and underscored the importance ofdialogue withMoscow.

New Bulgarian President Rumen Radev is also known asa vocal critic ofthe Western anti-Russian approach. Despite the fact that Radev is pro-European and pro-NATO, he insists that West-Russia ties cannot be based onconfrontation.

"Bulgaria is a loyal member ofNATO and the EU. Historically and culturally, Bulgaria has always been a European country. It has chosen a stable and unswerving path ofpro-European development. We shall not stray fromit. We want toassert ourselves asa most reliable NATO partner. But that does not mean we have tobe an enemy toRussia, a country we have important economic interests with," Radev said inan interview withLe Monde inDecember.

In an interview withRT, Ivan Konovalov, a senior analyst atthe Russia Institute forStrategic Studies, noted that NATO has found itself ina stalemate.

"Western Europe and the US do not want tosponsor Eastern Europe, and Eastern Europe does not have money torestore its defense capabilities. The situation is further complicated withcalls toend confrontation withRussia," Konovalov said.

The expert suggested that Eastern European states have not gained their desired benefits fromNATO integration.

"The armed forces offormer Warsaw Treaty members are indecay. Their Soviet-made military hardware is poorly maintained, and they do not receive new equipment. Moreover, they cannot cooperate withRussia, they do not wage wars. So, it is unclear what is the reason forthem tobe inNATO," Konovalov said.

Continue reading here:
Shattered Alliance: Unpleasant Legacy of NATO's Fast-Tracked Expansion in Europe - Sputnik International