May 5, 2012 - No. 18
Preparations for Upcoming NATO
Chicago May 20-21
Canada Get Out of Afghanistan Now!
Canada Get Out of Afghanistan
• NATO Defence Ministers' Meeting
Sets "In Together -- Out Together" Program for Afghanistan
Consolidates a Worldwide Military Force - Rick Rozoff, Stop
• U.S. Secretary of State Promotes
"Goals for Chicago" - Voice of
• "Global NATO" Is "America's NATO":
Washington Outlines NATO's 21st Century Mandate - Rick
Rozoff, Stop NATO
Preparations for Upcoming NATO Summit,
Chicago May 20-21
Canada Get Out of Afghanistan Now!
On April 25 the U.S. Department of Defense asked Canada
Australia to provide Special Forces to operate alongside U.S. Special
Forces in Afghanistan beyond 2014. The request followed the meeting of
the NATO defence and foreign ministers in Brussels, the announcement by
Australia that it was pulling
out its 1,550 combat troops from Afghanistan one year early by 2013,
not 2014, and the brutal slaying of 17 Afghan civilians for which a
member of the U.S. Special Forces stands accused. It also came just
three days after the U.S. and the government of Afghanistan reached a
deal on a "strategic partnership" that
would place U.S. forces in Afghanistan for at least a decade beyond
2014. This is the latest shifting date by which foreign troops,
including Canadian, were to be withdrawn. According to reports, U.S.
President Barack Obama expects to sign the agreement before the NATO
Summit to be held in Chicago on May
But the request also brought public attention
to the fact that
Canadian soldiers integrated with U.S. and British military units have
already been directly participating in combat, despite the alleged end
of the Canadian military mission. Canadians were told that Canada would
no longer be involved in combat after
the end of July 2011 and that the 950 Canadian forces remaining behind
were "trainers" operating under NATO. Now it is revealed the Prime
Minister authorized Canadian soldiers "on exchange" with the U.S. and
British militaries to continue to operate in Afghanistan indefinitely
and that Defence Minister Peter
MacKay was briefed by military officials one year ago at a time seven
Canadian Forces members fell under that category. At that time,
military officials indicated in a memo that "it is impossible to
forecast the number of [Canadian Forces] members who may fall into this
category in the future." A memo approved
by the Prime Minister also indicated that the intent of military policy
was to refrain from putting restrictions on where Canadian soldiers
could deploy, "thereby permitting those members to remain with their
units so as not to damage the unit's effectiveness and to gain the
benefit of their experience."
"The [Canadian Forces] will continue this practice," the
memo said, "informing [MacKay] in each case."
The extension comes as no surprise. In November 2010,
NATO'S top civilian official in Afghanistan at the time was quoted as
saying that "specialist strike units that target terrorist operatives
are likely to keep conducting operations even after the Afghan
government has taken over responsibility."
He said both 2011 -- the date set for U.S. troops to begin drawing down
-- and 2014 are "intermediate milestones" in a larger mission that will
last much longer.
This revelation indicates once again that the Harper
dictatorship operates behind the backs of Canadians in contempt of
Despite this, Harper tried
to play dumb about whether Canada would
provide special forces to the U.S. beyond 2014. As if Canadian forces
were not already in combat missions he said, "I have been told that we
have not had that specific request from the United States." Then, to
hide that he has already defined
Canada's "national interest" in a manner Canadians do not agree with,
he declared that Canada will make a decision in line with our "national
"Whether it comes or not, I will be very clear, Canada
will make its
own determination in this regard. We have our forces there now to help
train the Afghan security forces because it is in the interests of our
country that Afghanistan does not become once again a safe haven for
terrorism and also in our interest
that, in order to prevent that, the Afghans themselves assume greater
responsibility for their own security.
"Our government will make any decisions it makes with
interests of our own country and the world community in mind," Harper
In other words, the Harper government will carry on
Royal Prerogative in a self-serving manner which it calls "national
interests." It does not intend to even pay token respect to Parliament.
It is also clear that by "world community," Harper is not referring to
all nations of the world, or even to
the Canadian people, but to the U.S.-led NATO alliance and the defence
of U.S. strategic interests against those of the rest of the world.
Canada Out of Afghanistan!
Oppose the Harper War Government!
NATO Defence Ministers' Meeting Sets
"In Together -- Out Together" Program for Afghanistan
From April 18-19, a joint meeting of NATO Foreign and
Ministers took place at NATO headquarters in Brussels, Belgium. Its
primary purpose was to prepare for the annual Summit of the U.S.-led
aggressive alliance, hosted this year by the U.S. in Chicago on May
20-21. Those in attendance included
Canada's Foreign Minister John Baird and Defence Minister Peter MacKay.
Click image to
The Canadian Armed Forces informed in a press release
Foreign and Defence Ministers' meeting dealt with "NATO's engagement in
Afghanistan towards 2014 and beyond, in addition to other joint
operations, important reform efforts aimed at ensuring the Alliance can
remain adaptable, deployable and
successful on operations, and discussions aimed at maintaining
capabilities." During the April 18-19 meetings, the theme for NATO's
Afghanistan program was dubbed "in together -- out together." This is
said to enshrine a basic "principle" of NATO's occupation of
Afghanistan. The meeting was also faced with
the announcement by Australia that it would be pulling out its 1,550
combat troops in 2013, one year ahead of schedule.
The meeting of political officials of NATO was followed
on April 25-26
by a meeting of NATO's Military Committee, attended by Canada's Chief
of Defence Staff, General Walt Natynczyk.
It was after these meetings that Canada and
Australia were asked
by the U.S. to provide special forces to work with U.S. special forces
in Afghanistan past the 2014 alleged pull-out date.
The U.S. has made clear that the upcoming Summit is not
toward securing peace in the world, which would mean dismantling NATO
as a relic of the Cold War. Discussion on how to keep U.S. and NATO
troops and bases in Afghanistan, along with updating and expanding NATO
and statements by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton preceding the
Summit show it is designed to "cement" the U.S. ability to use NATO to
do its fighting worldwide and to have it at the ready in the event of
Though attempts are made to keep them under wraps,
the U.S. and other imperialist powers in Europe, like Germany and
France, are very sharp. In part to satisfy Germany, the U.S. is calling
on NATO to extend its Baltic Policing Force, which has had German jets
patrolling the Russian border.
But will such a move backfire? Germany has its own interests, as was
evident during the war against Yugoslavia where Germany and the U.S.
contended for supremacy, contributing to splitting Yugoslavia.
Germany's attempt to impose austerity on Greece and other European
countries and France's attempt to dominate
the International Monetary Fund also reveal the rivalry over control of
The deepening economic and political crises facing all
countries and the U.S. means these inter-imperialist conflicts will
sharpen. The U.S. hopes to use its military might to keep everyone in
check and direct NATO against Russia, China and the peoples of the
world. The Summit will likely reveal
how far they are succeeding with this.
Across the Globe
NATO Consolidates a Worldwide Military
The military leaders of 50 nations, more than a quarter
of those in the
world, opened a two-day conference at NATO Headquarters in Brussels on
April 25 to discuss, as the Pentagon's website described it, "the
future of the effort in Afghanistan" and other topics.
Afghanistan being the main subject of discussion, the
military chiefs of
NATO's 28 member states, collectively the Military Committee,
met with the chiefs of defense staff of the 22 non-NATO nations
alliance with troops for the war in Afghanistan.
In January top military leaders of 67 countries, over a
third of those in the
world, met at NATO Headquarters to discuss operations in Afghanistan in
what is the largest-ever meeting of chiefs of defense staff in history.
The recently concluded expanded meeting of the NATO
Committee was the last before [the] summit in Chicago and was
largely focused on that impending event.
Participants in the conference included General Martin
of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff; General John R. Allen (in
commander of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in
Afghanistan, in charge of the largest foreign military force ever to be
in that nation; NATO's two top military commanders, Supreme Allied
Commander Europe Admiral James Stavridis and Supreme Allied Commander
Transformation General Stéphane Abrial; U.S. military chief
equivalents from 49 nations in Europe, North America, Central America,
Middle East, the Caucasus, Northeast Asia, South East Asia and the
Pacific supplying troops for NATO's Afghan War. (Armenia, Austria,
Australia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bosnia, El Salvador, Finland, Georgia,
Jordan, Macedonia, Malaysia, Mongolia, Montenegro, New Zealand,
Singapore, South Korea, Sweden, Tonga, Ukraine and the United Arab
In short, NATO's 21st century global expeditionary force
and its top
commanders. An international military coalition never authorized by the
Nations or discussed at any conference or other fora except at NATO
Headquarters and at the bloc's summits.
On the second day of the Military Committee conference
NATO's Allied Command Operations reported on a training course underway
at the Allied Joint Force Command Headquarters in Brunssum, the
where staff officers from NATO's Partnership for Peace, Mediterranean
Dialogue and Istanbul Cooperation Initiative military partnerships are
instructed to "work as augmentees in a Deployable Joint Force
(DJF HQ) environment.
NATO added, "DJF HQ serves as an example of a Joint HQ
non-NATO nations to contribute to the Alliance's missions."
"Many of the attending nations already share close ties
with NATO and
have taken part in NATO's missions, including the International
Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan."
Participating officers were from Azerbaijan, Belarus,
Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Qatar, Ukraine and the
At the gathering of military chiefs on April 25 and 26,
were NATO's wars and occupations in three continents: In addition to
ten-and-a-half-year conflict in Afghanistan, NATO's top brass
missions in Kosovo (Kosovo Force), off the Horn of Africa (Operation
Shield), in Libya (Operation Unified Protector), the Mediterranean Sea
(Operation Active Endeavor) and no doubt others. Most everywhere,
but on or near the Atlantic Ocean, north or south.
Reporting on the conference, the Pentagon's website
unnamed senior Defense Department official, "speaking on background,"
affirming that "Every opportunity for NATO members and their partners
work together helps to keep the alliance moving forward...especially
seek to improve interoperability [and] refine tactics and procedures..."
Quoted directly, the source added:
"NATO remains a very strong partnership -- as strong as
ever -- and we
have a lot of demonstrated successes with NATO if you look at the
through today and current events, and especially in the last year. So I
that bodes well for the future of the partnership. The United States
involvement in NATO is a strong partnership for tackling any future
The Pentagon account also mentioned meetings between the
military chiefs and representatives of Georgia and Ukraine, within the
NATO-Georgia Commission and NATO-Ukraine Commission frameworks, and
of the NATO-Russia Council.
The top military commanders also discussed what in a
Pentagon report on
the conference was alluded to as Pacific perspectives.
The North Atlantic Alliance in fact has a Pacific
strategy. Most of the
most recent additions to NATO's Troop Contributing Countries in
have come from Asia-Pacific nations: Malaysia, Mongolia, Singapore,
Korea and Tonga. Japan has dispatched military personnel, medics, as
Australia and New Zealand have had troops, including special forces,
in combat operations in Afghanistan for years. With 1,550 soldiers
to the International Security Assistance Force, Australia is the
provider to that NATO operation of any non-NATO country.
The Afghan war has been employed by the U.S. and NATO to
unprecedented 50-nation interoperable military force and the bloc has
formalized the arrangements initiated to that end with its new
Concept adopted at the last NATO summit in Portugal in late 2010. At a
NATO foreign ministers meeting in Berlin a year ago the alliance
new partnership format, a uniform Partnership Cooperation Menu (with
approximately 1,600 activities), to strengthen already existing
cooperation programs and to expand its network of military partnerships
throughout the world.
In addition to the Partnership for Peace, Mediterranean
Istanbul Cooperation Initiative programs -- in Europe and Asia, North
and the Middle East, and the Persian Gulf, respectively -- NATO has a
category it calls partners across the globe, which as its name
indicates has no
NATO lists Partnership for Peace members, which with the
members are subsumed under the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council, as:
Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia, Finland,
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Malta, Moldova, Montenegro, Russia,
Serbia, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and
Its Mediterranean Dialogue partners are Algeria, Egypt,
Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia.
Istanbul Cooperation Initiative partners are Bahrain,
Kuwait, Qatar and the
United Arab Emirates, with Saudi Arabia and Oman next in line.
Partners across the globe are, to date, though subject
Afghanistan, Australia, Iraq, Japan, Mongolia, New Zealand, Pakistan
The new Partnership Cooperation Menu provides for a new
type of global
NATO partnership arrangement called an Individual Partnership and
Cooperation Programme. The first country to be enrolled in it was
last month. With Kazakhstan, NATO now has two partners that border both
China and Russia.
The issue of Israel employing the Partnership
Cooperation Menu to secure
Individual Partnership and Cooperation Programme status like Mongolia
2006 Israel was the first nation to be granted membership in another
partnership modality, the Individual Cooperation Program) has arisen
regard to reports that Turkey has blocked Israel's participation at
NATO summit to prevent the above reaching fruition.
The Partnership Cooperation Menu became effective the
first of this year
and initial plans were to grant the above-mentioned program to Israel
other members of the Mediterranean Dialogue.
NATO is cultivating Iraq and Yemen for prospective
Initiative membership and Libya for membership in the Mediterranean
Dialogue, with Lebanon and Syria (in the event of a change in regime)
it. With Iraq the partnership with the Western military organization is
continuation of the seven-year NATO Training Mission-Iraq.
In reference to partners across the globe, NATO
maintains that "Japan is
NATO's longest-standing global partner," adding:
"At their meeting in Berlin in April 2011, Allied
foreign ministers listed
Japan as one of NATO's partners across the globe. As such, in the
of the establishment of a single Partnership Cooperation Menu (PCM)
all NATO partners, Japan will be able to access a wide range of
activities with the Alliance and develop a more effective individual
Article 9 of the Japanese constitution expressly forbids
the nation entering
into any form of collective self-defense. A formal partnership with the
only military bloc is doing just that.
The government of South Korea has stated: "Following the
partnership policy of NATO approved in the NATO Ministerial meeting in
Berlin, Germany in April 2011, the Republic of Korea is committed to
developing its partnership with NATO and to deepening practical
with the trans-Atlantic defense organization. "
Pakistan is another nation that has expressed interest
in the Individual
Partnership and Cooperation Programme.
Afghanistan, whose new military is being developed for
with those of the major Western powers through the NATO Training
-- Afghanistan, is another candidate.
The 21st century has witnessed the emergence of a truly
military alliance, one which in regard to the number of members and
geographic range, defense capabilities and universal ambitions is
As the war council in Brussels was underway, Italian
Giampaolo di Paola (former chairman of the NATO Military Committee)
speaking at a NATO Smart Defense Agenda meeting in Rome advocated the
establishment of ties between the military bloc and the BRICS nations
Brazil, India, China and South Africa), asserting that "the Alliance
a global vision and must take responsibility for the problems
security on a global level," according to Agenzia Giornalistica Italia.
U.S. Secretary of State Discusses "Goals for Chicago"
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke to the U.S.
command forces in Norfolk, Virginia April 3. She also spoke at the
military Institute and the World Affairs Council of Greater Hampton
all in the Norfolk area, also home to a major U.S. naval base. In her
she emphasized U.S. efforts to have NATO provide funds and troops on
ground to serve U.S.-empire building. She emphasized that the U.S.
NATO, the largest military bloc in the world, to expand its military
and to carry on into the next century.
Speaking about the upcoming NATO Summit in Chicago May
Clinton said, "In Chicago we will discuss the form that NATO's enduring
relationship with Afghanistan will then take. We also hope that, by the
we meet in Chicago, the United States will have concluded our
with Afghanistan on a long-term strategic partnership between our two
nations." She was alluding to the U.S. maintaining three major
bases in Afghanistan: at Bagram, outside the nation's capital; at
the Iranian border; and near the capital of Kandahar province close to
Pakistani border. These bases are also capable of monitoring Central
Russia and China.
Clinton also made clear that a main purpose of the
U.S./NATO war in
Afghanistan was to build an international, integrated expeditionary
force under U.S. command for future wars. There are 50 nations
equipment, artillery and aircraft for NATO's International Security
Force. Clinton said that the Chicago summit will
allies' "commitment to joint exercises and training programs that
habits of cooperation we have developed through our work together in
Clinton added that two other main topics for Chicago
will be "to update
NATO's defense capabilities for the 21st century" and "to cement and
our global partnerships." The three points together were identified as
With respect to the role of NATO, she added: "Europe is
partner of first resort. We're working together in the Middle East and
Africa, in Afghanistan, and reaching out to emerging powers and
those nations in the Asia Pacific." Using the Afghanistan model, the
would like to see the European countries embroiled in the ground
interference in these regions, while the U.S. reaps the benefits. This
the ability to claim the U.S. has no troops on the ground. It will rely
drones and Special Forces rapid assassinations and similar illegal
NATO forces carry out the ground war.
Given that the Pentagon commands NATO, the U.S.
anticipates that it will
do whatever the Pentagon dictates. However, there are also sharp
contradictions between the U.S., Germany, France and the European Union
a whole, as the various monopoly interests both collude and contend.
could fracture and various forces could line up differently, say with
China or India. To prevent this and maintain the massive additional
force that NATO is, the U.S. is striving, as Clinton put it, to
partnerships, with Europe top of the list.
In addition, Clinton emphasized that the U.S. is
"On a new Alliance Ground Surveillance system, which
uses drones to
provide crucial intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance
our forces." She added, "In Chicago, we'll decide how to use this
a hub for joint operations." This will be an operation entirely under
control and is a mechanism for the U.S. to control military operations,
including use of drones.
Another way that NATO is serving the interests of U.S.
and military plans, she also said was that: "In Lisbon [at the last
agreed to deploy a missile defense system to provide full coverage and
protection for NATO European territory, population, and forces. In
we will look to advance that goal by developing our plans for NATO to
exercise command and control of missile defense assets."
NATO is the main partner in Washington's global
system. The now eight-year-old NATO air patrol operation over the
Sea's Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania -- all bordering Russia -- by
Western, including U.S., warplanes was not left out. In Chicago,
"We will highlight NATO's decision to extend the Baltic Air Policing
Clinton, taking up all these military matters, is hardly
acting as Secretary
of State, the "diplomat," for the U.S. On the contrary she is playing
in the dual presidency with Obama. Her role is to push U.S. aggression
use of force, including extending the "Baltic Policing Program" aimed
Russia, right while Obama talks about working with Russia to resolve
conflicts over missile defense. The NATO Summit will see both acting as
president, reflecting conflicts within the U.S. ruling circles on how
partnerships and expand military capabilities, using the troops and
NATO" Is "America's NATO"
Washington Outlines NATO's
21st Century Mandate
The State Department's top Eurasia hand addressed the
on Foreign Affairs's Subcommittee on Europe and Eurasia on April 26 to
present Washington's perspective on and expectations of next month's
of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
In a presentation titled "The Chicago Summit and U.S.
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs,
Kaidanow, laid out what the military alliance's main powerhouse and
backer demands of its 27 allies and in so doing indicated many of the
geopolitical objectives of her department and the U.S. government as a
for the upcoming years.
Commenting on the fact that the May 20-21 gathering of
over fifty heads
of state from nations supplying troops for the longest war in her
history, that in Afghanistan, will occur in Chicago, only the second
summit in the U.S. and "the first ever outside of Washington," Kaidanow
reiterated the main purpose of the world's only military bloc:
"Our hosting of the Summit is a tangible symbol of the
NATO to the United States, as well as an opportunity to underscore to
American people the continued value of the Alliance to the security
we face today... NATO is vital to U.S. security. More than ever, the
is the mechanism through which the U.S. confronts diverse and difficult
to our security... Our experiences in the Cold War, in the Balkans, and
Afghanistan prove that our core interests are better protected by
together than by seeking to respond to threats alone as individual
What the House members listening to her, if not the
casual reader, would
understand by the above comments is that NATO is the chief vehicle
employed by the State Department, White House and Pentagon to advance
American political, economic and military interests in Eurasia and
the rest of the world. As such, it's well worth the U.S.'s efforts to
preponderance of its funding and military assets and further engineer
evolution into an expanding, ultimately global, military-political
Kaidanow included an elementary school primer-level
synopsis of NATO's
history from its founding -- "For ... 40 years ... we ... stood united
against the specter of communism" -- until the fall of the Berlin Wall,
which "NATO helped to rebuild Central and Eastern European -- countries
integrating them into the trans-Atlantic community of democratic
The latter was accomplished by absorbing every former
Soviet ally in the
Warsaw Pact, and three past Soviet republics, into the alliance from
1999-2009, in the process conscripting troops from every one of them
deployment to war zones in Iraq and Afghanistan. No troops from the
Pact except the Soviet Union had been deployed outside Eastern Europe
the entire Cold War period.
Her presentation dutifully echoed that of her boss,
Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton, in the latter's speech at the World Affairs Council
NATO Conference on April 3. The U.S. is the only NATO member whose
leading officials speak authoritatively in advance of the outcome, in
of the upcoming summit as the nation effectively determines the agenda,
a friendly nod in the direction of its fellow NATO Quint states
France, Germany and Italy -- but nevertheless calling all the
One wonders why, except for a vain propensity for pageantry and
summits are held at all given that the results have been decided upon
Early in her talk Kaidanow invoked the new Strategic
Concept adopted at
the last NATO summit in 2010, particularly highlighting the bloc's
mutual military assistance (war) clause, affirming that "First and
NATO remains committed to the Article 5 principle of collective
That article is responsible for the stationing of
152,000 troops, at peak
strength, from 50 nations in Afghanistan.
When Kaidanow spoke of "integrating them [twelve Eastern
nations incorporated into NATO from 1999-2009] into the trans-Atlantic
community," she was in fact if not openly confirming the practical
NATO expansion: To provide the U.S. and its Western allies with air,
naval, radar and drone surveillance, missile, strategic airlift, cyber
other bases and facilities east of the former Berlin Wall and
neocolonial wars and military occupations in the Balkans, Asia and
She has been no disinterested observer in that process.
In her current
position and in a post that preceded it, Kaidanow has cultivated and
consolidated the power of what are without dispute Washington's two
favored -- and pampered -- satraps, Georgia's Mikheil
Saakashvili and Kosovo's
Hashim Thaci, than whom there are no less savory and more malicious
of state in the world. If the sociopathic ghoul in Kosovo and the
megalomaniacal self-styled reincarnation of the medieval King Davit IV
Georgia are indicative of the U.S.'s political alliances, and if an
empire can be
judged by the foreign stooges it employs, then Washington has plummeted
a new imperial nadir.
Like most of the current American foreign policy elite,
Kaidanow cut her
teeth in the Balkans in the 1990s, her first State Department
in the U.S. embassies in Serbia (1995-1997) Bosnia (1997-1998) and
Macedonia (1998-1999), in the last instance focusing on neighboring
She attended the infamous Rambouillet conference in
February of 1999
where the American delegation headed by Secretary of State Madeleine
Albright threw down the gauntlet to Yugoslavia with the infamous
B ultimatum and set the stage for the 78-day war that began on March
Rambouillet was also the debut of American asset Thaci, then an
kingpin and head of the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army, who was even
then being groomed as the head of state he became in 2008 ahead of
unilateral declaration of independence in February of that year. Four
a majority of the world's nations still don't recognize his organized
crime-ridden fiefdom as a nation.
Kaidanow was the Chief of Mission and Charge d'Affaires
at the U.S.
Office in Kosovo from July 2006 to July 2008, until the George W. Bush
administration appointed her the first American ambassador on July 19
In 2009, as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for
European and Eurasian
Affairs (her Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary position, a
obtained last July), she visited Georgia a year after the Saakashvili
invaded South Ossetia, thereby provoking a five-day war with Russia,
with Defense Minister Bachana (Bacho) Akhalaia to discuss modernizing
nation's armed forces (described as "reforms"), the impending
U.S. Marine Corps-trained Georgian troops to Afghanistan to serve under
NATO command and the U.S.-Georgia Charter on Strategic Partnership
four months after the war of the preceding year. She returned two
afterward for the same purpose.
In her April 26 appearance before the House committee,
she hailed NATO
as an alliance of "like-minded states who share our fundamental values
democracy, human rights, and rule of law." NATO's first war, against
Yugoslavia thirteen years ago, and its partnerships with nations in
Soviet space have produced the likes of Hashim Thaci and Mikheil
Saakashvili. Democracy, human rights and the rule of law.
Speaking of goals to be discussed and promoted at the
"In addition to being a collective security alliance,
NATO is also a
cooperative security organization. Unlike an ad hoc coalition, NATO can
respond rapidly and achieve its military goals by sharing burdens. In
NATO benefits from integrated structures and uses common funding to
develop common capabilities. "
That is, NATO is a mechanism for the permanent military
European states for the purpose of the U.S. securing auxiliary troops
outside the Euro-Atlantic zone.
Concerning the first of three main items of discussion
at the summit, the
war in Afghanistan, Kaidanow asserted:
"[T]he Summit will make clear that NATO will not abandon
after the ISAF mission concludes. In Chicago, the Alliance will
enduring commitment beyond 2014 and define a new phase of cooperation
with Afghanistan. "
As to the true and residual purpose of the Afghan
campaign, she added,
"we must continue our efforts to develop NATO's role as a global hub
security partnerships," which Afghanistan has been used as the
The latter relates to the third point, building
partnerships, regarding which one is reminded of Aesopian cautionary
about being offered cooperation by wolves and lions. Upon hearing such
propositions, a sensible creature starts inching backward into the
sheep pen or
out of the lair.
The other priority at next month's summit is what both
Clinton before her referred to as critical defense capability
the former saying, "NATO's ability to deploy an effective fighting
force in the
field makes the Alliance unique" and that, pressuring allies to cough
funds to ensure it, "its capacity to deter and respond to security
only be as successful as its forces are able, effective, interoperable,
To reinforce and flesh out the above, she added:
"The United States is modernizing its presence in Europe
at the same time
that our NATO Allies, and NATO as an institution, are engaged in
steps. This is a clear opportunity for our European Allies to take on
responsibility. The U.S. continues to encourage Allies to meet the two
benchmark for defense spending and to contribute politically,
operationally to the strength and security of the Alliance."
She, like her superior at Foggy Bottom, accentuated
several key projects
in Europe, the most important of which is the U.S.-created European
Adaptive Approach interceptor missile system.
Kaidanow acknowledged commitments already obtained to
that end in
Poland, Romania, Turkey and Spain and said, "We would welcome
Another summit item is the further integration and
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities. Lest
be confused about the purpose of those and mistake them as in any way
defensive in character, the following comments from Kaidanow will
them of the notion:
"Allies contributed more combat power in Libya than in
operations (almost 90 percent of all air-to-ground strike missions in
were conducted by European pilots, as compared to 10 percent in the
air campaign in 1999). However, Libya demonstrated considerable
in European ISR capabilities as the U.S. provided one quarter of the
sorties, nearly half of the ISR aircraft, and the vast majority of
capability. This past February, NATO defense ministers agreed to fund
Alliance Ground Surveillance (AGS) program. The five drones that
this system will provide NATO with crucial information, including
potential threats, monitoring developing situations such as
and distinguishing possible targets for air strikes."
She also spoke of the now over eight-year patrol of the
Baltic Sea sky by
NATO warplanes which this year has been extended to 2018, which is to
in perpetuity, revealing an interesting link along the way: "This helps
the security of allies in a way that is cost effective, allowing them
resources into other important NATO operations such as Afghanistan. "
Kaidanow also assured her congressional
interlocutors -- again in advance;
see above comments -- that next month's NATO summit will endorse
Deterrence and Defense Posture Review (DDPR).
Doing so "will reaffirm NATO's determination to maintain
flexible, credible capabilities that are tailored to meet 21st century
challenges. The DDPR will identify the appropriate mix of nuclear,
conventional, and missile defense capabilities that NATO needs to meet
She then touted the role of NATO's global partnership
"working with a growing number of partners around the world," as they
the Alliance to extend its reach, act with greater legitimacy, share
benefit from the capabilities of others."
Regarding which regions among others the expanding
will be focused on, Kaidanow stated: "In light of the dramatic events
Arab Spring and NATO's success in Libya, we envision a particular focus
further engagement with partners in the wider Middle East and North
She also promoted a new category of nations being
cultivated for full
NATO accession called aspirant countries -- currently Bosnia,
Macedonia and Montenegro -- which are "all working closely with
meet NATO criteria so they may enter the Alliance."
Regarding the most controversial of those four candidate
"U.S. security assistance and military engagement
support the country's
defense reforms, train and equip Georgian troops for participation in
operations, and advance its NATO interoperability. In January,
Obama and President Saakashvili agreed to enhance this cooperation to
advance Georgian military modernization, defense reform, and
capabilities... U.S. support for Georgia's territorial integrity within
internationally recognized borders remains steadfast, and our
of the separatist regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia will not
The U.S. makes decisions for the military bloc it
created and its 27 allies
With the results already determined, the claim by NATO
that it is an
alliance of equals and that their summits are in any way deliberative
What has already been decided, as confirmed by Deputy
Kaidanow on April 26, is that NATO will remain the world's only nuclear
alliance, one which will continue stationing U.S. strategic weapons on
in European countries under NATO's nuclear sharing arrangement.
- That NATO military forces, including the NATO Training
Mission -- Afghanistan, will remain in Afghanistan long past 2014.
- That the U.S. will steadily expand its interceptor
missile system from one
end of Europe to the other under NATO auspices.
- That the U.S. and NATO will continue to move military
equipment to Russia's borders.
- That the hallmark of NATO mutual obligations is the
bloc's Article 5,
which commits all members to intervene, up to and including going to
behalf of any member state which requests intervention.
- That NATO will be used to recruit national contingents
from scores of
nations for military actions like those in Afghanistan and Libya.
- That NATO will continue to build a global military
network even beyond
its 80 or so current members and partners.
ISSUES | HOME
Read The Marxist-Leninist Daily