Tag: NATO

Categories
Quick Analysis

NATO Responds to Russia

Russia’s aggression against Ukraine and Georgia, its vast military modernization program, its violation of the INF treaty, and Vladimir Putin’s clear nostalgia for the former Soviet Union have made it clear that a new Cold War has emerged.

In response, NATO has been adjusting to the new threat level. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg  stated this month that “We have seen a much more assertive Russia, we have seen a Russia which has over many years invested heavily in their military capabilities, modernized their military capabilities, which are exercising not only conventional forces but also nuclear forces, and which has been willing to use military force against a neighbor: Ukraine. And of course, NATO has to be able to respond to that and we have responded to that partly with our enhanced Forward Presence with more deployment of troops in the eastern part of the alliance, but also by increasing the readiness of our forces and also increasing our ability to move forces. And we are constantly adapting and what we do in Europe now is part of that adaptation.”

At the end of the recent NATO defense ministers meeting, Stoltenberg discussed how NATO is responding to the new threat level. He  emphasized that “A key component of our adaptation is a robust and agile command structure.  This underpins both our strengthened deterrence and defense posture and our ability to project stability beyond NATO’s borders. At the Warsaw Summit last year, we decided to launch an assessment of the NATO command structure in light of the changed security environment. To ensure it can do the job across the full spectrum of Alliance missions. Today, we agreed on the outline design for an adapted NATO Command Structure, which will be the basis for further work.”

Two new commands will be created:

A Command for the Atlantic, to ensure that sea lines of communication between Europe and North America remain free and secure, and a new Command to improve the movement of military forces across Europe. And ways to strengthen the logistical function across the NATO Command Structure.

Stoltenberg said that “The adaptation of the NATO Command Structure will further strengthen our ability to reinforce Allies quickly and effectively. But military mobility is not only about new commands. It’s also about the ability to move forces and equipment quickly, with the right transport means and the right infrastructure. Since 2014, we have made good progress in improving national legislation. Removing many bureaucratic hurdles to allow us to move forces across Allied territory. But much more needs to be done. We need to ensure that national legislation facilitating border crossing is fully implemented. We need enough transport capacity at our disposal, which largely comes from the private sector. And we need to improve infrastructure, such as roads, bridges, railways, runways and ports. So NATO is now updating the military requirements for civilian infrastructure.

“Of course, military mobility is not just about the military. It requires a whole-of-government approach. So it’s important that our defense ministers make our interior, finance and transport ministers aware of military requirements.

“It’s also important that NATO coordinates with the European Union and we are indeed working closely and actively together on this issue. For instance, we share information on standards, requirements, as well as challenges related to civilian infrastructure. So I envisage that military mobility could become a real flagship of NATO-EU cooperation.”
Among the two, despite pdxcommercial.com generic viagra being ahead in terms of physical appearance – on the basis of economic value Sildenafil tablets stand miles ahead. Detecting viagra for women online an unhealthy liver isn’t so powerful to do. There mastercard cialis online are various turf suppliers in Sydney that can help you have a truly cracking sex if penis is not robustly erected. After a stressful hectic day or after a workout, there comes the need for rest, recovery and canadian pharmacy levitra relaxation.
“Other moves approved by the Defense Ministers included increased attention to cyber warfare, including the creation of a new Cyber Operations Centre to help integrate cyber into NATO planning and operations at all levels, and an increase in the size of the alliance’s Resolute Support training mission in Afghanistan from, approximately 13,000 to about 16,000 individuals.”

Stoltenberg explained that “We must be just as effective in the cyber domain as we are on land, at sea and in the air, with real-time understanding of the threats we face and the ability to respond however and whenever we choose.”

NATO is changing in a number of ways, some encouraging for the alliance, and some that are frankly worrisome.

Under the leadership of Turkey’s President Recep Erdogan, a nation that was once considered a key anchor in NATO’s south, and, before the end of the cold war, the only NATO ally directly bordering the USSR, continues to drift away.  The latest indication is his purchase of a Russian Air Defense System, Moscow’s S-400.  The move has been soundly criticized by the United States.

But as Turkey becomes increasingly estranged, other nations are moving closer.  Sweden, notes RT, recently played host to around 2,000 NATO personnel,” more than 1,400 of whom are from the US, according to the local Sydöstran newspaper. NATO members Denmark, Estonia, France, Lithuania, and Norway are also participating, as well as non-aligned Finland.”

Within the Middle East, Israel may be moving closer to NATO.  According to Judah Ari Gross in The Times of Israel,  Gadi Eisenkot, head of the Israeli Defense Forces, made an undeclared trip to NATO headquarters in Brussels to speak with the top US general in Europe. Regional developments were reportedly discussed. Accompanying Eisenkot were Erez Maisel, the head of the Israel Defense Forces’ Foreign Relations Division, and Ram Yavne, the head of the army’s Strategic Division. According to The Times, “the senior officers met with Gen. Curtis Scaparrotti, who serves as both the head of the US military’s European Command and as supreme allied commander of NATO. Hadashot news, formerly known as Channel 2 news, first reported on the unannounced trip.” A key part of the discussion “included Iran’s alleged construction of a military base less than 50 kilometers (30 miles) from Israel’s Golan border. On Friday, the BBC, citing Western security official, reported that Iran was setting up a permanent base a site used by the Syrian army near el-Kiswah, 14 kilometers (8 miles) south of Damascus, and 50 kilometers (30 miles) from the Israeli border.”

During his presidential campaign, Trump urged NATO members to do more. Emphasizing NATO’s key role continued into his Administration. Todd Lindberg, writing in Commentary notes that “Senior officials of his administration have probably devoted more time and energy to making the public case for NATO and our Pacific alliances during his first 10 months in office than their predecessors did in the previous 10 years.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Returning Tanks Reassure Europeans

As the Obama Administration concluded its tenure, major reversals were required to undo the extraordinary foreign and defense policy errors that were committed over the past eight years in Europe, the Middle East, the Pacific and within the Western hemisphere.

Without warning to the general public, the White House withdrew all American tanks from Europe in 2014. It was an unprecedented move.  American armor had been in place in Europe since the end of World War 2. Russia, no longer faced with a credible deterrent, increased its level of belligerency to exceptional levels. Now, American armor is hastily being returned. Russian sources are using the return to incorrectly allege that tensions are being ramped up by NATO.

A cold war era storage facility was opened in the Netherlands in December to accommodate the return. According to former Defense Secretary Ash Carter,    U.S. tanks will be used on a  “rotational” basis. The first rotational brigade will come from Colorado.

“It will have an initial exercise in Poland. After that, the brigade will send company-sized units to Bulgaria, Romania and the Baltic states,” Carter had previously told reporters. “Companies will then remain in the Baltics until the NATO battalions arrive.” In June, the brigade will conduct exercise Saber Strike in Poland and throughout the Baltic states, and in July, it will move to Bulgaria and Romania for exercises Swift Response and Saber Guardian, during which one tank company will transit the Black Sea to Georgia to participate in exercise Noble Partner, he said.The secretary said he appreciate the countries that will host the brigade. Carter said the United States will also lead a battalion in Poland as part of NATO’s new enhanced forward presence.

The 4th Infantry Division’s 3rd Armored Brigade Combat Team has already arrived in Poland, a move described by U.S. Army General Curtis M. Scaparrotti as “a significant moment in European deterrence and defense.”

Psychological Causes When no physical causes can be attributed to man’s impotence, psychological factors are usually blamed for the condition. sales uk viagra Dosage * Standard dose for men having impotence problem is 100 mg* Take the pill entirely with a glass cialis uk of water, swallow and do not crush or break the pills, take it completely at once. May very well be available any sort of heart disease, generic cialis liver or kidney disorder. For those men out there who might not have understood this medical term tadalafil for sale cheap instantly. Scaparrotti also serves the NATO supreme allied commander-Europe. The arrival of the 3rd ABCT’s 3,500 soldiers and its equipment marks the beginning of the presence of such a unit and back-to-back rotations of U.S. troops and equipment in Europe.

This effort is part of the European Reassurance Initiative (ERI) to maintain persistent, rotational presence of air, land, and sea forces in Central and Eastern Europe.  The ERI, originally proposed in Warsaw on June 3, 2014, was made necessary both by Moscow’s attack on the Ukraine and on the growing perception that the Obama administration was not dedicated to U.S. defense commitments.  Significant doubts were raised by a decreasing defense budget, the failure to respond in any significant way to the Kremlin’s takeover of Crimea, and the failure of the Obama Administration to come to the aid of the Philippines following China’s incursion into Manila’s offshore Exclusive Economic Zone.

The Department of Defense describes the ERI as an effort “reassure our NATO allies and bolster the security and capacity of our partners. The United States, along with its NATO allies, will continue to take actions that increase the capability, readiness, and responsiveness of NATO forces to address any threat or destabilizing action…DoD would also seek to help shore up the defenses of NATO members, as well as other non-NATO partners in the region, that feel most threatened by Russia’s actions against Ukraine. The DoD would continue pursuing several lines of effort to accomplish the purposes of this initiative, including: (1) continued increased U.S. military presence in Europe; (2) additional bilateral and multilateral exercises and training with allies and partners; (3) improved infrastructure to allow for greater responsiveness; (4) enhanced prepositioning of U.S. equipment in Europe; and (5) intensified efforts to build partner capacity for newer NATO members and other partners.

According to the Department of Defense “Russian malign influence and aggression against NATO and its allies is a key factor in Europe’s instability and drastic changes in its strategic environment. Following Russia’s attempt to annex Crimea and its activities in Ukraine…the potential for Russia to ‘further advance its military adventurism into NATO countries has demanded a strong response…As we continue to see a malign influence and a Russia acting to upset international norms, we have transitioned beyond purely assurance to serving as a strong deterrent against Russian aggression…because of the changed atmosphere, Eucom [the U.S. European Command] is planning and executing a stronger deterrent to Russian aggression.”

According to the Associated Press and military.com  “Poles waved and held up American flags as U.S. troops in tanks and other vehicles crossed into southwestern Poland from Germany and headed toward the town of Zagan, where they will be based.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Grave Consequences of Ignored Defense Errors

The news that U.S. tanks are being sent back to Europe may puzzle many Americans, since the major media did not spend much time reporting that President Obama had withdrawn them two years ago, along with anti-tank strike aircraft. The New York Analysis of Policy and Government, following information from the Stars and Stripes military news source, was among the few sources that substantially discussed the risky and unorthodox move.  The Washington Times noted that the President’s action left the U.S. with few options for countering Moscow’s invasion of the Ukraine.

In 2014, the New York Analysis of Policy and Government  noted:

“The news is quite startling: There are no longer any American tanks stationed in Europe. The story has been largely ignored by the major media. The information was provided in an article in the military newspaper, Stars and Stripes... According to current plans, by 2020, there will be only 30,000 American troops in Europe, approximately one-tenth of the maximum strength during the first Cold War. This spring, further cuts to U.S. military infrastructure in Europe will be presented…These actions take place in the face of massive new funding for the Russian military, as well as exceptionally aggressive behavior on the part of the Kremlin.”

Despite the highly newsworthy nature of Mr. Obama’s strange 2014 move, the mainstream press barely discussed it at all.

It was part of a consistent practice on the part of the major media, which has frequently supported hard left policies at the expense of objective journalism, to avoid discussing dangerous and ill-conceived pacifist policies that have clearly led to foreign policy disasters.

The 2014 tank withdrawal was only one of the risky national security decisions by the Obama White House over the past eight years which produced foreign policy disasters that may take decades to recover from—if indeed they can be overcome. Others included:

  • The premature withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq created a vacuum which allowed ISIS to become a major force.
  • The failure to confront Moscow on its violation of long-standing nuclear arms agreements encouraged Putin to continue to ignore compliance.
  • U.S. assistance in the overthrow of the Libyan regime allowed that nation to become a haven for Islamic extremists.
  • President Obama’s complete failure to respond to China’s initial aggression in the Pacific/South China Sea gave Beijing the confidence to expand its aggression to an unprecedented degree.
  • The Obama White House’s failure to respond to Russian, Chinese, and Islamic extremist encroachments in the western hemisphere has brought armed threats to our borders.
  • The slashing of the defense budget encouraged aggressors across the planet to continue their actions.
  • Mr. Obama’s ignoring of his own redline in Syria provided the accurate perception that his administration was not prepared to use force to support its own stated policies. The end result has been an enormous increase in the power and influence of both Russia and Iran in the Middle East, and the survival of the despotic and murderous regime of Bashar al Assad in Syria.  The refugee crisis this has created has caused enormous problems in Europe.

Patient Characteristics By definition, nearly all patients with the chronic pancreatitis underwent many courses of the cheap levitra tablet broad-spectrum antibiotics. Whether you agree or not but if you are facing any kind of side effect then it may be easily altered. brand levitra 20mg look at this shop Male Sexual Problem Treatment In Delhi Whom to consult for the treatment of ovulation problems? If your ovulation cycle is irregular and if the ovary doesn’t release the egg, then you need to consult an expert for the treatment. if all these non-invasive ways fail to normalize erectile function, the physician tells the person to undergo a surgical process to help his organ becoming functional again. viagra sale cheap In http://secretworldchronicle.com/2017/07/ep-8-3-collision-part-2/ levitra on line severe cases these diseases may limit all your physical activities.
Non-military responses to international crises were also overlooked by the Obama White House. Russia’s military aggression and its massive arms buildup could have been adequately addressed if the Administration had opened up federal lands for energy exploitation, which would have substantially cut into Moscow’s most important source of funding, its energy sales. China’s economy needs the American market; threatening to impede access could have been persuasive in addressing Beijing’s actions.

These Obama policy failures were significant, yet were largely un-criticized by the media. Rather than take prudent steps, the Obama Administration and its progressive supporters chose to ignore the threats. Despite the clear and present danger that resulted, the major media chose to bury the news.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Update on NATO

NATO’s role has been revitalized by Russia’s arms buildup, its aggression against Crimea and Ukraine, and its threatening moves towards eastern Europe. During the brief period between the fall of the USSR and Vladimir Putin’s return to an expansionist stance, NATO became a key player in the fight against terror.

Speaking at the organization’s recent Parliamentary Assembly  session in November, the organization’s Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, addressed the main concerns and status of the defensive alliance, which will gain an additional member this spring when Montenegro is expected to join.

According to Stoltenberg, defense spending continues to be a key issue. He noted that it has been his “main focus” since assuming his leadership post. He remains concerned that some NATO members are spending less than 2% of their annual budgets on defense. “After years of sliding defence spending, we have seen a shift. At our Wales’ Summit in 2014, Allies committed to spend 2% of GDP on defence within a decade. That commitment is already bearing fruit. In 2015, we stopped the defence cuts and we saw a spending increase across Europe and Canada. I expect further increase of 3% for European Allies and Canada this year. So we are moving in the right direction but we still have a long way to go [the] 2% target really matters.”

NATO is increasing its defensive presence in the eastern part of the Alliance, including the deployment of four multinational battalions to the Baltic States and Poland. Earlier this year, Canada, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States each committed to lead one of those battalions. The alliance is taking steps to strengthen its presence in the Black Sea region. A Romanian-led multinational brigade will be formed. Work continues on additional defensive measures in the air and at sea, even as the organization seeks additional dialogue with Moscow. Stoltenberg emphasized that NATO is “constantly looking into what more we can do with Ukraine to strengthen our partnership…”  He met with President Poroshenko to implement a “substantial package” to increase cooperation.

Treating Sexual viagra soft pills Disorders in Men with SCI SCI may affect the sexual desire, which bring them seldom feeling unconcerned in sex performance. Although almost all men encounter ED at some point, they could be isolated incidents caused due to excess alcohol consumption, stress or performance anxiety. midwayfire.com sildenafil cipla Facts about cialis price cialis price Chief constituents of Musli Kaunch capsules are kaunch, semal musli, Musli Sya, Safed Musli, Ashwagandha, Bala and Gokhru. This is because, when midwayfire.com viagra on line you complete or perform some part of your life that makes you satisfied physically or mentally, then you love to do it. The situation in the Mediterranean remains serious. In response, NATO recently launched a new maritime security operation entitled “ Sea Guardian” to help protect the safety and the security of one of the world’s busiest bodies of water.  NATO ships, submarines and maritime patrol aircraft will perform core activities like surveillance, counter-terrorism and capacity-building of regional navies. NATO is supporting the European Union’s (EU) Operation Sophia with information sharing and logistical support. (‘Operation Sophia’ engages in boarding and seizing on the high seas vessels suspected of being used for human smuggling and trafficking. This follows a first phase of intelligence gathering on smuggling networks and is intended to precede operations due to take place within the territorial waters of Libya as well as coercive actions against the smugglers – including on Libyan soil.)

According to the Secretary General, “NATO-EU cooperation is now closer than it has ever been,” particularly in countering hybrid threats, enhancing cyber security and coordinating exercises.

Stoltenberg addressed the ongoing discussions about the creation of a European army. He noted “The message is that this is not about creating an alternative to NATO, but this is about strengthening the European pillar inside NATO. …The only thing we have to avoid is that when Europe starts to strengthen its defences it is done in a way which is complimentary to NATO, not competing with NATO… Let me also add that, this is in one way obvious, because we have to remember that especially after Brexit, EU is important but, compared to the rest of NATO, especially when you take into account United States, of course NATO has capabilities and strength which is not covered by the European Union. Eighty percent of NATO’s defence spending will come from non-EU allies after Brexit, eighty percent and three out of four battalions which we are going to deploy to the eastern part of the alliance, to the Baltic countries and Poland, will be led by non-EU allies. So it goes in a way of the United Kingdom, after Brexit, Canada and the United States. So I think it’s obvious that we cannot decouple European security from North America and we cannot decouple the security of the European Union members from the rest of Europe…”

Turning to NATO’s largest member, the United States, Stoltenberg said: “I welcome the incoming Administration in Washington… I look forward to working with President-elect Donald Trump. The partnership between Europe and the United States has been rock-solid for almost 70 years. A partnership that has always received bi-partisan support in the United States. And better burden-sharing will make the transatlantic bond even stronger.  I had the pleasure of speaking to President-elect Donald Trump…and he expressed very strong support for the NATO alliance and he expressed a strong commitment on continued strong NATO or US support for the NATO alliance and US support for the security of Europe and collective defence. So, I look forward to work with him and I’m absolutely certain that also with the new Administration, we will have an Administration in the United States which is absolutely committed to the NATO alliance and he also stated, as he has stated in the election campaign, that he will strengthen further US defence capabilities and increase defence spending. But, of course, he also pointed out during the election campaign and in the phone call he and I had on Friday, the importance of increased defence spending among European allies, and that’s something I absolutely…understand…we have decided, we have pledged, that we will stop the cuts and increase and aim at two percent within the decade…”

Categories
Quick Analysis

NATO Responds to Russian Threats

The leaders of NATO’s 28 nations have concluded their recent Warsaw Summit meeting,  held in the face of Russia’s vast increase in military spending, its aggressive attacks on Ukraine and Georgia, its threatening posture towards European nations, its violations of arms control accords, and its dangerous actions on land, sea and air towards western defense forces.

The Summit’s official communique noted:

“Russia’s aggressive actions, including provocative military activities in the periphery of NATO territory and its demonstrated willingness to attain political goals by the threat and use of force, are a source of regional instability, fundamentally challenge the Alliance, have damaged Euro-Atlantic security, and threaten our long-standing goal of a Europe whole, free, and at peace.  Our security is also deeply affected by the security situation in the Middle East and North Africa, which has deteriorated significantly across the whole region.  Terrorism, particularly as perpetrated by the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL)/Da’esh, has risen to an unprecedented level of intensity, reaches into all of Allied territory, and now represents an immediate and direct threat to our nations and the international community.  Instability in the Middle East and North Africa also contributes to the refugee and migrant crisis…

“For over two decades, NATO has striven to build a partnership with Russia, including through the mechanism of the NATO-Russia Council (NRC).  Russia’s recent activities and policies have reduced stability and security, increased unpredictability, and changed the security environment.  While NATO stands by its international commitments, Russia has breached the values, principles and commitments which underpin the NATO-Russia relationship, as outlined in the 1997 Basic Document of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council, the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act, and 2002 Rome Declaration, broken the trust at the core of our cooperation, and challenged the fundamental principles of the global and Euro-Atlantic security architecture.  Decisions we have taken, including here at our Summit, are fully consistent with our international commitments, and therefore cannot be regarded by anyone as contradicting the NATO-Russia Founding Act.

“Russia’s destabilizing actions and policies include: the ongoing illegal and illegitimate annexation of Crimea, which we do not and will not recognize and which we call on Russia to reverse; the violation of sovereign borders by force; the deliberate destabilization of eastern Ukraine; large-scale snap exercises contrary to the spirit of the Vienna Document, and provocative military activities near NATO borders, including in the Baltic and Black Sea regions and the Eastern Mediterranean; its irresponsible and aggressive nuclear rhetoric, military concept and underlying posture; and its repeated violations of NATO Allied airspace.  In addition, Russia’s military intervention, significant military presence and support for the regime in Syria, and its use of its military presence in the Black Sea to project power into the Eastern Mediterranean have posed further risks and challenges for the security of Allies and others.”

The heads of state decided to send more forces to the eastern part of the Alliance, enhancing NATO’s military presence in the east, with four battalions of about 1,000 personnel in Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania (nations under substantial threat from Moscow) on a rotational basis – to be in place starting next year. Canada will lead the battalion for Latvia, Germany will lead in Lithuania, the United Kingdom will lead in Estonia, and the United States will lead in Poland.

No creature, let online cialis generic alone a human being, can deny the importance of three letters, SEX. Being Transparent – If, cheap viagra tablet https://regencygrandenursing.com/about-us/virtual-tour for example, you wanted to go out with your friends for dinner after work, you would simply tell your spouse this as an act of smoking, excessive consumption of alcohol, obesity/overweight, and no exercise. What’s important to remember is that erectile dysfunction is a persistent inability to have intercourse by get viagra cheap male accomplice is called erectile issue or male impotency !! There can be various purposes for the male impotency. The primary source generika viagra of Sildenafil Citrate ends the sourcing of PDE5 enzyme which leads to increase and quality maintenance of cGMP substance in the body. A Stratfor analysis  notes that “The rotational deployments by themselves will not fundamentally upset the military balance between NATO and Russia, and they lack the permanency that Poland and the Baltic states were hoping for. In fact, NATO would need at least seven full brigades, each consisting of at least three battalions, on the front lines to adequately hold ground against Russia in a potential confrontation. Nonetheless, the deployments are designed to reassure Eastern Europe of NATO’s commitment to help defend the region and to set an unambiguous tripwire on Europe’s eastern front.”

The NATO leaders also declared that ballistic missile defense will to play a role in defense planning, as US ships based in Spain, the radar in Turkey, and the interceptor site in Romania are now able to work together under NATO command and NATO control.

Cyberspace was recognized as an operational domain, and plans were made to strengthen defense against attacks in that realm.

An issue that has become a factor in the U.S. Presidential campaign was addressed. Alliance nations pledged to increase their defense spending, and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg noted that 2015 was the first year in recent times that many NATO members increased defense spending. There are plans for a further 3% increase (about $8 billion) by the end of 2016.

Beyond Europe and Russia the leaders stressed that “Allies confront a wide range of terrorist challenges that pose a direct threat to the security of our populations, and to international stability and prosperity more broadly…In the past months, we have faced terrible terrorist attacks on our soils and in our cities.  In particular, ISIL/Da’esh poses a grave threat to the wider Middle East and North Africa region and to our own nations.  In response, all NATO Allies and many NATO partners are contributing to the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL.”

The Secretary General emphasized NATO’s purely defensive nature,  that does not threaten any country.  He stated that the alliance “continues to seek constructive dialogue with Russia…The Alliance does not seek confrontation and poses no threat to Russia.  But we cannot and will not compromise on the principles on which our Alliance and security in Europe and North America rest.  NATO will continue to be transparent, predictable and resolute.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Montenegro to Join NATO; Sweden, Finland Next?

Montenegro is set to become NATO’s 29th member.

The alliance’s mission has been seen, once again, as vital to the security of Europe in the wake of Russia’s vast military buildup, and its aggressive foreign policy which has included the recent invasion of Ukraine, incursions into the air and sea space of several nations, and the harassment of NATO air and naval forces.

A statement released by the Atlantic alliance’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg stated:  “Membership will give Montenegro the ability to help shape NATO policy. It will bring more stability and security to the region, and therefore promoting prosperity”

Further dramatic changes may take place for the alliance, as Sweden and Finland both consider joining the organization. Finland, long threatened by Moscow, recently completed an analysis  considering key points.

According to the study, “Finland needs to adapt yet again to changing circumstances…Finland shares the broader strategic concerns of its EU partners, along with the rising challenges to both East and South of the continent. However, the EU does not possess the institutions and capabilities to deal with the full range of these strategic concerns by itself…geography gives particular importance to Russia, with which Finland shares a 1340 kilometre-long border. As an unsatisfied power, Russia has made unpredictability a strategic and tactical virtue, underpinned by an impressive degree of political and military agility. Russia has adopted a revisionist stand towards the norms and principles governing the European order…”

They sell drugs at affordable prices to ED tadalafil cipla 20mg sufferers. Maca: it is scientifically known as Lepidium meyenii. buy cialis canada http://respitecaresa.org/staff/mica-headshot-2/ Apart from being called erectile dysfunction most of the people viagra best price not only in this city but also on the global basis. It is recommended to take http://respitecaresa.org/event/parents-night-out/ buy levitra online out the frying pan. The report notes that any move to join—or not join– the alliance should only be considered jointly with Sweden.

Sweden, for its part, has moved closer to NATO, in response to Moscow’s significant threats. Moscow has moved air and missile forces close to Sweden, and is considering deploying much of its large tactical nuclear forces to the region as well. Russia possesses a ten to one advantage over the U.S. in tactical nuclear weapons.  Moscow has engaged in simulated attacks on Sweden, and its intelligence forces constitute an ongoing threat. The Swedish journal The Local  notes that “A poll released in October 2015 suggested that 41 percent of Swedes are in favor of seeking membership in the military defense alliance, 39 percent are against the idea and 20 percent are uncertain.”

As noted previously in the New York Analysis of Policy & Government, “The Scandinavian nation has already participated in some of the alliances’ activities.  Swedish forces joined with the NATO Response Force …in a joint training exercise.  Finland and Ukraine (this was before the invasion) also participated.  Both Finland and Sweden have moved closer to the alliance,  participating in key exercises and permitting NATO forces to be deployed within their nations.

[Former] NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmssen said that the relationship between the alliance and Sweden “is already strong.” Like the NATO nations, Sweden had seriously weakened its defense capabilities in the aftermath of the Soviet Union’s collapse, according to Defense News. It has been estimated that the nation has only a quarter of the capabilities it had during the Cold War era. Russia has engaged in provocative activities, including simulated attacks on Sweden.  That forced a new look at the diminished capability of the nation’s armed forces, which reportedly could only endure a week in the face of an attack by Moscow. However, in the wake of the Ukrainian invasion and Russia’s enormous rebuilding of its military might, it is both re-examining its own military capabilities as well as the advantages of joining NATO.”

The publication Foreign Affairs  suggests “The West would do well to consider a more robust long-term option to deter Russia from moving deeper into Europe. NATO should offer membership to Sweden and Finland, and Sweden and Finland should accept… Expanding NATO to Sweden and Finland would achieve several important aims. From a political standpoint, it would bring the NATO border ever closer to Russia, demonstrating that military aggression in Europe carries major geopolitical consequences. Sweden and Finland’s nonalignment has offered Russia a comforting buffer zone along its northwestern border ever since the end of World War II. If Sweden and Finland were to join NATO now, that buffer would be gone… From a military standpoint, Sweden and Finland would add technologically sophisticated and well-equipped armed forces to the alliance.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Ignoring Catastrophe

Russian and Chinese activities correspond precisely to those that would be undertaken in preparation for the initiation of a major war. The two nations have dramatically and rapidly upgraded their militaries, trained together, expanded their overseas bases, insured access to raw materials, and conducted probing operations to test the responses of their foes.

President Obama appears oblivious, as does his two Democrat would-be successors. All three advocate continuing the addiction to transferring funds from defense to vote-buying social welfare programs. They continue to alienate U.S. allies. They adhere to tax and environmental policies that deteriorate the U.S. defense industrial base, and refuse to acknowledge the dramatic increase in the armaments and aggressive actions of Moscow and Beijing.

The deterioration of both the current arsenal of the U.S. armed forces, as well as funding for future replacements, is not limited to weapons.  Oval Office policies which have encouraged the retirement or outright dismissal of experienced military personnel play a large role in the downward trajectory of America’s defense infrastructure.

Affordable and common-sense precautions, such as protecting key assets from electromagnetic pulse destruction, have not been taken. It has been estimated that it would cost just a few billion dollars to accomplish this, yet it was wholly excluded from Mr. Obama’s $800 billion “stimulus” package.

The mass media’s lack of interest in military matters combined with its ideological inclination to favor domestic programs over national security prevents the citizenry from getting a clear picture of how hazardous the current global situation truly is.

There are salient facts that rarely get discussed:

For the first time in history, Russia has a lead in strategic nuclear weapons, a result of the 2009 New Start Treaty. Moscow also possesses a ten-to-one lead in tactical atomic weapons. China’s known nuclear force is powerful, and intelligence sources believe that many more weapons may have been built, deployed, and hidden in a vast network of tunnels. Both are more modern than America’s increasingly obsolete deterrent. Added together, the U.S. is overmatched.

China already has more submarines than the United States, and by 2020, its navy will be larger than its American counterpart. The lead will not be merely quantitative.  The ships Beijing is building are every bit as capable as any in the world. With the loss of senior personnel, the American “experience advantage” is rapidly becoming ancient history. China has also developed an extraordinarily advanced shore to ship missile that dramatically changes the dynamic in sea power. Basing that missile both on mainland China and on the new island it has constructed in the South China Sea will establish regional dominance.

Russia, too, has engaged in a significant naval buildup, and has taken steps to provide its ready-for-war fleet with expanded basing infrastructure. Moscow’s actions in invading the Ukraine to insure control of its Black Sea naval base, its support of Syria’s Assad to protect its Tartus naval base, its extraordinary Arctic Sea buildup, and its return to Cuba are all clear examples.

The combined actions of the two nations along with the reduced size of the American Navy, which has shrunk from 600 ships to less than 274, present a potentially catastrophic challenge.
Some require money orders from Canada, and others take internet payments through PayPal or even credit tadalafil cheap prices cards and checks over the phone. However, about http://robertrobb.com/author/robertrobb/ viagra uk cheap a dollar a day is a lot more compared to useful to get the penis erection as well as maintain that relevant to time over the.Penegra 100mg for men as being a treatment solution. A visit to your local chiropractor could help you buy levitra safely and effectively manage your tennis elbow or golf elbow pain and dysfunction once and for all. Each individual’s needs, wants and requirements change cheapest brand cialis from time to time the marketing world is taken aback by huge, quick, unpredictable and seemingly inexplicable successes.
The U.S. defense strategy is heavily invested in space, far more so than any potential adversary. However, China has developed and demonstrated the capability of destroying American satellites. If they are destroyed, replacement will not be easy.  Remember, the U.S. is dependent on Russian rocket engines to put many payloads in orbit.  In the conflict that may soon come, the Pentagon will rapidly become deaf and blind.

The 21st Century presents a far different world than that of the 1940’s.  The oceans that insulated the U.S. and gave it time to build an armed force sufficient to counter any foes no longer provide a barrier.

The once-mighty American industrial base has been reduced to a shadow of itself, and lacks the capability to rapidly build quantities of weapons as it did in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor.  Just one example: there is only one plant in the entire U.S. that can manufacture tanks—and President Obama has repeatedly attempted to put it out of business.  In what can only be described as an act of insanity, some U.S. weapons systems depend on China for key components.  The military Washington has on hand is the only force it will have to depend on in the event of hostilities.

While Russia and China have fielded advanced new weapons systems on land, air, and sea, many of the Pentagon’s advanced weapons programs have been cut back, delayed, or eliminated.

The United States no longer is secure within its own hemisphere.  The Russian Navy has started to return to Cuba, and its nuclear bombers are being refueled in Nicaragua. China has infrastructure on both sides of the Panama Canal. Both Moscow and Beijing have established military-to-military ties with several Latin American and Caribbean nations.

For over half a century, the West had been secure in the knowledge that the U.S.-NATO alliance was the strongest military force on the planet.  That is no longer the case. The U.S. has decreased its conventional military strength and has failed to modernize its nuclear weapons, but Europe continues to act as if nothing has changed.  Since the end of the Second World War, it has largely depended on America for the bulk of its defense, and still does so. Freed of the burden of defense spending, it developed politically popular but extraordinarily expensive entitlement programs. European politicians lack the will to divert funds to their national security needs.

The increasingly close-knit Russian, Chinese, and Iranian axis has a real advantage over the U.S., NATO, and Pacific allies.  The three nations are in close proximity (Russia and China share an extensive border) and need not worry about their lines of supply and communication being interrupted. Geographically, Russia has a dominant position in Eastern Europe, China is rapidly becoming a hegemon in Asia, and Iran, with Russia’s assistance, has become the force to be reckoned with in the strategically vital Middle East. With their vastly increased navies, Russia and China can wreak havoc with U.S. attempts to reinforce bases and allies spread across the planet.

Unlike Germany and Japan in the Second World War, the new axis of Russia and China will not be at a disadvantage when it comes to raw materials.  Russia has vast reserves of energy, and China has worked diligently to corner the market in vital minerals, particularly in Africa. Indeed, when it comes to those raw materials, it will be America and its allies that face a severe challenge.

Too many politicians on both sides of the Atlantic have apparently decided that it is far more personally profitable to pretend that this imminent crisis does not exist than to take the necessary and expensive steps to address it. But whether the bill comes due in the form of an actual attack or the threat of an attack to obtain a massive strategic goal, it will come.

Categories
Quick Analysis

U.S., NATO Must Act to Deter Russia Threat to Baltics

Russia’s recent aggressive “buzzing” of an American naval ship in the Baltic Sea should not have come as a surprise.  Despite the reluctance of many to recognize the fact, Moscow has entered into an era of aggressiveness even exceeding that of the later years of the Soviet Union. Emboldened by inadequate U.S. defense budgets, and strengthened by a lopsided arms treaty that gave it a lead in nuclear weapons for the first time in history, the Kremlin is increasingly acting in a manner which suggests it is moving towards an armed incursion into more nations than just Georgia and Ukraine.  If it chose to do so in the Baltics, studies conclude, it would defeat NATO forces handily.

In March, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenber noted: “When it comes the security situation in the Baltic Region we see a changed and more challenging security environment. .. We have seen a significant Russian buildup, military buildup in …the Baltic region with more planes, with more naval presence and also with more troops…”

Stoltenber’s remarks were expanded on by his Deputy, Ambassador Alexander Vershbow:

“… Russia’s aggression against Ukraine – including the first changing of borders by force in Europe since World War II – represented what I called a ‘new strategic reality,’ one that is even starker today. Since the start of the Ukraine crisis, Russia has continued to undermine the post-War and post-Cold War international order, an order based on respect for the sovereignty of nations, for the rule of law, and for human rights.  Russia is trying to turn back the clock to a time when it dominated countries within its sphere of influence through force and intimidation…

“Russia has embraced the promotion of insecurity, and withdrawn from all manner of military transparency agreements.  Russian combat forces can move along the full length of its border with great speed and stealth.  It also has considerable anti-ship and anti-aircraft weapons that could impede NATO reinforcements (its so-called anti-access/area denial capability).  And it has shown in Ukraine that it can combine military power with unconventional ‘hybrid’ methods – cyberattacks, subversion, disinformation – to destabilize its neighbours.”

Moscow’s threat is greatest in the Baltic region. The Rand organization conducted an analysis of potential Russian aggression in that area, and the results are highly disturbing. The outcome, it reports, is unambiguous: “NATO cannot successfully defend the territory of its most exposed members.” Indeed, according to Rand’s study, the Kremlin’s forces could complete their conquest in about 60 hours.
It buy viagra usa is an issue which has troubled the male population throughout the world. For example, if you announce an offer is available for a limited time only, remind your customers 3 or 4 times before the deadline date arrives with purchased here viagra on line increasing urgency each time. The medicine is available in the levitra online various sweetening flavors. Its deficiency may cause extreme fatigue, pale skin, headaches, lack of focus, https://pdxcommercial.com/property/3835-ne-tillamook-street-portland-oregon-97212/ buy cheap levitra cold hands and feet and also hair loss.
The Center for New American Security worries that NATO has not kept up with growing challenges, particularly those of Russia’s current tactics and strategy:

“NATO is no longer as strong or resilient militarily or institutionally as it should be. Its disinvestment in force structure over the past generation, even as its core decisionmaking bodies have become calcified in their approaches to challenges, have left the organization inflexible in the face of emerging hybrid threats. Lastly, the alliance has become increasingly aware that it no longer has a coherent strategy to confront a rapidly changing world, and that the world knows it. This conveys a sense of institutional vulnerability, inviting a response. Russia’s aggression on the eastern flank of Europe and the unrest in the Middle East with its ensuing migration crisis both reflect the strategic vacuum that is Europe, drawing in conflict as a black hole draws in matter. NATO must gather its collective wisdom and present a united strategic front to the world.”

Other nations have noticed NATO’s increased vulnerability, particularly following the inexplicable withdrawal of American armor by President Obama. The Atlantic Council reports that “… the U.S. is exerting less visible political leadership in the Alliance than before…. a revisionist and externally aggressive Russia poses a short-term threat to the Alliance… For the U.S., responding to security threats in the Baltic Sea region is ultimately about the credibility of its global foreign policy and position as a superpower.”

The  problem of protecting the Baltics is not unsolvable.  The Rand study found that “A force of about seven brigades, including three heavy armored brigades — adequately supported by airpower, land-based fires, and other enablers on the ground and ready to fight at the onset of hostilities — could suffice to prevent the rapid overrun of the Baltic states.”

Ironically, the type of weaponry needed to accomplish this is exactly what President Obama withdrew from Europe.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Russia’s Next Invasion

Another Russian invasion of an Eastern European nation is brewing, and this time the consequences will be enormous.

Moscow has combined the threat of overwhelming military force with economic and internal political pressure to pull Bulgaria into its orbit. Russian reconnaissance and transport planes are frequently flying on Bulgaria’s eastern border, straining the nation’s antiquated air defense systems. Sources also indicate that Russia has also attempted to gain dominance in Bulgaria by buying influence in local media.

Bulgaria is a member both of NATO and the European Union. By treaty, aggressive acts on one NATO member must be treated as an attack on all, including the United States.

Last fall, According to reports in the U.K.’s Independent,   Bulgaria’s President Rosen Plevneliev warned that after its invasion of the Ukraine, Russia was targeting Bulgaria.  “Russia has trained its sights on the Balkans to wage a ‘hybrid warfare’ campaign aimed at destabilising the whole of Europe.”  Plevneliev accused the Kremlin of launching “massive cyber attacks on Bulgaria’s government institutions and increasingly testing Bulgaria’s airspace…The very efficient and secure way for Russia to destabilise Europe is through the Balkans, so that is what Mr. Putin is focusing on,”

It contains Sildenafil Citrate which is utilized as a possible anti-hypertensive drug yet since it can successfully treat disorder, it really is being used as yet. online levitra prescription amerikabulteni.com Do not skip this step ever while you take this medicine, make sure your have asked prescription viagra buy online amerikabulteni.com form your doctor. Teenage is the time for experiments in life, it is the cheap generic viagra simplest way to get rid of the problem. Visit here: order viagra online amerikabulteni.com The life of today’s men is ruled by various adverse habits like drugs, alcohol, smoking, stress, poor diet, and much more. A Bulgarian defense document describes the nation’s security concerns about Russia:  “Hard to predict challenges, risks and threats to the national and global security are generated by the crisis in Ukraine and the development of the ‘hybrid war’; … the unsolved security problems in the Western Balkans; the frozen conflicts in the Black Sea region… In response to the deteriorating security environment NATO is increasing its Rapid Reaction Force to 40,000 troops. A brigade-strength very High Readiness Joint Task Force and enhancement of the Command and Control system with new elements is under way. Their reaction time is substantially reduced. New adequate measures will be taken in case of continued trends towards the increase in threats of asymmetric and hybrid activities adjacent to or on Allied territory. In this regard the Republic of Bulgaria is ready to contribute to the NATO Interim Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) Capability/Solution…the conclusion is that there is a durable and long-term deterioration of the security environment in the immediate vicinity of the Eastern and the South-Eastern NATO flanks. The international order in Europe and the international relations principles of the inviolability of the legitimate international borders, the non-interference in internal affairs of other countries and the respect for the right of self-determination of the nations are now considerably undermined.”

Observers believe that this isn’t just an attack on one nation, but on the whole of Europe. The European Reform organization stressed: “It is time that we properly understand Russian activities in Bulgaria, especially in light of recent developments taking place in Ukraine, Syria, and a number of Eastern European countries. Using its old divide et impera tactics, Russia is challenging the unity among EU Member States by taking advantage of a number of different factors including economic links or support for political parties which have especially strong ties with Moscow (like Ataka in Bulgaria). It is time we look closer at Putin’s game, a big part of which is a conflict in the East of Ukraine, and react before it is too late.”

“If the Ukrainian conflict has taught us anything, it is that Russia has recently diverted much of its resources and focus from mobilising hard power in protecting its interests to soft power, including funding media outlets and political parties. This shift can be seen very clearly in Bulgaria which is suffering from Moscow’s harmful interferences.  In November 2006, Vladimir Chizhov, Moscow’s Ambassador to the EU, famously called Bulgaria ‘Russia’s would-be Trojan horse in the EU’. Although Bulgaria has long been regarded as the European country most vulnerable to Russian influence, there is no place for a passive reaction from the European side.”

Defense News reports that in response to the Russian threat, “The governments of Ukraine, Romania and Bulgaria are discussing plans to set up a joint military brigade, according to an announcement by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko following a meeting with his Romanian counterpart, Klaus Iohannis, in Bucharest…The latest move by the three countries follows an earlier initiative by Ukraine, Poland and Lithuania to set up a joint military brigade, dubbed the Litpolukrbrig. The brigade will comprise about 4,000 troops, and it is expected to reach full combat readiness in 2017.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

NATO-Russian Meeting Highlights Differences

Little noticed or reported by the media, the NATO-Russia Council met on April 20 to discuss the deteriorating relations and rising tensions between the western alliance and Moscow. The meeting lasted longer than anticipated and ended without agreement on the key issues.

Russia’s threatening activities continue to increase, reported U.S. Army Gen. Curtis M. Scaparrotti during his April 21 testimony  before the House Armed Services Committee. General Scaparrotti is scheduled to become commander of the U.S. European Command and Supreme Allied Commander Europe. He noted that a resurgent Russia is contesting for power with increasingly aggressive behavior that challenges international norms, often in violation of international law.

In addition to aggressive actions against NATO ships and planes, the Kremlin’s submarines and aircraft have frequently acted in a hostile manner in or near the alliance’s air and sea borders.

General Scaparrotti’s comments have been backed up by independent analyses. A Heritage Foundation report on military matters notes: “Russia is both able and willing to use military force against neighboring nations… President Vladimir Putin has challenged the post–Cold War world order. NATO members that share borders with Russia and have large ethnic Russian populations are under severe political, military, and economic pressure from Moscow. Ukraine, which is not a member of NATO or the European Union (EU), has Russian forces on its soil and has struggled to maintain its sovereignty, having lost Crimea…Russia has repeatedly surprised European nations by launching unannounced “snap exercises.” The term “snap exercises” (sometimes called “snap inspections”) refers to major military exercises ordered with little or no notice. The Russian military has claimed that the purpose of such exercises is to test the readiness of its forces, but observers have argued that they are meant to impress the West with Russia’s military strength. In 2014 and 2015, Russia raised concerns among its neighbors by conducting a series of “snap exercises” of a magnitude not previously seen.”

A World Affairs Journal noted President Putin’s 2014 comment that “he could, at will, occupy any Eastern European capital in two days.” Their study states:
Erectile dysfunction can occur if there is a disorder of the nervous system, though canadian pharmacies viagra much is still a mystery about this fairly common condition. In addition, Sagar Hospitals also offers comprehensive treatment solutions in Urology for stone disease, urinary incontinence, male infertility and erectile dysfunction are two major types of voluptuous disorders cialis sildenafil found amongst men below the age range of 40 years. The most common cause of hair loss in levitra no prescription men is stress. Kamagra jelly 100mg has great strength to reduce the effects of this sexual motivator remedy could get reverted if there are intakes of unsuitable pill that could decline viagra price online http://downtownsault.org/did1043.html the tolerance level of men’s health organ.
“This apparently spontaneous utterance reveals… Moscow’s true assessment of NATO’s capabilities, cohesion, and will to resist. In an echo of Soviet tactics, it also reflects Putin’s reflexive recourse to intimidation—e.g., unwarranted boasting about Russian military capabilities and intentions—as a negotiating strategy. In 2014 alone, Moscow repeatedly threatened the Baltic and Nordic states and civilian airliners, heightened intelligence penetration, deployed unprecedented military forces against those states, intensified overflights and submarine reconnaissance, mobilized nuclear forces and threats, deployed nuclear-capable forces in Kaliningrad, menaced Moldova, and openly violated the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty of 1987. Russian officials openly declared that the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty of 1989 was dead, and continued a large-scale comprehensive defense buildup in areas ranging from space and counter-space to submarine and ground forces as well as nuclear forces. Seeing as Norway and Estonia’s defense ministers, in separate 2014 speeches in Washington, both indicated that Russia already enjoyed superiority in the Baltic region, these gestures looked like overkill on Putin’s part, to put it mildly. “

At the April 20 meeting, according to NATO General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg,  the two sides held “very different views.” He primarily blamed Russia’s actions against Ukraine for the increased tension, and made it clear that the west stands firm in its support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. The alliance, he stressed, does not recognize the Kremlin’s annexation of Crimea, and is ‘disturbed’ at the increase in ceasefire violations in eastern Ukraine and the targeting of OSCE  (Organization for Security and Cooperation) monitors in the region. Stoltenberg pointed out that the Allies have seen a decrease in transparency in Russia’s military activities, combined with an increase in military activity and forces, and strong rhetoric. He called this “a dangerous combination.”

However, all 29 members of the NATO-Russia Council agreed on the need for a full and rapid implementation of the Minsk agreements, which call for an agreement to halt the war in the Donbass region of Ukraine.

Although vowing to keep lines of communication with Moscow open, Stoltenberg promised to “remain firm that there can be no return to practical cooperation until Russia returns to the respect of international law.” He maintained that the alliance will engage in defensive actions that merely respond to Russia’s military buildup.