Category Archives: NATO

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg on Friday warned that the conflict in Ukraine was heading into a "dangerous" new phase, as the Kremlin simultaneously claimed that Russia's unprovoked six-week war could end in the "foreseeable future."

Stoltenberg told NPR that Russian President Vladimir Putin has not "changed his overall aim, and that is to control Ukraine," warning that the war is likely to see "much heavier fighting" in the days to come.

The NATO chief said Putin was unlikely to "sit down and engage in good faith in negotiations for a political solution," adding, "Therefore, we need to also be prepared for the long haul. And it's hard to predict. Wars are always unpredictable. But this can last for months and even years."

Meanwhile, Putin's spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told reporters that Moscow's so-called "special military operation" in Ukraine could soon be over because Russia was succeeding at reaching its goals in the eastern European country, according to the Russian state-owned TASS news agency.

"The operation continues and the goals are being achieved," Peskov said, according to TASS.

Peskov added, "Substantive work is being carried out both on the military side, in terms of advancing the operation, and on the side of the negotiators who are in the negotiation process with their Ukrainian counterparts," TASS reported.

The Kremlin spokesman said during a live interview with Sky News on Thursday that the Russian military was "doing their best to bring an end to that operation."

"And we do hope that in coming days, in the foreseeable future, this operation will reach its goals or will finish it by the negotiations between Russian and Ukrainian delegation," Peskov said.

When pressed Friday by whether the war could actually end in days, Peskov said, "We are talking about the foreseeable future," according to TASS.

On Thursday, Peskov admitted that Russian forces had endured "significant losses."

Despite Ukraine's armed forces being largely outnumbered and outgunned by the Russians, the Ukrainians have put up fierce resistance, which has resulted in heavy losses for Russian troops. NATOestimates between 7,000 to 15,000 Russian troops have been killed since the war began less than two months ago. Russia has also lost an astonishing number of generals in the conflict.

As Peskov claimed the war would wind down soon, the brutal Russian onslaught continued. At least 50 people were killed on Friday including five children after two Russian rockets hit a train station in the eastern city of Kramatorsk that was packed with people attempting to evacuate, Ukrainian officials said.

Putin launched Russia's invasion of Ukraine on February 24, with Russian troops surrounding and shelling towns and cities across the country. Civilian areas have consistently been targeted, killing at least 1,611 and leading over 4.3 million Ukrainians to flee the country, according to the UN's latest figures.

Both Western and Ukrainian leaders have accused Moscow of committing war crimes in Ukraine, and in a rare diplomatic rebuke, Russia was suspended from the UN Human Rights Council on Thursday.

Though there's strong evidence to the contrary, Russia has repeatedly and falsely stated that it's not targeting civilian areas.

Russia has continuously spread disinformation on the war, habitually offering misleading and inaccurate assessments of the situation on the ground.

The Russian military has struggled to make major gains in the war thus far, in spite of the Kremlin's claim that the "operation" has achieved its goals.

Russia failed to take Kyiv, the Ukrainian capital, and for the time being has shifted its focus to the eastern Donbas region where Russian-backed separatists have been fighting Ukraine since 2014.

Stoltenberg on Tuesday warned that Russia would launch a "concentrated" offensive in the Donbas.

"In the coming weeks we expect a further Russian push in the east and southern Ukraine, to try to take the entire Donbas and to create a land bridge to the occupied Crimea," the NATO chief said.

Originally posted here:
NATO chief says Ukraine war could last years as Russia claims it will end soon - Business Insider

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg: NATO foreign ministers will meet today and tomorrow, we will address the brutal war in Ukraine and we have all seen the atrocities that have been committed in Bucha and other places in Ukraine. This reveals the true nature of President Putin's war, and the targeting and killing of civilians is a war crime and therefore, NATO allies are supporting the international efforts to establish all the facts, to investigate, and to make sure that perpetrators are punished. We are now in a critical phase of the war. We see that Russia is moving forces out of the north to reinforce them, to resupply them, to rearm them and then to move them into the east where we are expecting a major offensive. President Putin's aim is to try to control the whole of Donbas and to establish a land bridge [...]. We have seen no indication that President Putin has changed his ambition to control the whole of Ukraine and also to rewrite the international order. So we need to be prepared for the long haul. We need to support Ukraine, sustain our sanctions, and strengthen our defences and our deterrence, because this can last for a long time and we need to be prepared for that. We will be joined by Foreign Minister Kuleba from Ukraine, and I think it's important that we have this opportunity to engage directly with him. To discuss with him to listen, to hear Minister Kuleba and also to discuss the way forward together. We'll also be joined by other partners, the Foreign Minister of Georgia, Finland, Sweden, the European Union, and also by our partners from the Asia Pacific, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and South Korea. And these are all highly valued partners.

Tonight, Foreign Ministers will discuss NATO's New Strategic Concept which will address of course the new security reality we are faced with the Strategic Concept will be the roadmap for NATO and how to address a more dangerous world and how to make sure that we continue to protect and defend all NATO Allies. In the Strategic Concept we need to address the security consequences of Russia's aggressive actions, of the shifting global balance of power, the security consequences of a much stronger China, and the challenges Russia and China are posing together to our rules based international order and our democratic values. But of course also in the Strategic Concept, we will sort out the strategy for how to deal with cyber, hybrid, terrorism, and also the security consequences of climate change. So I'm looking forward to the meeting and it will be, an important meeting. Not least facing the grim reality in Ukraine. And with that, I'm ready to take your questions.

Question 1: Mr. Stoltenberg, some allies are already sending heavy equipment to Ukraine. Others are still reluctant, such as Germany, what is your position? Should, in this new phase of a war, Western Allies send heavy weapons, heavy equipment such as tanks, to Ukraine?

NATO Secretary General: NATO allies have supported Ukraine for many years, we have trained 10s of 1000s of Ukrainian troops, who are now on the front, fighting the Russian invaders, and the NATO allies have also provided different kinds of equipments over many years. And of course, this combined with the courage, the commitment, of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, is really making a difference every day on the battlefield. Since the invasion, allies have stepped up their support. I also expect that ministers when they meet today, and tomorrow, will discuss how we can further support Ukraine. Allies are providing both anti-tank, anti-air or air defence systems, but also different kinds of advanced weapon systems and also both light and heavier weapon systems to Ukraine. I will not go into all details, so exactly what kind of weapons equipment allies are providing, but I can say that the totality of what Allies are doing is significant. And that includes also some heavier systems combined with lighter systems.

Question 2: Thank you very much. Mr. Secretary General, we want to be sure that the part of the strategic concept which you will discuss, will include open door policy, which is very important for Georgia as an aspirant country, especially now, what can you tell us about this? More about this, and also, you yesterday said that the importance of stepping up support for Georgia, and support the country to prevent future aggression. What do you mean and what threats do you see? Thank you.

NATO Secretary General: I believe that one of the lessons we all should learn from the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, is that it is important that all of those also believe in democracy, the rule of law need to provide support to close and highly valued partners like Georgia. It's better to support them sooner than later. And therefore, one of the issues that will be discussed at the Foreign Ministerial meeting, today and tomorrow, is how can we step up support for other partners which are under Russian pressure and of course, Georgia is one of them. Russia controls part of Georgian territory, and we will look into how we can provide more support both when it comes to everything from cyber to secure communications, capacity building, and other ways to strengthen Georgia in resisting the pressure from Russia. NATO's door remains open. The enlargement of NATO over several decades has been a great success, helped to spread democracy, the rule of law, stability, peace across Europe, and it is for the applicant country, the country aspiring for membership, and for the 30 allies, to decide on membership issues. Russia and no other country has any veto on that issue. It is for the applicant and the 30 allies to decide.

Question 3: This time partner countries such as Japan participates, what they aim for that?

NATO Secretary General: We very much welcome that we have the Japanese Foreign Minister participating at the NATO meeting. It demonstrates the strong partnership between Japan and NATO. Japan has been a long standing partner with NATO for many years. And I think that we all understand that even though Japan and NATO are geographically far apart from each other, we share the same values, we share the same challenges, and therefore we need to work closely together, both to protect our core values, democracy, international rules-based order, but also for instance, to address the challenges posed by a more assertive China. And the fact that China now has the second largest defence budget in the world, it's investing heavily in new modern military equipments. And therefore we need also to work together with our partners in the Asia Pacific. Also to work together on issues like maritime security, cyber, and other areas where we have common interest, Japan and NATO to work together.

Question 4: How quickly does NATO countries need to supply Ukraine with heavy military equipment if it's going to be able to defend itself against the stronger onslaught from Russia in the east and the south? And secondly, what is your comment in Norway expelling three Russian diplomats today?

NATO Secretary General: Ukraine has an urgent need for military support. And that's the reason why it is so important that NATO Allies agree to further support Ukraine with many different types of military equipment, both heavier equipment, but also light weapon systems. And we have seen that this support is actually having an effect every day. We can see just the pictures of all the destroyed Russian armour. This is something which has been done with weapons, anti-tank weapons, so anti-armour equipment delivered by NATO Allies and the US Congress just decided, the United States just decided, to allocate more money for anti-armour systems. Just one of many examples of how allies are stepping up. There is urgent need and therefore I also expect allies to provide further support of many different types of weapon systems. It is of course the Norwegian decision to expel Russian officials from the diplomatic mission or the embassy in Norway, but this is now a pattern where many allies have done that because we see that many of those who say that they are conducting normal diplomatic activity are actually not doing that, they are intelligence officers for Russia and therefore, several allies have expelled several Russian officials from different NATO Ally countries.

Question 5: You mentioned yesterday that if Finland and Sweden applied for NATO membership, allies would find ways to address security concerns over the interim period before, between application and ratification. Could you expand on that? What would that entail?

NATO Secretary General: It is for Finland and Sweden to decide whether they would like to apply for membership or not and we will respect that decision. If they, regardless of the conclusion, if they decide to apply, I expect that all allies will welcome them, and that building on the fact that Sweden and Finland are our closest partners. We have worked together for many years, we know that they meet the NATO standards when it comes to interoperability, democratic control over the armed forces. We know that they can easily join this alliance if they decide to apply. Then on the interim period, I'm certain that we will find ways to address concerns they may have regarding the period between the potential application, and the final ratification. Again, I think it's not helpful if I start to speculate in the public exactly how we'll do that. First of all, we need to know whether Finland and Sweden will like to apply. But I'm confident that if they apply we will sit down and we'll find a way to address that issue.

Question 6: Thank you. You said that we may be in this for the long haul, that the war may take a long time, does that require NATO Allies changing their approach, and their strategy, and will you be discussing that?

NATO Secretary General: So first of all, this war must end now. And President Putin can end it by withdrawing his troops and forces and stop attacking independent, sovereign, country Ukraine, and sit down in good faith and to find a political solution. But at the same time, we have to be realistic and realise that this may last for a long time, for many months, for even years. And that's the reason why we need also to be prepared for the long haul. Both when it comes to supporting Ukraine, sustaining sanctions, and strengthening our defences. And I expect the ministers to address the long term perspectives, the need to be prepared for the long haul both when it comes to support to Ukraine, sustaining sanctions, and strengthening our defences. I also believe that regardless of when the war ends, this has long term implications for our security, because we have seen the brutality. We have seen the willingness by President Putin to use military force to reach his objectives. And that has changed the security reality in Europe for many, many years. So therefore, we have started the process in NATO, we have tasked our military commanders to provide options for the political leaders to take decisions on how to reset our deterrence and defence for the long term. This will of course, build on what we have already done. The invasion of Ukraine was a wakeup call. But that happened in 2014. So we have actually since 2014, implemented the biggest reinforcement to our collective defence, increased readiness of forces, tripled the size of the NATO Response Force, reformed the command structure, and started to invest more increased defence spending across the Alliance. So we, NATO, was actually quite well prepared when Russia invaded Ukraine for the second time, and on the day of the invasion, we activated our defence plans, deployed 1000s of additional troops in the eastern part of the Alliance. Now there are 40,000 troops on the NATO command in the eastern part of the Alliance. And there are more US troops in Europe, 100,000 in total, and other Allies have also increased their presence. So, this demonstrates that for years we have been actually adapting to the aggressive actions of Russia. We were well prepared when they invaded Ukraine. But now we need to take a new step, for a more long term strengthening of our deterrence and defence and I expect that NATO, that this will be discussed among the foreign ministers today and tomorrow, but then decisions for the longer term will be made at the summit in Madrid in June when the heads of state and government meet.

Question 7: On a very quick follow up, Secretary General, on Finland and Sweden. The idea of fast track membership should they want to do that, what does that message does that send to other countries who might want to join NATO?

NATO Secretary General: It is for each and every nation in Europe to decide whether they would like to apply. Then, if they apply, we will sit down and assess the need for reforms, the need to ensure interoperability, the need to strengthen their governance, fight corruption, and all of the different types of reforms which different countries need to implement to join NATO and therefore, the time it has taken for different countries to join this alliance has varied significantly, reflecting different starting points. And the only thing I'm saying today is that Finland and Sweden, there is no other countries that are closer to NATO, that have for many, for so many years worked so closely with us on military interoperability, on exercises, training, and also where we know them, you know that they actually also meet the NATO standards, for instance, when it comes to political, democratic, civilian, control over the security institutions and the armed forces. So, that's reason why I believe that an accession process for these countries can be quite smooth, meaning that we know that they are very close to NATO already. But again, this is for Finland and Sweden to decide and then if they apply, we'll sit down and address the old issues related to membership. Thank you.

Read the original here:
Doorstep statement by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg ahead of the meeting of NATO Ministers of Foreign Affairs on 6 and 7 April 2022 - NATO...

Just over two months ago, the prospect of Finland joining NATO was virtually unthinkable to most in the northern European country. It had grown closer to the military alliance over the last three decades but resisted the idea of becoming a full-fledged member.

That all changed when tens of thousands of Russian troops rolled across Ukraines border in late February.

Now, top Finnish leaders are edging closer to joining NATO, buoyed by a drastic turnaround in Finnish public opinion that went from opposing the move to supporting it virtually overnight.

Just over two months ago, the prospect of Finland joining NATO was virtually unthinkable to most in the northern European country. It had grown closer to the military alliance over the last three decades but resisted the idea of becoming a full-fledged member.

That all changed when tens of thousands of Russian troops rolled across Ukraines border in late February.

Now, top Finnish leaders are edging closer to joining NATO, buoyed by a drastic turnaround in Finnish public opinion that went from opposing the move to supporting it virtually overnight.

It has been a major change, said Pete Piirainen, a visiting senior fellow at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs. We feel Russia broke the rules, broke the international system and security architecture.

Finlands sudden shift on NATO membership is a sea change in Europes security environment in the wake of Russias invasion of Ukraine, one that could drastically alter the map of the showdown between Russia and the West.

If Finland were to join the alliance, the total land border between NATO territory and Russia would more than double, from around 754 miles currently to nearly 1,600 miles. It would also extend NATOs northern flank across the full length of the border with Russias strategically important Murmansk region and Kola Peninsula, where a sizable chunk of Russias navy is based.

A similar debate over NATO membership is playing out in neighboring Sweden, another longtime partner of the alliance that had spurned full membership for decadesuntil Russias brazen invasion of Ukraine. Of the two countries, it is the Swedish public that has historically been more open to membership of the military alliance than their Finnish neighbors. That is no longer the case. The biggest momentum is in Finland, and that has been a bit surprising actually, said Anna Wieslander, director of the Institute for Security and Development Policy, a Swedish think tank.

In the days after Russias invasion of Ukraine in February, support for NATO membership in Finland surged into the majority for the first time, reaching 62 percent in a second survey conducted in mid-March by the Finnish public broadcaster. In Sweden, 51 percent now support NATO membership, according to a poll from early March, up from 42 percent in January.

Although Finland is edging closer to NATO membership than Sweden, most analysts and diplomats agree that the countries are a package deal. If one joins, the other is likely to follow suit. Given their shared geography on the Scandinavian Peninsulaalong with NATO member Norwaythe alliance would prefer if the two countries joined at the same time. [With] that, you will have one new solution for the security arrangements, Wieslander said.

Finland is on a path toward membership. I think now its a question of when, not if, said Erik Brattberg, an expert on trans-Atlantic security with the Albright Stonebridge Group, a consulting firm. I think Sweden is still adjusting to the new geopolitical reality. It has been slower in that adjustment, but they are also moving in the same direction.

NATO members seem universally ready to welcome Sweden and Finland with open arms. Diplomats from Germany, Britain, France, Canada, Lithuania, and Estonia all told Foreign Policy their governments would likely support Finland and Swedens membership bid.

Julianne Smith, the U.S. ambassador to NATO, said Washington would welcome the two new members but stressed it was up to the governments in Helsinki and Stockholm to make the first move. They bring very capable militaries. They are some of our closest allies in Europe, and so I cant imagine a situation where there would be tremendous resistance to this idea, she told reporters in a briefing on Tuesday. Quite the contrary, I think NATO allies would be generally enthusiastic.

The Finnish government is working on a white paper on security due to be released this month, which will fuel conversation about NATO membership ahead of the security alliances summit in Madrid in June. The white paper will clearly influence the debate here in Sweden as well, Wieslander said.

Brattberg said the ruling party in Sweden, the center-left Swedish Social Democratic Party, appears to be starting to shift its foreign-policy platform in the wake of Russias war, prodded in part by the center-right parties in opposition to renewing a push for NATO membership. The Social Democratic Party has traditionally, historically stood for Swedish neutrality and military nonalignment, Brattberg said. But even amongst leading Social Democrats in Sweden, that stance is increasingly being seen as less and less relevant in a new era marked by the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The question of NATO membership is likely to factor higher than ever before in debate ahead of the Swedish general election scheduled for September. The countrys Moderate Party has already announced that it would back membership of the military alliance.

The prospect of Finland and Sweden joining NATO is likely to further inflame tensions between Russia and the NATO alliance. The Kremlin has characterized the alliance, borne out of the Cold War rivalry between the Soviet Union and the West, as its top geopolitical foe and signaled that Ukraines prospective NATO membership played a major role in its decision to fully invade the country. A senior Russian diplomat warned last month that there would be serious military and political consequences if the two countries joined the alliance.

Finlands ambassador to Washington, Mikko Hautala, told Foreign Policy in an interview that he expected a reaction from Moscow if Finland or Sweden were to move ahead with applying to NATO. [At] a minimum, we will see information influencing those kind of activities, he said. But its hard to say what the reaction would be.

During the Cold War, as Europe was carved up into spheres of influence, Finland opted for neutrality, serving as an important buffer between the East and the West. The collapse of the Soviet Union gave Finland more room to maneuver in its foreign policy, joining the European Union in 1995 and deepening its cooperation with NATO. We are basically as close to NATO as you can get without being a member, Hautala said.

Smith, the U.S. NATO ambassador, said the Kremlins fierce opposition to NATO enlargement wouldnt deter allies from welcoming new members, even in the face of a full-scale Russian war in Ukraine. Russia tried its very best in recent months to try and get NATO allies to revisit that policy, she said. It sent a treaty requesting that NATO basically turn off the process of NATO enlargement, and the answer that came back in stereo surround sound from all 30 allies was: absolutely not. NATOs door will remain openfull stop.

NATO diplomats say Finland brings more advantages to the alliance than just military hardware. Few countries know how Russia works better than Finlandat least as well as foreign countries can in the shadowy and opaque power structure that Russian President Vladimir Putin has built. They say adding Finlands expertise and experience in balancing relations with its larger eastern neighbor would add significant value to the alliance.

Other experts on trans-Atlantic security said while Russia would likely condemn Finland and Swedens membership, it doesnt view those countries in the same light as other prospective members that used to be in the Soviet Union and, at least in the eyes of Putin, should fall under Moscows orbit.

Russia would be furious, but I dont think it would react the same way if, say, Georgia or Ukraine were on a clear track to NATO membership now, said Rachel Rizzo, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council think tank.

Originally posted here:
Finland May Finally Want In on NATO - Foreign Policy

Senator Rosen: I am honored to be appointed to the Senates bipartisan NATO Observer Group to work alongside my colleagues to reaffirm the United States enduring commitment to NATO

WASHINGTON, DC U.S. Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV) announced that she has been appointed as one of three new members to join the bipartisan Senate NATO Observer Group at a time when the Alliance is playing a critical role in coordinating the response to Russias unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. The Senate NATO Observer Group has a mission to closely monitor and inform Senators about defense spending commitments of Alliance members, the process of upgrading military capabilities, the Alliances counter-terrorism capability, NATO enlargement, and the ability of NATO member states to address non-conventional warfare. Re-established in 2018, the Senate NATO Observer Group is co-chaired by Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) and Thom Tillis (R-NC) and made up of seven Democrats and seven Republicans in total.

As Russia continues its brutal and horrific invasion of Ukraine, a strong and united NATO is vital to the security of the United States and our allies, said Senator Rosen. NATO is one of the most successful alliances in history and has been the bedrock of peace and security in Europe for over half a century. I am honored to be appointed to the Senates bipartisan NATO Observer Group to work alongside my colleagues to reaffirm the United States enduring commitment to NATO, assess the strength and capabilities of the Alliance, and coordinate the transatlantic response to Russian aggression. We will ensure that NATO has the resources needed to protect the United States and the security of our allies.

The strength and resilience of the transatlantic alliance has never been as critical as it is today amid Putins war in Ukraine. The close coordination among NATO nations, led by the United States, has been pivotal to increasing military assistance and humanitarian aid to Ukraine, and imposing historic punitive measures against Putin for his unprovoked invasion and barbaric war crimes against the Ukrainian people, said Senator Shaheen. Senator Tillis and I re-established the Senate NATO Observer Group four years ago as we observed the increasing belligerence of Russia and other adversarial regimes that pose a threat to U.S. security and our global stability. Im encouraged to see our effort strengthened by this new expansion to include Senators Hagerty, Rosen and Moran, reaffirming the robust bipartisan support in the Senate for NATO and the U.S. commitment to the transatlantic alliance.

The last few months have shown the importance of unequivocal U.S. support for NATO and unity among our transatlantic allies as Russia continues its unprovoked invasion and atrocities against Ukraine. Congress will continue to play a vital role in ensuring we stand together against Putins invasion and any attack on our democratic allies, said Senator Tillis. I want to welcome Senators Hagerty, Rosen, and Moran to the Senate NATO Observer Group. I am proud to co-lead this important coalition with Senator Shaheen, and the addition of these members, bringing the total to 14 senators, only strengthens our mission to advocate and demonstrate strong Congressional support for NATO.

###

Continue reading here:
Rosen Named to Bipartisan Senate NATO Observe - Jacky Rosen

Huddled in a control center deep in a bunker in Uedem, western Germany, operators monitor air traffic 24/7 for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization territory from the Alps up to Iceland. A green blip on radar screens on Tuesday showed what appeared to be a Russian plane likely looking to collect intelligence on anything from radar capabilities and air bases to logistics on the ground. (Airman 1st Class Joshua King/Air Force)

An unidentified Russian aircraft flying off the northern coast of Norway raised up an alert among NATO officials this week, prompting a Norwegian fighter jet to lift off into the sky and investigate.

Huddled in a control center deep in a bunker in Uedem, western Germany, operators monitor air traffic 24/7 for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization territory from the Alps up to Iceland. A green blip on radar screens on Tuesday showed what appeared to be a Russian plane likely looking to collect intelligence on anything from radar capabilities and air bases to logistics on the ground.

A duty controller at the operations center ordered a so-called alpha scramble, which sends a fighter jet in air within minutes to monitor the aircraft, collect any markings or tail-numbers and check if its carrying any missiles. That information is fed back into a database to match any previous records.

Such encounters occur every other day on average and havent seen a significant uptick since the start of Russias war with Ukraine, NATO officials said. Monitoring the alliances airspace has become all the more important since the invasion as NATO looks to beef up its presence in the east to deter any potential aggression from Moscow, but also looks to ensure no incidents spiral out of control and unintentionally drag NATO allies into the conflict.

We dont want to be provocative but its to determine what this airplane is doing and report that back, said Steve Carocci, director of the air operations center at Uedem, adding that so far officials havent seen any NATO airspace violations from the Russian side.

An incident earlier in March, when a drone flew from Ukraine through several NATO countries before crashing outside Zagreb, has highlighted the sensitivity of the work. An investigation is ongoing into the incident.

Russian intelligence-gathering planes also frequently cruise near Norway, in light of Moscows interests in the Arctic Circle. Moscow is making the so-called Northern Sea Route, which runs along its Arctic coastline, a key part of its strategy to boost natural gas exports to Asia.

The NATO alliance, which includes the U.S. and 29 other countries as members, employs as many as 8,000 people for air policing. In addition to Uedem, a center in Torrejon, Spain monitors traffic in the southern part of the alliance. Around 30 surveillance and fighter jets are in the air at any one time monitoring NATO airspace.

That includes also peering into Ukrainian territory, to some degree. While no allied planes will enter into Ukrainian airspace, some planes and ground radar sites can pick up information about whats in Ukrainian airspace or on land. NATOs airborne warning and control system aircraft, for instance, can see up to 250 kilometers (155 miles) on ground and 400 kilometers in the air, depending on weather conditions.

You always need some early warnings, Harold Van Pee, commander of the Uedem center, said. The farther you can look into the other side, the more time you have to prepare for whats coming up.

Original post:
NATO scours the skies for incursions amid rising Russia tensions - Stars and Stripes

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent in any way the editorial position of Euronews.

The word children was etched in large white letters in Russian on the ground next to the building, in the hope that Russian jets would spare the target.

Hundreds of civilians, from the very old to the very young, had flocked to the theatre in the southern Ukrainian port city of Mariupol seeking refuge from the invaders ceaseless assault. Yet still the bombs came, reducing a temple of culture to a pile of rubble.

It took nine days to tally up the dead, numbering roughly 300, according to the city council. But counting casualties has become impossible in a city where they cannot keep pace with the dead. Bodies have piled up on the streets as local residents race to dig mass graves.

Time is running out for the living, who struggle to cope with freezing temperatures and shortages of food and water, their ability to leave -- or bring desperately needed supplies in -- cut off by the cordon of Russian soldiers encircling the besieged city, who are now forcibly relocating Mariupols residents to Russia.

Hold these images in your head. Please do not look away. Ukrainians need the world to see what is happening in my country -- to feel it, in their very souls -- and conjure the moral courage to do what is right.

Each day brings a new horror story in the ongoing saga of the senseless slaughter of innocent lives that has unfolded since Russia invaded in late February.

The World Health Organization reports it now has verified 64 Russian attacks on Ukrainian health facilities since the war began, leaving hundreds of thousands of people without water and electricity.

Before the attack on the Mariupol theatre, Russian bombs struck a maternity hospital, killing mothers and babies.

After days of intense shelling, Russian officials announced on Friday a strategic shift to the eastern Donbas region, which promises more carnage.

The use of weapons of mass destruction against civilians is a crime against humanity and a violation of the fourth Geneva Convention of 1949.

Government officials and civil society organisations in Ukraine are now collecting evidence of Russian President Vladimir Putins war crimes.

We are gratified by the recent announcement that the US is sending $800 million (733 million) in additional security aid to our country.

The worlds response has been amazing. The speeches and pledges at the meetings in Europe are truly heartening.

But as the European leaders who have just returned from Kyiv have explained, Ukraine needs even more from its allies to prevent the further slaughter of civilians as Russia continues its relentless campaign to destroy our country. We need NATO to impose a no-fly zone over Ukraine. To create true humanitarian corridors, allowing innocent women and children safe passage out of the war zone.

The UN General Assembly earlier this month approved by an overwhelming majority a resolution calling on Russia to immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw all of its military forces from the territory of Ukraine".

In March, the International Court of Justice ruled by a vote of 13-2 that there was no evidence to support Russias pretext for war, and demanded an immediate end to its military operations.

Yes, Russian President Putin has ignored the rule of law many times in the past, in Crimea, Syria, Chechnya, Luhansk and Donetsk, to name just a few examples.

But this is a violation of another magnitude, an effort to totally obliterate a sovereign nation he does not believe even has the right to exist.

If he is allowed to continue, is there is nothing to stop him from crossing other borders, in an attempt to reassemble the Tsarist Russian empire of the past? Can a superpower pronounce Putin a war criminal, as President Biden did Wednesday, with no consequences? Does the system established following World War II to govern global security have any meaning if Putin can blow through these guardrails with impunity?

NATO and the European Union are vital parts of that international order. I listen as diplomats voice concern about stepping in to save Ukrainian lives; taking firmer measures would risk drawing NATO and the EU into the war now raging in my country, they say.

But Russia has already declared war on NATO, on the EU, on their founding principles and values. Ukraine is just the battlefield on which that war is being fought. This is not just an assault by an autocracy on an emergent democracy. This battle is the ultimate test of a rules-based world order against a dictator who believes he can take whatever territory he desires through military might - no matter how many die in the process. Free people everywhere have a stake in the outcome.

There are means of holding leaders accountable for war crimes - as in Nuremberg, Cambodia, the former Yugoslavia, and Rwanda. But the wheels of international justice turn slowly. We need to close the sky and stop the slaughter now before more war crimes are committed, before thousands more Ukrainians are murdered. Only then can the work of holding Putin accountable begin. The world is watching. Chinas decision about what to do with Taiwan may well hinge on the consequences they see levelled for Putins invasion. North Korea too is taking note.

What is happening now in Ukraine is an opportunity to show the world that the rule of law is stronger than the rule of brute force and that morality does not stop at NATOs borders.

The Ukrainian people are rising up in resistance, fighting heroically against Russias vastly superior firepower. Our efforts, with the help of our democratic allies, must succeed, and not just for Ukraines sake. Victory here matters to Georgia, to Moldova, to the rest of the free world. With greater support from the US, NATO and the EU, victory can come sooner. With your help, lives can be saved.

Dont let the death of mothers and their babies be in vain. Let it be a reminder of the high cost of tyranny a reminder that freedom is a cause worth sacrificing for.

Hanna Hopko is chair of Ukraines Democracy in Action Conference and a former Ukrainian MP.

Follow this link:
Russia has already declared war on the EU and NATO | View - Euronews

On 22 March 2022, NATO organized a public event on Women Mediators and Peacebuilders in the MENA Region: Leveraging Leadership. The event was part of NATOs ongoing efforts to do more in terms of public diplomacy in the Middle East and North Africa region.

It brought together women mediators and peacebuilders and representatives of the Atlantic Alliance to discuss the vital role of women in promoting peace and stability across the Middle East and North Africa. It featured a wide attendance, both in person and online.

In her introduction remarks, Ambassador Bettina Cadenbach, Assistant Secretary General for Political Affairs and Security Policy at NATO Headquarters, emphasized the necessity for the Alliance to foster such discussions on the Women, Peace and Security Agenda in the region. Ambassador Cadenbach outlined the scope and priorities of NATOs Women, Peace and Security Policy, including its informing principles of integration, inclusiveness and integrity.

The Assistant Secretary General welcomed speakers coming from several countries in the Middle East and North Africa, and introduced the guest of honour, Mrs. Tawakkol Karman, Nobel Peace Prize Recipient. Tawakkol Karman highlighted the crucial role of international organizations such as NATO - together with its member states and partners - to always include women and disregard activities that might bring harm to women peacebuilders and mediators.

During a first panel on the security of women peacebuilders and human rights defenders in the MENA Region, panellists highlighted the need to strengthen international cooperation to protect female peacebuilders within the framework of international humanitarian law, and to enhance womens representation in conflict resolution efforts. The second discussion on the role of women in politics in the Middle East and North Africa drew on past and current experiences aimed at informing a more holistic and sensible approach to the inclusion of all women in all political processes. International support for funding and logistics were identified as major drivers for female activists in the region.

The discussion featured also an exchange of views on NATO and Allied countries role in the MENA region. Participants presented several policy recommendations for NATO, including the organization of workshops and training programmes for female peacekeepers and peacebuilders, as well as renewed efforts in line with the Responsibility to Protect principle enshrined in the UN Security Council Resolution 1973 of 2013.

Amongst the highlights of the event was a discussion held between Yemeni 2011 Nobel Peace Prize Winner, Mrs. Tawakkol Karman, who compared the struggle of the Arab Spring activism to Ukraines resistance to Russias aggression, and Ms. Irene Fellin, NATO Secretary Generals Special Representative for Women, Peace and Security.

See the article here:
NATO hosts women peacebuilders and mediators from the Middle East and North Africa to discuss their work and the Women, Peace and Security agenda -...

A couple of weeks ago, some Republican senatorstook to the microphonesto declare that the war in Ukraine has shown that Democrats are a bunch of weaklings who can't defend America. What a shocker? One of them even called Joe Biden "Bambi's brother." But despite their fist-shaking, you could see they were just going through the motions. That's because they know their party is hopelessly confused about what they need to do to appeal to their base on foreign policy these days. Elected GOP officials are all over the map on this issue, with a growing faction becoming more hostile to support Ukraine by the day.

It's actually not unprecedented for Republicans to vote against military action instigated by Democratic presidents and it isn't even unprecedented for them to refuse to back NATO. Back in the '90s, many of them voted against intervention in the Balkans region after the former Yugoslavia splintered, even in the face of ethnic cleansing and genocide. The House GOP leader at the time, Tom Delay of Texas, saidhe didn't trust the president and claimed the crisis was "falsely described as a huge humanitarian problem, when in comparison to other places, it was nothing." (It was not nothing.)

I think what he saidaccurately summed upthe thinking of many Republicans at the time. Their hatred for Clinton was so overwhelming they simply could not support anything he did and frankly, they just didn't care about all those war crimes. If anything, they were sympathetic to the Serbian strongman who had been terrorizing the region for most of the decade,Slobodan Miloevi,who was eventually found guilty of war crimes by the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

RELATED: Putin's war crimes and his military failures are making his GOP apologists squirm

But after the many decades of reflexive GOP hostility to the Soviet Union and their virulent anti-communist scaremongering, it is still a bit startling to see so many of them suddenly ambivalent about Russian aggression.

Why?

There was a timewhen the hard-line right-wingers defined themselves by their antagonism toward America's strongest post-war adversary. They were so paranoid about it that for a time they believed the entire government was overrun with Russian spies and the whole country was in danger of being overtaken from within. Not anymore.

On Tuesday night, the House of Representatives held a vote for a simple, non-binding resolution expressing support for NATO and calling on President Joe Biden to strengthen the organization's commitment to defending democracy. All the Democrats and two-thirds of the Republicans voted for it.

63 Republicans voted against it.

This was the most anodyne resolution under the circumstances you could possibly come up with. This isn't like Kosovo when they were voting on whether to authorize airstrikes, it was a purely symbolic statement to back the NATO allies which are bearing a huge burden of taking refugees and a statement of support for NATO's "founding democratic principles" citing the threat of "authoritarian regimes" and "internal threats from proponents of illiberalism."

If you look at that list of the Republicans who voted against this resolution, nearly one-third of the caucus, you'll see that it includes the usual Trumpist suspects and a few more we might not have known was in that faction. Considering all the kind words Trump himself has had to say about Putin ever since he began the invasion, it's obvious this is where the Trump base is on this issue. And it seems to be growing in Congress.

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

And this wasn't the first House vote that made that clear although it did garner more votes than any of the previous ones. The first voteon March 2ndwas a resolution urging sanctions against Russia and military aid to Ukraine for which all of the Democrats, even the true blue anti-war lefties, voted. Only three Republicans declined to support it: Matt Rosendale, R-Mt., Thomas Massie, R- Ky., and Paul Gosar, R-Az.

"Before Tuesday night, 21 House Republicans had already voted against support for Ukraine or sanctions on Russia"

Two weeks later onMarch 9th, the House voted to suspend oil and gas imports from Russia. Two Democrats voted against it as did 15 Republicans. On March 17, the House passed a bill toend favorable trade relationswith Russia and Belarus and eight Republicans voted against it. All of the Democrats voted yes.

Meanwhile, members of this faction are busy proposing legislation of their own, which explains their objections to the aforementioned resolutions and bills.North Carolina Rep. Madison Cawthorn and Arizona's Gosarwant to prohibit the military from deploying any more troops in support of Ukraine in Europe than are stationed at the Mexican border.10 more Republicanswant to bar the delivery of military aid to Ukraine until the border wall is completed. I think it's only a matter of time before they propose an invasion of Mexico along the lines of Putin's incursion into Ukraine.

Before Tuesday night, 21 House Republicans had already voted against support for Ukraine or sanctions on Russia. And that number had only grown from one vote to the next, culminating last night in 63 Republicans voting against even expressing support for democracy. That third of the caucus will have an enormous influence if the Republicans take control of the House next January.

RELATED:Putin's war and the battle for democracy: How this conflict raises the global stakes

So where is this coming from?

Some of it is simple contrarianism, of course, just as it was back in the '90s. There is, after all, a Democrat in the White House. And some of it comes from a very real admiration for Russia, especially its leader Vladimir Putin. But a lot of this attitude is no doubt due to Trump's trashing of Ukraine and its president Volodymyr Zelenskyy over the years. Some believe that Ukraine deserved to be invaded, largely based on the misinformation they've been fed about "biolabs" and "Nazis," both of which they believe America is responsible for perpetrating. And, of course, Trump blamed Ukraine for the election interference in 2016 no doubt having been told that by Putin himself.

But there are other rationales as well. Some simply don't like NATO and have bought into Trump's nonsensical view that Europe is a"welfare case."Many of them just don't think the U.S. has any reason to have allies or joint defense agreements, which reveals that they have no knowledge of history. They also seem to think thatRussia is super strongand America is extremely weak, so it's a mistake to hit the hornet's nest. These are the people who dress up in the flag and sing "I'm proud to be an American '' at their wedding receptions.

"It's obvious this is where the Trump base is on this issue"

And, needless to say, aside from his impressive manly manliness, a lot of Republicans appreciate Vladimir Putin because he believes in traditional family values and won't let that "woke," gay agenda infect his culture the way the Democrats have done here. Because, let's face facts, this is all the Democrats' fault, especially the alleged "Biden Crime Family," and the bogus climate change pushers whocooked the whole thing upto screw up the oil markets and force their radical Green New Deal down the throats of Real Americans.

This faction within the Republican Party is powerful and it's becoming mainstream. The big question is how many Republican voters are with them. If the voters are following the same trajectory as their representatives, there are more today than there were a month ago and that's frightening.

Read the original post:
Trump's trashing of Ukraine pays off for Russia: Republicans vote to reject NATO and democracy - Salon

By Jeffrey H. Bloodworth

God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.

Reinhold Niebuhrs Serenity Prayer, 1943

Harry Truman understood Reinhold Niebuhrs Serenity Prayer. Because of this, NATOs founder surely would resist NATO expansion.

In 1947, Truman was confronted with what is to us a familiar challenge: Soviet (Russian) aggression. Breaking wartime accords, the Soviets occupied Eastern Europe and schemed to overtake the Western half. This was a strategic challenge of the highest order, which seemingly posed a binary choice: appeasement or war.

Recalling Neville Chamberlain, Truman refused appeasement. He also realized a bloody war to roll back Soviet aggression did not serve the national interest.

But Truman knew his Niebuhr. Made famous by 12-step programs, Niebuhr originally penned his plea for war-weary Americans. But the philosopher-theologians prayer came to encapsulate early Cold War philosophy to counter Soviet aggression while avoiding full-fledged war.

People are also reading

Rejecting both combat and concession, Trumans middle way was the 12-nation North Atlantic Treaty Organization. A collective security pact, NATO was the foundation of Americas postwar containment policy.

Via NATO, the West contained Soviet expansion until it would collapse from internal contradictions. Hardly the stuff of action movies, NATO and containment were stolid, sober and serious answers to Soviet imperialism. It also worked. Despite strategic blunders and inter-alliance tensions, NATO held firm and the Soviet Union crumbled from within.

Seventy-five years later, the West is confronted with a reprise of Russian imperialism. Like our forebears, there are those so filled with understandable umbrage and outrage that they seek an aggressive, affirmative response: NATO expansion.

In the heat of the moment, we must keep our heads and remember Niebuhr and Trumans sage example. Both understood America had to restrain its inner-Yosemite Sam and thread a political needle by countering aggression without spiraling into an atomic conflagration. NATO expansion into Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine and even Finland are needlessly provocative measures, which also could undermine the alliance.

NATOs current united stand against Russian aggression resulted from decades of slow-gestating security, and economic, political and cultural integration. In theory, NATO is open to those nations that meet certain economic and political criteria, and contribute to Euro-Atlantic security.

Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine simply do not meet those standards. In addition to lagging economic development, all three bring with them pre-existing conflicts, which could drag the alliance into war.

Realists have bemoaned NATO expansion into Poland (1999) and the Baltics (2004) for sparking Russias ire and the present conflict. These specialists are, to some extent, correct. But their analysis misses the point.

First, Poland and the Baltic states are sovereign nations equipped to make security considerations that run counter to Russian desires. Moreover, Russia did not heatedly object, which meant expansion did not bring with it an imminent threat of war. But 2022 is not the late 1990s and early 2000s.

Today, adding Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine and even Finland invites further conflict with a humiliated and nuclear-armed Russia. This is no time for provocations on Russian borders.

NATO is only as strong as its members commitment to Article V. The Three Musketeers proviso pledges each member state to consider an attack on one as an attack on all. It is wholly foreseeable that a NATO state could deem a conflict with Russia over far-flung Moldova, for instance, as outside its security interests and refuse to invoke Article V. Such a scenario could be the alliances undoing and Putins ultimate fantasy.

Niebuhr and Truman would not deem Russian domination of its neighbors as something the West cannot change. But they would caution our seething rage at Putins war should not blinker our wisdom so that we blunder into a catastrophic, wider conflict.

Courage oft-times calls for discretion and measured responses. Arming the Ukrainians, sanctioning Russia and offering robust security assistance short of NATO enlargement has helped stymie Putins advance.

To be sure, such measures do not result in emotional satisfaction. But this is not a Hollywood movie. Americans should not expect a tidy denouement in which the plot is resolved after a climatic end.

A wise Niebuhrian and Truman-esque response is one that salvages Ukrainian sovereignty, severely punishes Russia, forestalls a wider war and prevents future conflict. Be prepared. There is no quick and easy solution to this foreign policy crisis.

The West must accept it cannot end Putins aggression in one fell swoop. It is a challenge that must be managed, confronted and thwarted. This is no time for dramatic gestures. Trumans example and Niebuhrs Serenity Prayer point the way.

Jeffrey H. Bloodworth is security fellow at the Truman National Security Project. He wrote this for InsideSources.com.

2022, Tribune Content Agency

Read more from the original source:
COUNTERPOINT: This is not the time for NATO expansion - Richmond Times-Dispatch

China has accused the US, UK and Australia of trying to build an "Asia-Pacific version of NATO" after the three countries announced that they will develop hypersonic weapons via the recently created AUKUS security alliance.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison, US President Joe Biden and British Prime Minister Boris Johnsonannounced the plan after holding a check-in on the progress of AUKUS, the Indo-Pacific alliance that was launched by the three countries in September.

In Beijing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian told a daily briefing that the cooperation would "undermine peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region".

"The US, UK and Australia will cooperate in developing hypersonic weapons and other advanced military technology," Mr Zhao said.

"Their ultimate goal is to create the Asia-Pacific version of NATO and serve the US hegemony outright. Asia-Pacific countries are of course firmly opposed to this."

The alliance comes amid growing concerns by the US and allies about China's growing military assertiveness in the Pacific.

Australia, the UK and the US have already begun work on deepening collaboration across a range of advanced military technologies, including cyber, artificial intelligence, quantum technology and undersea robotics.

They will now also develophypersonics and counter-hypersonics missiles, as well as electronic warfare capabilities and information sharing.

Both China and Russia have made large strides testing advanced versions of hypersonic missiles that can hit distant targets at such high speeds that they cannot be readily intercepted by defence systems.

The weapons can carry nuclear payloads.

Most analysts say the United States is currently lagging behind both Beijing and Moscow on the technology, although the Pentagon reportedly conducted its own successful tests last month.

Australia is also trying to develop its own advanced missiles including hypersonics under several defence initiatives announced by the federal government.

Mr Zhao criticised the AUKUS partnership as "an Anglo-Saxon clique" that followed "the mentality of Cold War and bloc politics".

"We urge the US, UKand Australia to face up to the aspirations of Asia-Pacific countries to seek peace and development, promote cooperation and achieve win-win results," he said.

"We urge them to abandon the Cold War mentality and zero-sum games, faithfully fulfil their international obligations, and do more things that are conducive to regional peace and stability."

Separately, Mr Zhao condemned the US-proposed sale of equipment related to the Patriot air defence system to Taiwan, saying China would "take strong measures to resolutely defend its sovereignty and security interest."

The US $95-million-worth deal includes support for the operation of the Patriot system, such as training, fielding and maintenance of the system, and related equipment, according to a Pentagon notification to Congress.

Loading

ABC/Wires

Excerpt from:
China accuses US, UK and Australia of trying to build Asia-Pacific NATO - ABC News