Tag: NATO

Categories
Quick Analysis

NATO’s Future Plans

NATO Foreign Ministers met in Brussels on November 20 to address a wide range of security challenges. “We all agree that NATO remains indispensable for our security, and that despite our differences, we are stronger as we face the future together,” said NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo travelled to Brussels for the meeting.

Although supportive of the alliance, President Trump has urged the other members to pay a fair share of the expenses.  Last year, in a meeting with Stoltenberg, he noted:

“The strong working partnership we forged has helped to produce significant increases in member-state contributions.  We’ve worked very hard on that.  And I will tell you, the Secretary General has been working on that for a long time, before I got there.  But I think more progress — I can say with surety, more progress has been made in the last year and a half than has been made in many, many years… last year, as a result of our joint efforts, we witnessed the single-largest increase in defense spending among European member states and Canada in a quarter of a century…As a result of these contributions, NATO is much stronger, taking in billions and billions of dollars — more money than they ever have before.  But as the Secretary General and I have discussed, more work needs to be done.  We’re still waiting on 20 member states to meet their NATO commitments and spend at least 2 percent on defense.”

The meeting focused on adopting NATO to future challenges.  The participants agreed to recognize space as a new operational domain for NATO, alongside air, land, sea and cyber. “This can allow NATO planners to make requests for Allies to provide capabilities and services, such as hours of satellite communications,” said the Secretary General. He added that NATO has no intention to put weapons into space, and the Alliance’s approach to space will remain fully in line with international law.

Addressing energy security, ministers agreed recommendations to consolidate NATO’s role. “The recommendations aim to improve situational awareness and understand the risks; protect critical infrastructure and enhance Alliance resilience; and enable NATO forces to have the necessary energy resources at all times,” said the Secretary General.

Also, it is seen that generic levitra sale about 10-20% of all cases of erectile problems are due to psychological issues. To grip its paramount results it is better to consult a spebuy cialis t who can give suggestion about the exact problem by verifying through several tests. In the past, the Latin term impotentia coeundi simply meaning the inability to insert the penis into the vagina of the females during tadalafil india intercourse, therefore, it has to be of an adequate size so that complete desire is fulfilled and the female partner as well. The recommended dose of ordering cialis online is 5 mg, taken at approximately the same time every day for up to 26 weeks.

They also discussed NATO’s role in the fight against terrorism, and reviewed progress in strengthening Black Sea security.

 Addressing fairer burden-sharing in the Alliance, Mr. Stoltenberg noted that “the trend is up and it is unprecedented.” Ministers also adopted a policy that sets standards in the prevention and response to sexual exploitation and abuse.

Later, ministers are set to discuss NATO’s coordinated approach to three strategic issues: relations with Russia, the rise of China, and arms control. “NATO is the only platform where Europe and North America engage every day on such strategic issues, which matter to our shared security,” said the Secretary General. He added that Europe and North America are doing more together than for many years.

On Nov. 21, NATO and the Republic of Korea signed a new partnership agreement that sets the framework for cooperation and political dialogue. It’s the end result of discussions that began in 2005.

The agreement promotes political dialogue and practical cooperation in a number of joint priority areas, including cyber defence, non proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and Science for Peace and Security.

A NATO release noted that “The Republic of Korea has been a valuable contributor to the Alliance’s stabilisation efforts in Afghanistan. The Provincial Reconstruction Team, led by the Republic of Korea, played a significant role in the reconstruction of the Parwan province. The Republic of Korea continues to be a significant contributor in support of the security and socio-economic development of Afghanistan.”  

Photo: Nov. 20 meeting (NATO)

Categories
Quick Analysis

NATO Maintains Security in a Changing World

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg delivered, on September 26, an important address on NATO’s role in maintaining security in a changing world. The New York Analysis of Policy and Government provides key excerpts:

As the Cold War came to an end, the peoples of Central and Eastern Europe were anxious to secure their new-found freedom.  The first major step was membership in NATO.  The prospect of being welcomed into our family helped those nations make difficult democratic and economic reforms.  NATO membership gave them the certainty that they were safe and the confidence to focus on growth, on the wellbeing of their people, and soon on membership of the European Union.  Today, they are strong independent nations, thanks in large part to the bedrock of security that comes with NATO membership. 

Today, our values are once again under pressure.  We see this in our countries, where we face sophisticated disinformation campaigns, aiming to undermine our democratic processes, meddling in our democratic elections and cyberattacks on our governments, institutions and companies.  And our values are not universally held.  In many countries, people are denied the right to elect their own leaders, imprisoned for voicing their political views and closely monitored by the governments, using the latest technology.  Yet, from Moscow to Hong Kong, we can always see how people are willing to stand up and fight for freedom, whatever [the] odds.  This shows the enduring strength of our values.  We believe in them simply because democracy is better than dictatorship, tolerance is better than intolerance, and freedom is better than oppression. 

A second challenge is the shifting balance of power.  Today, the countries of the NATO Alliance account for roughly half of global GDP.  20 Years ago, that figure was almost 75%.  Over the next decade, China is forecast to overtake the United States as the largest economy in the world.  And military spending by China has almost doubled over the last ten years, giving it the second biggest defence budget in the world after the United States. 

At the same time, we are seeing challenges to the established rules-based order.  Russia is not the partner we once hoped it to be.  Rather than following international norms and rules, it is undermining them.  From its illegal annexation of Crimea to assassination attempts on NATO territory, from cyberattacks and disinformation campaigns to supporting the Assad regime in Syria.  It is also investing heavily in its armed forces, replacing its aging ships, carriers and aircraft, and investing in advanced weapon systems such as laser cannons. 

We also see proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and aggressive and destabilising behaviour by nations such as Iran and North Korea.  All of this means that, to protect our freedom, we must continue to invest in our defence.  All NATO Allies are increasing defence spending and more Allies are meeting the guideline of spending 2% of GDP on their defence.  By the end of next year, European Allies and Canada will have spent an additional 100 billion US$ on defence since 2016.  Economically, politically and militarily, together we are stronger. 

To confirm such condition, a survey was carried out among 151 soft tab cialis participants. Risk of losing everything in http://mouthsofthesouth.com/locations/estate-auction-of-fay-gaddy-deceased/ generic cialis online a hope of adding few inches, definitely doesn’t sound worth it. The problem of stress, toxins, chemicals and fatigue can be so huge, that even basic daily activities are unmanageable. price for viagra 100mg Such Get More Information cialis active same study was also pointed to the possibility that they are in progressive age.

A third challenge is the rapid pace of disruptive technological change.  This is transforming our daily lives.  Technology changes fast.  We are in the midst of a new industrial revolution.  Artificial intelligence, facial recognition, big data, biotech, extraordinary technologies that have the potential to revolutionise our societies.  They can help us solve some of our most difficult problems: curing diseases, tackling climate change, growing our economies. 

At the opening ceremony of last year’s Winter Olympics, we saw one pilot control more than 1200 drones in a stunning light show.  The display was beautiful.  But imagine that same technology being used to cripple a state-of-the-art aircraft carrier, or even to destroy a seat of government.  Some civilian technologies can be used for military purpose and others are being developed specifically for military use, such as hypersonic missiles, autonomous weapon systems and cyber warfare.  All of this is changing the nature of warfare. 

For 70 years, NATO’s deterrence and defence has relied upon maintaining our technological edge, on being better and more advanced than our opponents.  We have done this by investing more in research and development than anyone else, but today we are under fierce competition.  For example, President Xi has announced plans for China to become the world’s leading power in artificial intelligence by the end of 2030 and is investing billions of dollars to make it happen.  Our future security depends on our ability to understand, adopt and implement emerging disruptive technologies.  NATO has a key role to play in this transformation.  It can serve as a forum for Allies and partners to consider the difficult, ethical and legal questions that will inevitably arise from these technologies.

Importantly, NATO coordinates defence planning among nations, ensuring Allies are investing, developing and adopting the latest technologies.  And it creates common standards, procedures and other means of maintaining our ability to work together, in peace time, in crisis and, when necessary, in combat. 

NATO was created by people who could see beyond the world as it was, towards the world as it could be, and then to act to shape the future.  Back then, they could see the terrible threat posed by the Soviet Union, but they could also see the potential strength of western democracies united for peace. 

NATO is the bedrock of our security. 

Photo: Sec. General Jens Stoltenberg (NATO)

Categories
Quick Analysis

North Macedonia Joins NATO

At NATO Headquarters in Brussels on February Sixth, the Permanent Representatives to NATO of the 29 members of the Alliance signed the Accession Protocol for the future Republic of North Macedonia. The signing ceremony took place in the presence of North Macedonian Foreign Minister Nikola Dimitrov.

North Macedonia’s entry into NATO had been delayed due to a dispute with Greece on the nation’s name.  Greece, which has a northern territory named Macedonia, objected, stating that the name could imply a claim to some of its land.  Following the addition of the word “North, Athens dropped its objections.

Russia, as expected, continues to object to the move. Moscow considers that part of Europe to be within its sphere of influence, as part of what used to be the Soviet Empire. North Macedonia is the fourth Balkan country to join NATO following Croatia, Albania and Montenegro. 

Following the signing of the Accession Protocol, Skopje (Macedonia’s Capital) can now take part in NATO activities as an invitee.  The accession process now moves to the capitals of the other NATO Allies where the Protocol will be ratified according to national procedures.  The country will become a member of NATO as soon as all Allies have ratified the Accession Protocol.

Speaking following the signing ceremony NATO Secretary Jens Stoltenberg said, “NATO keeps almost one billion citizens across Europe and North America secure and with you joining NATO there will be thirty countries committed to protect each other. Your accession will bring more stability to the Western Balkans. This is good for the region and for Euro-Atlantic security.”

Mr. Stoltenberg congratulated both Skopje and Athens for showing commitment and courage in reaching an agreement on the name issue.

North Macedonia already participates in NATO’s training mission in Afghanistan and the Alliance’s KFOR peace keeping mission Still, there is a need to know the factors, affecting men’s erection health. buy viagra When the erection that stallion xl will give you raises, you will be occupied with confidence bearing in mind that your penile organ is as vital as the human brain itself and though we fancy our brains for most of the chores executed daily in our lives it is the heart, which at the foundation of the human organs, governs the vital activities of all the other organs. levitra generic cialis It is learnt that traditional chemists cialis india price push people to buy branded medicines that come with side-effect of ED. There may be several causes responsible for this condition including some common mental and physical factors. check this link female viagra in india in Kosovo.

Other nations are seeking or considering NATO membership. Bosnia and Herzegovina was invited to join the Membership Action Plan in April 2010 but its participation is pending the resolution of a key issue concerning immovable defense property. At the 2008 Bucharest Summit, the Allies agreed that Georgia and Ukraine will become members of NATO in the future (since 2010, Ukraine has not been formally pursuing membership.)

The potential of Sweden, Finland, Ukraine and Georgia as potential future NATO members face fierce objections from Moscow’s Air Force and Navy over the past several years.  Those nations and NATO itself could gain a strategic advantage from joining together, but some fear Putin’s reaction to the potential move.  

Many in Sweden are advocating joining the alliance, particularly due to threatening actions by Moscow. However, as noted by Business Insider  “Russia’s ambassador to Sweden has warned the country of the potential military ‘consequences’ associated with joining NATO. In an interview with the Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter Russian Ambassador Viktor Tatarintsev told the publication  “…that Russia does not have any military plans against Sweden, in line with Stockholm’s alliance neutrality. But Tatarintsev warned that this could change if Sweden were to join the NATO alliance…Putin pointed out that there will be consequences, ‘that Russia will have to resort to a response of the military kind and re-orientate our troops and missiles,’ the ambassador said. ‘The country that joins NATO needs to be aware of the risks it is exposing itself to’…An October 2014 poll showed 37% of Swedes were in favor of joining NATO with 36% of Swedes against — the first time that more Swedes have favored joining the alliance than not. This swing in public opinion could be in response to a series of aggressive and provocative Russian actions throughout the region.”

North Macedonia will join Albania, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States in the alliance.

Photo: NATO Secretary Jens Stoltenberg and Macedonia foreign Secretary Nikola Dimitrov. (NATO)

Categories
Quick Analysis

NATO, U.S. Agree on Russian Violation

NATO’s members and President Trump are in solid agreement that Russia has substantially violated the long-standing Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty, signed by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987.

While President Trump’s push to get NATO members to contribute a fair share of the defense organization’s budget has raised some tension, the inherent danger posed by Putin’s latest aggressive act has produced unity within the alliance. According to Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, speaking at a foreign ministers meeting in Brussels, “All allies have concluded that Russia has developed and fielded a new ground-launched cruise missile system – the SSC-8, also known as the 9M729…Allies agree that this missile system violates the INF Treaty and poses significant risks to Euro-Atlantic security. And they agree that Russia is therefore in material breach of its obligations under the INF Treaty.”

NATO describes the treaty violated by Moscow as “…a pillar of European security. The treaty eliminated an entire category of destabilizing weapons…” Stoltenberg noted that “Russia’s deployment ratchets up tension on the continent. This is really serious, …these missiles are in particular dangerous because they are hard to detect, they are mobile [and] they are nuclear-capable,” the secretary general said at a news conference…The new Russian missiles can reach European cities, thus reducing warning time… they also reduce the threshold for nuclear weapons in the event of a conflict. That’s the reason why the INF Treaty has been so important, and that is why it is so serious that this treaty risks breaking down because of the Russian violations.”

Stoltenberg, referring to Washington’s efforts to get Putin to comply with the treaty, emphasized that “the United States has made every effort to engage with Russia, and to seek answers about the new missile. The U.S. has raised the matter formally with Russia at senior levels more than 30 times…Other allies have raised it with Russia, too. We did so, a few weeks ago, in the NATO-Russia Council here in Brussels… This violation “erodes the foundations of effective arms control and undermines allied security. This is part of Russia’s broader pattern of behavior, intended to weaken the overall Euro-Atlantic security architecture.”

The Secretary-General reported that The United States continues to fully comply with the INF Treaty. “There are no new U.S. missiles in Europe, but there are new Russian missiles in Europe…Arms control agreements are only effective if they are respected by all sides. A situation where the U.S. abides by the treaty and Russia does not is simply not sustainable.”
Besides them, avoiding overdose viagra online online or increased dose is strict NO-NO. This “mid-life crisis” poses a great cialis price pdxcommercial.com impact in the treatment of erectile dysfunction. If possible then always try to have everyone move together as if they’re in a chain gang, all clones of one another viagra shop usa moving in the same direction. These shocks do not pose any injury to the penis nor do they claim to have hormone type effect of cheap Kamagra rather than any other pills. order levitra online
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, speaking at the Brussels meeting, explained that “…whatever successes this treaty helped produce, today we must confront Russian cheating on its arms control obligations…our nations have a choice. We either bury our head in the sand or we take common-sense action in response to Russia’s flagrant disregard for the express terms of the INF Treaty. It’s worth noting that Russia’s violations didn’t happen overnight. Russia’s been flight-testing the SSC-8 cruise missile since the mid-2000s. They’ve been testing it in excess of ranges that the treaty permits. All the tests of the SSC-8 have originated from a Kapustin Yar site from both a fixed and mobile launcher. Its range makes it a direct menace to Europe… Throughout all of this, the United States has remained in scrupulous compliance with the treaty. In spite of Russia’s violations, we have exercised the utmost patience and effort in working to convince Russia to adhere to its terms. On at least 30 occasions since 2013, extending to the highest levels of leadership, we have raised Russia’s noncompliance and stressed that a failure to return to compliance would have consequences.

“Russia’s reply has been consistent: deny any wrongdoing, demand more information, and issue baseless counter-accusations. For more than four years, Moscow has pretended that it didn’t know what missile or test the United States was even talking about, even when we provided extensive information about the missile’s characteristics and testing history. It was not until we chose to publicize the Russian name of the missile in November of 2017 that Russia finally acknowledged its existence. Then Russia changed its cover story from the missile that does not exist to the missile that exists but is treaty-compliant.

“These violations of the INF Treaty cannot be viewed in isolation from the larger pattern of Russian lawlessness on the world stage. The list of Russia’s infamous acts is long: Georgia, Ukraine, Syria, election meddling, Skripal, and now the Kerch Strait, to name just a few.”

Photo: NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg speaks with reporters during a foreign ministers meeting at NATO headquarters in Brussels, Dec. 4, 2018. (NATO)

Categories
Quick Analysis

Why Die for Danzig? Part 2

Despite the lessons of history, some have questioned the wisdom of defending the Baltics. James Coyle, writing in The Hill  examines this viewpoint.

“ There are good reasons, however, that the United States should not have involved itself in the defense of these countries. They were part of the Soviet Union for over a half-century, which allowed many residents to develop an affinity for Russia. One-third of the population of Latvia and one-quarter of Estonians consider themselves ethnically Russian… The countries face pressure from Moscow in the energy sector. Lithuania gets all its oil and natural gas from Russia, and Latvia receives the majority of its energy from the same source. Only Estonia has its own supply of shale oil, and ports to bring non-Russian oil into the country by sea.  The Baltics are under threat. According to Lithuanian Army Lt. Col. Algimantas Misiunas, Russian plans to seize the Baltics are more than a wish or desire, but a need. Russia needs a land bridge with Kaliningrad, full access and control of the Baltic Sea, and the restoration of its Soviet-era influence in Europe. Independent Baltic States stand in the way of all these goals… should these countries be abandoned in the face of Russian aggression, it would mean the collapse of the alliance.”

How is NATO defending the Baltics?

The defense of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania is particularly relevant, and difficult. A study by the Center for European Policy Analysis, a non-profit, non-partisan, public policy research institute describes the challenge.

“A 65-kilometer wide stretch of land between Belarus and Kaliningrad— the Suwałki Corridor—…is NATO’s physical link between the Baltic littoral to the north and the European plain to the south. If this Corridor is not fully secured, NATO’s credibility as a security guarantor to Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia could be seriously undermined.

“It is a relatively small strip of land that contains only two narrow highways and one railway line, and presents significant impediments to maneuver. If Russian forces ever established control over the Suwałki region, or even threatened the free movement of NATO personnel and equipment through it, they would effectively cut the Baltic States off from the rest of the Alliance. Such an outcome could make reinforcing the Baltic States by land exceptionally difficult. Deterring any potential action—or even the threat of action—against Suwałki is therefore essential for NATO’s credibility and Western cohesion. And in learning how to deter potential Russian aggression, the applicable lessons from Suwałki can and should be applied throughout NATO’s Eastern Flank.

“At the 2016 Warsaw Summit, the Alliance agreed to deploy four multinational battalion battle groups on a rotational basis into Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland. These units, often called tripwire forces, are led by the UK, Canada, Germany, and the United States, respectively. Their purpose: to deter Russia and demonstrate that any military action against an ally would automatically trigger the influx of a 40,000-strong rapid reaction force and a full-scale NATO counterassault. This step was welcomed and needed. The current challenge for NATO is how to buttress its existing tripwire capabilities, including troops, transports, logistical support, and infrastructure, for quickly mobilizing reinforcements to defend allies in the event of a crisis. This is the key to providing a fully effective and robust deterrent against future Russian probes of allied solidarity and resolve.

“Despite NATO’s commitments, questions have been raised since the 2016 Warsaw Summit about the overall effectiveness of current tripwire deployments in Poland and the Baltic States. If an opponent knows the location of a tripwire it might simply avoid it. The positioning of military hardware without the permanent presence of U.S. and other allied troops is therefore premised on a two-part assumption:

Assumption 1: In event of attack, national armed forces and civilian reserve corps, together with limited contingents from NATO tripwire forces, will be able to impede or delay an aggressor long enough for;
It ordine cialis on line gets dissolved so quickly that it starts to provide the better sexual experience then this is a great deal of research exhibiting a commonalities. Pseudo yohimbe bark, which is much cheaper but contains almost no yohimbine alkaloid, is sold to viagra buy best the manufacturers of health supplements.Yohimbine appears to work better for erectile dysfunction not caused by a physical problem. Always try to consume this drug in a generic form of this drug without prescription from an international buying experience and benefits, its history? In short, there is no special eligibility to save on your international shopping, any one and every one of us. hop over to this pharmacy canada pharmacy cialis If you however cost of viagra are interested in only government jobs, it’d great to find vacancies, appear for various entrance exams and realize the dreams.
Assumption 2: The timely reinforcement by distant NATO units who will prevent a territorial fait accompli at the peace table.

“Recognizing these assumptions, however, Moscow is in a position to exploit the predictable doubts, uncertainties, and political cleavages which could emerge inside the Alliance during a crisis. Consequently, Russia could decide to test NATO’s response in several possible scenarios, whether through a low-threshold “hybrid” probe, a limited or temporary incursion, a rapid thrust to capture territory, or by threatening a wider war if NATO responds forcefully. Some or all of the above operations could be conducted consecutively or simultaneously.

“The Suwałki Corridor is particularly vulnerable given the continued, intensified militarization of Kaliningrad and Russia’s Western Military District. All the while, Moscow is able to use Belarusian territory as either a staging ground for offensive operations against NATO, or for positioning advanced A2/AD (Anti-Access Area Denial) capabilities pursuant to its military-political agreements with Minsk. Either option is a potential threat to Suwałki and the Alliance as a whole. For Russia, closing the Suwałki Corridor is likely to be a part of a broader strategic offensive in the region. In this case, the aim would not necessarily be to hold Suwałki, but rather to deny access to it to NATO and its reinforcements.

“Open source estimates put the number of total active forces in the Western Military District of Russia (e.g., NATO’s eastern border) at 330,000 troops. Moscow’s arsenal of weapons includes multi-layered air defense, mobile coastal defense, land- and sea-based cruise missiles, and tactical ballistic-missile platforms. Moscow has also positioned WMD-capable Iskander ballistic missiles in Kaliningrad. With a striking range of 500 kilometers, these missiles can target critical infrastructure, counterforce assets, troop concentrations, C2 facilities, and civilian populations in a wide arc across Poland and the Baltic region. An additional strategic threat comes from the Russian Baltic fleet, whose ships, in the near term, include Kalibr Land Attack CruiseMissile capabilities. The advanced variant of Kalibr reportedly has a 2,500-kilometer range—effectively reaching most of Europe.4,5

“Although NATO does not have comparable military capabilities in the Baltic zone, it does possess significant assets in Germany and other parts of Europe that can be deployed in the event of a crisis. The question is how rapidly these forces can be mobilized to enter a contested theater. In theory, the speed and strength of NATO’s military response should serve as a deterrent to Russia’s initial aggression, with its effectiveness increased by accelerating recognition, decision, and reinforcement…

“The challenge for NATO is to create the capabilities, including troops, transport, and infrastructure, for quickly mobilizing reinforcements to defend each ally. Such a posture is the key to an effective deterrence. The Suwałki Corridor is particularly vulnerable given the continued militarization of Kaliningrad and Russia’s Western Military District. For Moscow, closing the Suwałki Gap is likely to be a part of a broader strategic offensive. The aim would not necessarily be to hold the area but to deny it to NATO and its reinforcements. Although NATO does not have comparable military capabilities to Russia in the Baltic zone, it possesses significant assets in Germany and other parts of Europe that can be deployed in the event of crisis. The focus must be on guaranteeing that these forces can be mobilized to rapidly enter the combat theater. Indeed, the speed and nature of NATO’s military response should serve as a deterrent to Russia’s initial aggression. In addition to a guaranteed surge of NATO reinforcements, each state bordering Russia requires three fundamental elements: early warning of Moscow’s covert subversion of a targeted area that can be thwarted or contained; capable forces that can respond quickly to an assault on their territorial integrity; and adequate infrastructure and prepositioned equipment to allow for the speedy deployment of NATO troops.”

The Soviet Union’s successor state, Russia, is the last surviving heir of the Nazi-Communist axis of the 20th century that ravaged the world with war and mass murder. Allowing it to turn the clock back and reclaim part of the territory it conquered emboldens Moscow, and Beijing as well, to adopt aggression and war as the keystones of foreign policy.

Photo: Prime Minister Andrius Kubilius met with Chairman of the NATO Military Committee Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola. The Admiral thanked the Prime Minister for Lithuania’s participation in NATO operations,  (Lithuanian Government)

Categories
Quick Analysis

Why Die for Danzig

Questions have been raised concerning the wisdom of NATO’s commitment to its Baltic State members, including Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania.

The three Baltic states were conquered by the USSR in 1940 during Russia’s alliance with Hitler. They only regained their freedom after the Soviet Union collapsed. Those who fail to see the necessity of defending those countries ignore the lessons of history.

In the runup to World War 2, many questioned whether it was worth the effort to oppose Hitler’s invasion of the city of Danzig (now the Polish city of Gdansk).  In 2014, the same year Obama withdrew U.S. tanks from Europe and Russia invaded Ukraine,  an Economist article reported the concern raised by  some in Poland:  “SEVENTY-FIVE years after the start of the second world war, the West seems to capitulate again to aggression, say Polish intellectuals. Why die for Danzig? – this phrase has become symbolic of the attitude of Western Europe to the war that broke out 75 years ago. The French and British policy of appeasement emboldened the Nazi dictator to invade Austria, occupy the Sudetenland and finally crush Czechoslovakia without any serious consequences for Hitler and the Third Reich. Even when on September 1st, 1939, after the Soviet-German pact had been signed, the Western powers mustered up only enough courage to embark on the so-called phony war. Their belief in being able to save their own skin by turning a blind eye on the destruction of Danzig emboldened Hitler to make the next act of aggression. After that he captured Warsaw, then another European capital, Paris, and not long after that the Nazis started dropping bombs on London.”

The Trump Administration, in a sharp reversal of the Obama White House (which slashed military funding and, as previously, inexplicably withdrew all U.S. tanks from Europe) has increased defense spending and the U.S. commitment to NATO, even while concurrently sharply criticizing many alliance members for not contributing their fair share.

A Brookings Institute study analyzed U.S. defense spending compared to NATO allies.
To get rid of infertility it is advised to get the Hcg Hucog Injection which might increase the chances pdxcommercial.com viagra sale online of getting pregnant. Erectile Dysfunction (ED), or sexual impotence, is one of the most common sexual conditions in levitra prescription our link today’s time. Walking is one of the best exercises to improve your overall health, but make sure you do cheap viagra overnight not want to damage the aid further. Most of the cases, the problem occurs in men or women, al has a solution for levitra prices its cure.
“In 2017, the U.S. defense budget of $686 billion equaled 3.6 percent of GDP, by far the largest of any NATO member. The combined defense budgets of all other NATO members totaled $271 billion in 2017. Because most NATO members are small countries, only ten members spent more than $10 billion. In rank order, these are: U.S., U.K., France, Germany, Italy, Canada, Turkey, Spain, Poland and (just barely) Netherlands…In 2017, the defense budgets of the U.K., Greece, and Estonia—like the U.S.—exceeded 2 percent of GDP. France, Romania, Lithuania, and Latvia all were close—less than 0.3 percent under the two percent target. To meet the 2 percent target…four would increase their spending by $10 billion or more: Germany, Italy, Canada and Spain…if all NATO members had spent two percent of GDP on defense in 2017, the total increase in defense spending would have been $114 billion…”

In testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee in 2017,Lisa Sawyer Samp ,a  Senior Fellow from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) described the relationship with the Baltics:

“Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2014, the Baltic States—Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania—were quickly elevated as a U.S. defense priority. This was due not only to their multiple requests for assistance based on a perceived vulnerability vis-à-vis Russia, but also due to the emerging recognition within Washington that the NATO alliance…had likely underappreciated the need to take appropriate precautions for deterrence and defense in Europe’s own backyard… none could discount the possibility completely given ‘Moscow’s aggressive foreign policy and pattern of military intervention along its borders, combined with the strategic vulnerability of NATO’s eastern allies, particularly the Baltic States…[whose militaries] are small, geographically isolated, and lack mobility, firepower, and air and naval capability.’ …In many ways, the credibility of allies’ Article 5 commitment [which mandates that an attack on one NATO member must be treated as an attack on all] became tied to their response in the Baltic States. The United States became the first to respond by surging air, land, and sea forces into Eastern Europe. The immediate U.S. deployment sent a strong signal of resolve to Moscow, calmed nervous allies, and initiated what would become an alliance-wide reassurance effort that included additional force presence, enhanced training and exercises, prepositioned equipment, and infrastructure improvements. Since that time, the United States and its allies have begun to transition from reassurance-focused measures to those that seek to establish a longer-term credible deterrence.”

The Report Concludes Tomorrow

Photo:  Stalin (Pixabay)

Categories
Quick Analysis

NATO’s Crucial Meeting

This week’s NATO summit, now in session ,is a test both of the stability of the most important military alliance in existence, and the maturity and realism of key European governments.

At the conclusion of the Second World War, the United States possessed the west’s sole major functioning economy. It was both appropriate and logical that it provided, by a vast degree, the lion’s share of the alliance’s resources.

That conflict ended over 70 years ago, however.  The nations of western Europe have fully recovered, and some, like Germany, have become economic powerhouses.  The need for NATO to exist remains vital, particularly in light of Putin’s’ aggression and massive military buildup.  However, the rationale for European nations to continuing to depend on American taxpayers to pay a major portion of Europe’s defense no longer exists.

Overall, just four out of 27 NATO nations comply with the alliances’ military budget guidelines.  Under President Trump, American defense spending on Europe has doubled.

Defense News reports that Germany, the economic powerhouse of the continent, has allowed its military to deteriorate to a dangerous degree. “The Bundeswehr had a peak force of 600,000 at the end of the Cold War when West Germany conscripted young men, and has since shrunk to a 177,000-strong volunteer force…Systemic budget shortages now endanger training, military exercises and missions, while many barracks are crumbling…”

In 2015, Kyle Miokami, writing for the National Interest asked, “Is Germany’s Military Dying?… “… numerous articles have arisen demonstrating the Bundeswehr’s lack of readiness. Fixed wing aircraft, helicopters and other vehicles have been grounded due to lack of spare parts, bringing readiness rates below 50%. Indeed, Germany’s military, while armed with some of the world’s most deadly weapons, faces some tremendous challenges.”

Germany is not alone. Euronews notes that “The UK’s defence spending is ‘far too low’to combat threats facing the country, including Russian aggression, MPs warned…In its latest report, Britain’s Defence Committee urged the government to hike defence spending from its current level of 2% of GDP to 3%. Defence spending is far too low,’ MPs wrote in the report. ‘The Government now needs to apply the resources that are necessary to keep this country safe, and must begin moving the level of defence expenditure back towards 3% of GDP, as it was in the mid-1990s.’’”

Many patients cheapest generic viagra find various cures to treat health issues like impotence. This repairs the penile malfunctioning and pharmacy viagra allows the penis to get filled with blood, causing erections. These drugs were designed to overcome physically-induced male impotence, which is also known as cheapest tadalafil 20mg erectile dysfunction, admitted a leading concern in men. Infections around the area that don’t heal http://valsonindia.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Valson_Shareholding-Pattern_June-2018.pdf on line levitra easily soon start forming and before you know it, your email address has been circulated far and wide to almost every online business imaginable.

It is interesting to note that some Eastern European NATO members, especially Poland, Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania, that only escaped Russian occupation in the past few decades, have moved more diligently to provide their fair share than their western counterparts.

Despite promises to do more, several nations still fail to live up to their commitments. The Wall Street Journal reports that “There is a long history of U.S. frustration with its allies’ military spending. Following Russia’s military intervention in eastern Ukraine and Crimea, NATO nations promised at a summit meeting in Wales all members would spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense by 2024. At least 20% of that was to be spent on weapons and improving military capabilities—a target that was set to ensure that the funds didn’t go just for military pay.”

Many published reports are extremely critical of President Trump’s push to have fiscally capable European governments  meet their commitments. While almost all U.S. presidents have called for greater cost sharing , the current White House has been the most diligent on pursuing the matter.  That has led  to a great deal of criticism, even portraying the move as being soft on Russia.

President Trump has warned European leaders that “It will…become increasingly difficult to justify to American citizens why some countries continue to fail to meet our shared collective security commitments.”

Radio Free Europe broadcast comments that “Fifteen of NATO’s 29 members have laid out plans to meet the alliance’s defense spending goal by 2024, overall increasing spending by $46 billion,” according to NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg.” Stoltenberg emphasized that “After years of decline, since 2014 we have seen three years of increasing defense spending across European allies and Canada.’ His comments come as U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis is expected to pressure U.S. allies in Europe to increase military spending to levels targeted by NATO, fulfilling a key commitment sought by U.S. President Donald Trump. NATO has set a goal of each member spending 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense, but until recently only a few of NATO’s 29 members met that target. Stoltenberg said that in 2014, only three allies met the goal, but the number has increased to eight this year. The increase in the last four years has added $19 billion to spending on weapons and equipment for the alliance, he said. An additional seven NATO members have laid out plans to meet the goal by 2024.”

The question, of course, is whether those goals are adhered to.

Photo: NATO Secretary Stoltenberg addresses the European Council. (NATO)

Categories
Quick Analysis

NATO Prepares for Difficult Times

NATO’s Military Committee  will meet on Thursday. General Petr Pavel will preside. The sessions will focus on key strategic issues facing the Alliance, including the alliances southern flank, the ability to provide deterrence against any threat, and how to modernize the alliance.

NATO recently initiated a significant training mission, named Exercise Siil  in Estonia. 15,000 troops from 19 different nations took part.   According to the alliance, “The exercise focuses on defensive territorial maneuvers in the context of both conventional and unconventional warfare. In addition to military forces, the exercise brings together Estonia´s volunteer paramilitary Defence League, the Women’s Home Defence Organization, and police and rescue workers to train a broad-based defence. Over 30 observers from 15 countries, including  Russia and Belarus monitored the exercise.”

According to the alliance, “The exercise focuses on defensive territorial maneuvers in the context of both conventional and unconventional warfare. In addition to military forces, the exercise brings together Estonia´s volunteer paramilitary Defence League, the Women’s Home Defence Organization, and police and rescue workers to train a broad-based defence. Over 30 observers from 15 countries, including  Russia and Belarus monitored the exercise.”

As the Cold War has returned, NATO has had to readjust to a higher level of tension. The alliance has developed a study  on how it can adapt to what it calls “an unpredictable and fast-changing world.”

Key points made in the study:

NATO is at a crucial decision point. With new technologies such as Artificial Intelligence and Quantum Computing fast entering the defence domain, the role, function, method and structure of the Alliance must undergo radical change if collective deterrence and defence is to remain credible.

Yes, the Alliance has adapted well in response to the watershed events of 2014, rebuilding deterrence against threats from the East, increasing its engagement with the Middle East, and forging a closer partnership with the European Union – and it is already taking steps in some of the other areas set out in the recommendations below. However, as the Alliance approaches its seventieth birthday in April 2019, NATO risks falling behind the pace of political change and technological developments that could alter the character of warfare, the structure of international relations and the role of the Alliance itself.

New strategic realities

Adaptation will only succeed if the Alliance confronts new geostrategic and transatlantic realities, including the need to deter a revisionist, militarily advanced Russia, while also projecting stability to NATO’s South, and dealing with threats posed by states such as North Korea. To establish equitable burden-sharing between the United States and its Allies, the Defence Investment Pledge made at the 2014 NATO Summit in Wales (Allied leaders agreed to halt the decline in defence expenditure and aim to move towards spending 2% of Gross Domestic Product on defence and 20% of national defence budgets on major equipment and related research and development within a decade) must also be honoured in full and new money spent well.

Flexible Response 2.0

NATO’s deterrence and defence posture must be strengthened if the Alliance is to prevent conflict and deter aggression. Enhancing the readiness and responsiveness of NATO conventional forces must be the Alliance’s overarching priority. NATO’s nuclear posture and strategy must also be modernised if the growing gap between the conventional and nuclear deterrents lowers the threshold for nuclear use.

Warfighting ethos

Along with powerful, agile and resilient conventional forces, Allies need to adopt a warfighting ethos as core Alliance doctrine. NATO must re-establish the capacity for the swift generation of force mass and manoeuvre if NATO is to meet the force-on-force challenge. NATO should promote integrated deterrence, building on reforms to the NATO Command Structure, as well as undertake more systematic contingency planning, to ensure effective command and control across the conflict spectrum.

Military ambition

NATO must at least be able to command simultaneously operations in a large-scale state-to-state conflict (a Major Joint Operation-Plus) and undertake a sustained strategic stabilisation campaign to NATO’s South. NATO’s crisis management mechanisms are still far too complicated. NATO’s role in the defence of the global commons must also be enhanced with multi-domain forces able to operate to effect across air, sea, land, space, cyber, knowledge and information. NATO must train and think as it plans to fight. Impediments to battle-critical information-sharing must also be removed.

Counter-terrorism

The terrorist threat to the Euro-Atlantic Area will increase. NATO’s Counter-Terrorism Policy Guidelines and NATO’s support for the Global Coalition Against Daesh are vital. NATO must also contribute more to preventing terrorist attacks on its members, including home-grown plots. While this is primarily a national and EU responsibility, with law enforcement and interior ministries in the lead, NATO’s newly upgraded Joint Intelligence and Security Division, with its secure communications links to Allied capitals, could become a clearing-house for exchanging classified terrorist threat information.

Defence and dialogue

NATO must engage with Russia and Ukraine on the basis of principle: A new political strategy is needed for NATO to better engage with Russia. Dialogue must go hand-in-hand with defence with the goal of managing competition and reducing risks until fundamental differences that prevent a return to cooperation with Russia are resolved. At the same time, the Alliance must help Ukraine, Georgia, and other Eastern European neighbours to defend themselves and continue to promote the Euro-Atlantic integration of the Western Balkans. The Open Door policy, and the possibility of future membership, must also be upheld.

A broad security agenda
Obese discount cialis india women are particularly susceptible to diabetes, which in turn, puts women at dramatically increased risk of cardiovascular disease. The results are gradual but with the assurance that the generic cialis cipla chief elements present in the product not only contains the 5 alpha reductase inhibitor but it also contains anti fungal properties. These techniques reduce anxiety and make the mind price of cialis 10mg calm and stable. They were introduced one after the other, and the thing they both have in common is that cheap tadalafil pills they have to remove the negative mark from your credit report.
The enduring mission in Afghanistan is a reminder that the security of the Alliance does not stop at its borders. NATO needs a broader security role to reinforce the engagement of the Alliance across the Middle East, North Africa and beyond. Defence capacity-building to NATO’s South will be an important contribution to peace and security, working closely with regional security institutions, such as the African Union and the Arab League, as well as with individual partner nations.

 

Smart NATO

If the Alliance is to both protect people and project influence and power, NATO should better integrate the many centres of excellence into a network of excellence, and establish new centres to address new challenges. A bespoke Hyper War Centre of Excellence would help generate an urgently needed coherent approach to future war, including work on Artificial Intelligence and expanded NATO cyber defence within its defence and deterrence measures. Such a Centre would necessarily need to train and educate NATO’s civilian and military leadership, and include staff courses for the North Atlantic Council, NATO staff and and member nation civilians.

The vital NATO-EU Strategic Partnership

The European Union will become an increasingly important foreign and security actor and partner of NATO, with the NATO-EU strategic partnership increasingly important for the management of transatlantic relations. For many Europeans, the EU Common Security and Defence Policy will be a, if not the vehicle for defence policy. The European Defence Agency will also be the mechanism of choice for the development of military capabilities for many Europeans. Therefore, NATO and the European Union must overcome current barriers to foster a more substantial and mutually beneficial partnership and reinforce practical cooperation. A NATO-EU summit at heads of state and government level should be held at least once a year.

NATO’s wider strategic partnerships

NATO must also create a world-wide network of strategic partnerships and institutions. Indeed, at a time of globalised security NATO needs to better forge functional political, civilian and military partnerships across the world. The creation of consultative councils with states such as Australia, China, India, Japan, and South Korea would be an important indicator of such ambition.

Equipping and affording NATO

NATO must innovate as an alliance and streamline the delivery of new technology and equipment. On average it takes 16 years from conception of military capability to operational effect, which is far too long. Capability fielding timelines must be shortened and commanders given a greater say in requirements development. NATO should promote a common standard for shared assessment, harmonised requirements and common specifications, and expand the use of common funding, and conduct an Alliance-wide platform and systems audit as part of a Future Requirements Framework.

 

Partnerships with defence industry – old and new

NATO must gain a far better understanding of the impact of new technologies such as Artificial Intelligence and Quantum Computing together with their defence applications. Many of the companies driving new technologies are not defence giants, nor are many of them defence-focused. Such companies will need to be sure that if they invest limited people and resources on NATO projects, their existence will not be threatened by sclerotic acquisition practices.

NATO and the future of war

NATO needs a future war strategy that fully integrates hybrid warfare, cyber war, counter-terrorism and hyper war, and the continuum between them. Critically, NATO must leverage the impact of new technologies on the security space and battlespace. NATO must better grip and exploit new information technologies, and systematically trawl newly-available artificial intelligence-powered capacities to exploit big data. To that end, NATO should consider creating an agency similar in mission to that of the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

 

Next steps?

NATO leaders should commission a strategy review, which might be embodied in a new Strategic Concept. NATO needs a forward-looking strategy that sets out how the Alliance will meet the challenges of an unpredictable and fast-changing world.

Photo: NATO preconference (NATO picture)

Categories
Quick Analysis

NATO Expands Defense Spending, Criticizes Russia, Part 2

This month, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg presented the NATOs Annual Report. We continue our review by presenting excerpts presenting the Alliance’s views on Russia, and nuclear deterrence.

Russia

Relations with Russia NATO’s policy towards Russia remains consistent: defence and dialogue.

After the Cold War, NATO and Russia were striving towards a strategic partnership. However, after Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, all practical cooperation was suspended.

At the same time, however, NATO maintains political dialogue and military-to-military lines of communications with Russia. Efforts to reduce risk and increase transparency are also ongoing. At the Warsaw Summit, NATO leaders reaffirmed that the nature of the Alliance’s relations with Russia will be contingent on a clear, constructive change in Russia’s actions – one that demonstrates compliance with international law and its international obligations and responsibilities.

The Alliance maintains a firm position, based on a dual-track approach of strong deterrence and defence complemented by a periodic, focused and meaningful dialogue. That dialogue is carried out on the basis of reciprocity in the NATO-Russia Council. This is important to avoid misunderstanding, miscalculation and unintended escalation, as well as to increase transparency and predictability.

In 2017, the NATO-Russia Council met three times – in March, July and October. At each meeting, the Council discussed the conflict in and around Ukraine, including the need for the full implementation of the Minsk Agreements, issues relating to military activities, transparency and risk reduction, as well as the security situation in Afghanistan and the regional terrorist threat.

NATO continued to maintain a dialogue with Russia on air safety in the Baltic Sea region. In light of the increased air activity in the Baltic Sea region in recent years, it has become increasingly important to boost predictability and transparency in order to prevent incidents and accidents, and avoid unintended escalation. In 2016, the International Civil Aviation Organization’s Baltic Sea Project Team briefed the NATO-Russia Council on this important topic. Subsequently, a Finnish-led Expert Group on Baltic Sea Air Safety was established to build on the work of the Baltic Sea Project Team. The group – with the participation of Allied and partner countries from the region, Russia and NATO, inter alia – developed recommendations and guidance on the handling and resolution of air encounters between all aircraft, both civilian and military, in peacetime. Supported by the Allies, these recommendations were published by the International Civil Aviation Organization in December 2017.

In 2017, the NATO-Russia Council began to exchange advanced reciprocal briefings on upcoming exercises. This mutual exchange has the potential to contribute towards greater predictability and risk reduction in the Euro-Atlantic area. However, these voluntary briefings cannot replace mandatory transparency under the Vienna Document.

The Secretary General met with the Russian Foreign Minister in February, May and September. The Deputy Secretary General maintained regular contact with the Russian Ambassador to NATO throughout the year, as well as with other Russian officials. NATO’s military leaders have also continued to communicate directly with their Russian counterparts.
In PRP method, the doctor takes sildenafil cialis your blood sample and spins it to segregate the components. As an example, a recent study by the ASRM revealed that there are four life style elements accountable for lowering check out content levitra prescription female fertility in American women- Smoking, Overweight/underweight, Sexually transmitted diseases/infections, and Over-aging. As anti-impotence treatment options are easily accessible, people can sildenafil pfizer without any hindrance. People can now buy the medicine cialis 10 mg through a medical stores.

Nuclear Deterence

Nuclear deterrence has made a major contribution to peace and stability in Europe and beyond for more than 70 years, and has been at the heart of NATO’s posture. At the Warsaw Summit in 2016, Allies recognised the importance of nuclear deterrence as a key element of the Allied deterrence posture, for the specific purpose of preserving peace, preventing coercion, and deterring aggression. As long as nuclear weapons exist, NATO will remain a nuclear alliance.

At the same time, the Alliance is committed to seeking the conditions necessary for a world without nuclear weapons, in accordance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and in a step-by-step and verifiable manner.

NATO is also concerned about the threat of nuclear proliferation and it has taken a firm stand in condemning the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea for carrying out nuclear and missile tests. North Korea’s destabilising behaviour poses a threat to international peace and security and the Alliance has called on North Korea to abandon nuclear weapons and nuclear and ballistic missile programmes in a complete, verifiable, and irreversible manner. NATO also urges the country to comply with its international obligations and recommit to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Allied commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty remains unwavering. The Treaty is the cornerstone of the global nuclear non-proliferation and safeguards regime and the basis for global disarmament efforts.

The Alliance also recognises the importance of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty to EuroAtlantic security. The Treaty has contributed to strategic stability and reduced the risk of miscalculation leading to conflict. The Alliance is committed to the preservation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and strongly believes full compliance with this landmark arms control treaty is needed. In December 2017, NATO recognised the United States’ compliance with its obligations under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and its commitment to implementing the Treaty. The Alliance also welcomed the continued efforts by the United States to engage Russia to resolve concerns about Russia’s compliance with the Treaty.

NATO photo

 

 

Categories
Quick Analysis

NATO Expands Defense Spending, Criticizes Russia

This month, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg presented the Alliance’s Annual Report.

In 2017, European Allies and Canada increased spending on defense by almost 5%.  There have now been three consecutive years of growth since 2014. In 2017, twenty-six Allies spent more in real terms on major equipment than the year before.

“All NATO members have pledged to continue to increase defence spending in real terms. The majority have already put in place plans on how to meet the 2% guideline by 2024. And we expect others to follow”, according to Stoltenberg.

At the end of 2017, there were over 23,000 troops serving in NATO deployments, up from just under 18,000 in 2014, before Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and the rise of ISIS, an increase of 30%.

The Secretary General also addressed the recent use of a nerve agent in the United Kingdom, noting that this was “the first offensive use of a nerve agent on Alliance territory since NATO’s foundation”. “All Allies agree that the attack was a clear breach of international norms and agreements,” and they have “called on Russia to address the UK’s questions”, he noted.

Stoltenberg stated that the backdrop to the attack was “a reckless pattern of Russian behaviour over many years…the illegal annexation of Crimea and military support to separatists in Eastern Ukraine. The military presence in Moldova and Georgia against these countries’ will. Meddling in Montenegro and elsewhere in the Western Balkans. Attempts to subvert democratic elections and institutions. And the military build-up from the North of Europe to the Middle East.” He also warned that the “blurring of the line” between nuclear and conventional warfare “lowers the threshold for Russia’s use of nuclear weapons.”

Key Excepts from NATO’s Annual Report

NATO is adapting. Part of being a truly 21st century Alliance is about speed: speed of awareness, speed of decisionmaking, speed of action, speed of reinforcement and speed of adaptation – what is sometimes called the ‘speed of relevance’. And a more agile, more responsive, more innovative NATO is a stronger and more effective NATO.

2017 was a defining year in that continuing evolution. At our meeting of NATO leaders in Brussels in May, we took important decisions on how to implement fairer burden-sharing and stepping up the fight against terrorism – decisions which are making the Alliance stronger.

Last year, we also deployed four multinational battlegroups to the east of the Alliance and strengthened our Forward Presence in the Black Sea region. We welcomed Montenegro as the 29th member of the Alliance. We joined the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, with our AWACS planes, and training of Iraqi forces. We increased our support to Jordan and Tunisia. And we worked hand-in-hand with the European Union to keep our seas safe, fight terrorism, and defend against cyber attacks.

A more uncertain security environment requires that we invest more in defence, develop the right military capabilities, and make the necessary contributions to our military operations and missions. In 2014, Allies pledged to stop cuts to their defence budgets, increase defence spending, and move towards investing at least 2% of their GDP in defence within a decade.

Since then we have seen three consecutive years of growth in defence expenditure across Europe and Canada, adding a total of 46 billion dollars to defence. All Allies have pledged to continue to increase defence spending in real terms. In 2017 alone, European Allies and Canada increased their defence expenditure by almost 5%. This year, we expect eight allies to meet the 2% guideline. And the majority of Allies already have plans on how to meet the 2% guideline by 2024.

So the picture is clear: the Alliance is doing more to respond and adapt to an uncertain security environment. All Allies are stepping up: doing more, in more places, in more ways, to strengthen our shared security.

The Alliance remained committed to strengthening its deterrence and defence. In 2017, NATO bolstered its defensive presence in the eastern part of the Alliance. In just a year, the Alliance implemented the Warsaw Summit decision to establish a rotational Forward Presence – deploying four multinational battlegroups to Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, and strengthening its presence in the Black Sea region.
Kamagra 100mg pill is rapidly absorbed and should be taken around an viagra samples https://regencygrandenursing.com/about-us/schedule-a-tour hour before performing sexual activity. There are many factors to impotence and one might experience penile issues a number of years earlier than men that are found without diabetes. purchase generic levitra Sam was never so generic cialis online good in the bed, but that day he was in full swing and Martha enjoyed the 3 intense orgasms during the act. Buying a right kind of golf electric trolley effects of viagra is one of the most essential parts of preparing for your forthcoming golf sessions.
NATO maintained an all-round approach to collective defence, including by deepening its focus on threats from the Alliance’s southern flank. For example, NATO established a Regional Hub for the South in September 2017. The Hub aims to improve situational awareness and to enhance engagement with partners.

The Alliance continues to ensure it can perform its three core tasks: collective defence, crisis management, and cooperative security. In recent years, this has required NATO to recalibrate its missions, operations and activities to better meet changing security needs. NATO has wound down some activities, such as its counter-piracy mission off the Horn of Africa, and transformed others, including by transitioning from a combat to a training mission in Afghanistan. At the same time, to keep its nations safe in the face of new security challenges, the Alliance has invested in reinforcing and developing a number of activities, including on Allied territory.

As part of this adaptation process, NATO has strengthened its collective defence, tripling the size of the NATO Response Force from roughly 13,000 to 40,000 troops and establishing a 5,000-strong Very High Readiness Joint Task Force. The Alliance has boosted its Forward Presence in the northeast and southeast of the Alliance and strengthened assurance and support measures inside Alliance territory, including by enhancing air policing. NATO has also adapted its maritime security posture in the Mediterranean and invested in supporting the security and stability of partners by training local institutions and forces to fight terrorism.

Following the 2016 Warsaw Summit decision to make cyberspace an operational domain, the Alliance continued to strengthen its cyber defences and to fully integrate cyber defence into operational planning. At the same time, NATO is undertaking the largest modernisation of its information technology and networks in decades.

NATO also established a new intelligence division at its Headquarters in Brussels, improving Allies’ ability to obtain and share information on potential security threats.

Since the Wales Summit in 2014, NATO has implemented the largest reinforcement of its collective defence in a generation. As part of this extensive effort, NATO has increased its presence in the northeast and southeast of the Alliance. In 2017, NATO deployed four multinational battlegroups in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. Led by the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany and the United States respectively, this Forward Presence became fully operational in the summer. Around 4,500 troops are deployed and embedded in the home defence forces of the host nations, training and exercising with those forces on a daily basis. Over the past year, more than 20 Allies contributed forces and capabilities to this initiative, a clear demonstration of Allied solidarity and commitment. The battlegroups represent a proportionate and defensive force, in line with NATO’s determination to provide effective deterrence and to ensure collective defence. They send a message that an attack against any Ally would be an attack against the whole Alliance, and met with a collective response.

In the face of evolving security challenges in the Black Sea region, NATO also took steps to strengthen its presence in the southeast of the Alliance. This element of NATO’s Forward Presence comprises the deployment of a multinational brigade for training, and an expanded air and maritime presence in the Black Sea region. Together, these are distinct and important contributions to the Alliance’s strengthened deterrence and defence posture, and to its situational awareness.

The multinational framework brigade, led by Romania, was established in April 2017 and is expected to become fully operational by the end of 2018. The brigade is being developed with affiliated forces from Bulgaria, Italy, Poland, Portugal and the United States, with contributions from Canada, Germany, Hungary, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Slovakia and Spain.

NATO’s strengthened Forward Presence does not exist in isolation. The Alliance’s rapid-reinforcement strategy ensures that in a collective defence scenario the multinational battlegroups – alongside national home defence forces – would be reinforced by the brigade-sized Very High Readiness Joint Task Force, ready to be deployed in days, followed by the remainder of the approximately 40,000 troops of the enhanced NATO Response Force.

NATO has also invested in reinforcing its ability to understand and respond to security challenges along its southern borders. The Alliance continues to provide support to Turkey, including by augmenting Turkish air defence capabilities through the deployment of missile batteries, air policing and port visits. NATO actively contributes to security in its southern neighbourhood by being an active member of the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS and by supporting its partners’ efforts to fight terrorism. NATO continues to be present in the Aegean and Mediterranean Seas, working to support maritime situational awareness, counter terrorism, combat illegal trafficking and enhance capacity-building.

In 2017, NATO boosted its awareness of the threats and challenges from the south, including by establishing a Regional Hub at the Allied Joint Force Command Naples. The Alliance has also committed to improving its ability to conduct expeditionary operations, for example by carrying out more high level exercises that reflect challenges emanating from its southern neighbourhood.

NATO photo

The Report Concludes Tomorrow.