NATO

Why is NATO in Yugoslavia?

Posted by

0

Excellent historical perspective on present day problems.

By Sean Gervasi
Global Research, June 22, 2015

Why Is NATO In Yugoslavia?

Editor’s Note

This paper was presented by the late Sean Gervasi at the Conference on the Enlargement of NATO in Eastern Europe and the Mediterrenean, Prague, 13-14 January 1996. It was published on Global Research when the Global Research website was launched on September 9, 2001.

The late Sean Gervasi had tremendous foresight. He understood the process of NATO enlargement several years before it actually unfolded into a formidable military force.  He had also predicted the breakup of Yugoslavia as part of a US-NATO project.

See also Sean Gervasi’s 1993 video interview

Introduction

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has recently sent a large task force into Yugoslavia, ostensibly to enforce a settlement of the Bosnian war arrived at in Dayton, Ohio at the end of 1995. This task force is said to consist of some 60,000 men, equipped with tanks, armor and artillery. It is backed by formidable air and naval forces. In fact, if one takes account of all the support forces involved, including forces deployed in nearby countries, it is clear that at least two hundred thousand troops are involved. This figure has been confirmed by U. S. defense sources. [ 1 ]

By any standards, the sending of a large Western military force into Central and Eastern Europe is a remarkable enterprise, even in the fluid situation created by the supposed end of the Cold War. The Balkan task force represents not only the first major NATO military operation, but a major operation staged “out of area”, that is, outside the boundaries originally established for NATO military action.

However, the sending of NATO troops into the Balkans is the result of enormous pressure for the general extension of NATO eastwards.

If the Yugoslav enterprise is the first concrete step in the expansion of NATO, others are planned for the near future. Some Western powers want to bring the Visegrad countries into NATO as full members by the end of the century. There was resistance to the pressures for such extension among certain Western countries for some time. However, the recalcitrants have now been bludgeoned into accepting the alleged necessity of extending NATO.

The question is: why are the Western powers pressing for the expansion of NATO? Why is NATO being renewed and extended when the “Soviet threat” has disappeared? There is clearly much more to it than we have so far been told. The enforcement of a precarious peace in Bosnia is only the immediate reason for sending NATO forces into the Balkans.

There are deeper reasons for the dispatch of NATO forces to the Balkans, and especially for the extension of NATO to Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary in the relatively near future. These have to do with an emerging strategy for securing the resources of the Caspian Sea region and for “stabilizing” the countries of Eastern Europe — ultimately for “stabilizing” Russia and the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States. This is, to put it mildly, an extremely ambitious and potentially selfcontradictory policy. And it is important to pose some basic questions about the reasons being given for pursuing it.

For the idea of “stabilizing” the countries which formerly constituted the Socialist bloc in Europe does not simply mean ensuring political stability there, ensuring that the regimes which replaced Socialism remain in place. It also means ensuring that economic and social conditions remain unchanged. And, since the so-called transition to democracy in the countries affected has in fact led to an incipient deindustrialization and a collapse of living standards for the majority, the question arises whether it is really desirable.

The question is all the more pertinent since “stabilization”, in the sense in which it is used in the West, means reproducing in the former Socialist bloc countries economic and social conditions which are similar to the economic and social conditions currently prevailing in the West. The economies of the Western industrial nations are, in fact, in a state of semi-collapse, although the governments of those countries would never really acknowledge the fact. Nonetheless, any reasonably objective assessment of the economic situation in the West leads to this conclusion. And that conclusion is supported by official statistics and most analyses coming from mainstream economists.

It is also clear, as well, that the attempt to “stabilize” the former Socialist bloc countries is creating considerable tension with Russia, and potentially with other countries. Not a few commentators have made the point that Western actions in extending NATO even raise the risks of nuclear conflict. [2]

It is enough to raise these questions briefly to see that the extension of NATO which has, de facto, begun in Yugoslavia and is being proposed for other countries is to a large extent based on confused and even irrational reasoning. One is tempted to say that it results from the fear and willfulness of certain ruling groups. To put it most bluntly, why should the world see any benefit in the enforced extension to other countries of the economic and social chaos which prevails in the West, and why should it see any benefit in that when the very process itself increases the risks of nuclear war?

The purposes of this paper are to describe what lies behind the current efforts to extend NATO and to raise some basic questions about whether this makes any sense, in both the narrow and deeper meanings of the term.

NATO in Yugoslavia

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was founded in 1949 with the stated purpose of protecting Western Europe from possible military aggression by the Soviet Union and its allies.

With the dissolution of the Communist regimes in the former Socialist bloc in 1990 and 1991, there was no longer any possibility of such aggression, if there ever really had been. The changes in the former Communist countries made NATO redundant. Its raison d’etre had vanished. Yet certain groups within the NATO countries began almost immediately to press for a “renovation” of NATO and even for its extension into Central and Eastern Europe. They began to elaborate new rationales which would permit the continuation of business as usual.

Continue reading →

Pentagon says U.S. will provide weapons and NATO commandos to attack E. Ukraine self-defense forces

Posted by

0

By Kurt Nimmo
Infowars, June 22, 2015
Posted on Global Research, June 23, 2015

Pentagon boss Ashton Carter has announced the United States “will contribute weapons, aircraft and forces, including commandos, for NATO’s rapid reaction force” to defend against “Russia from the east and violent extremists from the south,” according to the Associated Press.

Carter did not specify who the “extremists from the south” are, but a recent NATO military exercise in Poland left little doubt.

During the largest maneuver by NATO since the end of the Cold War, a rapid reaction force in Poland staged a mock raid in the fictional country of Botnia.

From Deutsche Welle:

“Birdman” is the name that maneuver planners have given the opponent in the Bothnian enemy camp. He must be retrieved from a wooden house in the middle of the military training grounds in the forest. Stationed in the nearby village of “Alpha” are his followers, armed militiamen, who have begun to destabilize the region in southwestern Poland.

The scene is recognizable as it is loosely based on the situation in eastern Ukraine, except this time, a NATO member has been threatened by “little green men”. After all, the planners want to make the situation as lifelike as possible.

On Sunday a senior Pentagon official told the media Carter and the United States will urge NATO allies to “dispose of the Cold War playbook” in an effort to counter “hybrid warfare,” in short the ongoing effort in Eastern Ukraine to resist the coup government in Kiev.

“Carter … will really push the alliance to think about new threats, new techniques, urge them to kind of dispose of the Cold War playbook and think about new ways to counter new threats,” the official said.

On Monday in Munster, Germany, Carter said the United States “will contribute intelligence and surveillance capabilities, special operations forces, logistics, transport aircraft, and a range of weapons support that could include bombers, fighters and ship-based missiles” for the effort.

The Pentagon has yet to reveal the number of troops that will participate in the battle against “extremists.”

The announcement coincides with the defection of a onetime aide to the Ukrainian defense minister to the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic. Alexander Kolomiyets took a wealth of classified intelligence information along with his family, according to the Sputnik News.

The US-installed coup government in Kiev has suffered a number of humiliating defeats in Eastern Ukraine as it attempts to assert its control over the area.

“The initial attempts of the Kiev regime and its CIA backers to subjugate east Ukraine by sheer military terror, relying on fascist militias and select units of the Ukraine army that it considered to be reliable, have failed. Popular opposition and covert Kremlin support for east Ukrainian forces has sufficed to defeat those units that Kiev could throw against the Donetsk and Luhansk regions,” Alex Lantier wrote in February.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-will-provide-weapons-for-nato-commandos-to-attack-ukrainian-separatists/5457606

NATO General Ben Hodges lies to National Public Radio (NPR)

Posted by

0

By Eric Zuesse
Posted on Global Research, June 19, 2015

On June 17th, U.S. National Public Radio (NPR) interviewed NATO’s and America’s General Ben Hodges, who is the Commanding General of the U.S. Army in Europe, which is “NATO’s most senior land forces command.” He said (after 4:54 in the audio):

This notion that somehow, Russia, you know, has no choice but to respond or that the West is being provocative, really, I don’t think rings true at all. … We’re building up on NATO’s borders. These are NATO countries, these are allies of ours, that are concerned based on what Russia is doing on their borders, and they’ve asked for assurance that their allies are there.

The interviewer asked, “President Putin said that only an insane person could imagine that Russia would suddenly attack NATO. I mean, is NATO insane for worrying about a Russian attack?” Hodges replied (6:41):

I think that’s an irresponsible question. It is completely unimaginable to me that Russia would ever invade Crimea. I mean, this was the day after the Sochi Olympics, after the Russians had spent millions and millions of dollars, and then threw away whatever goodwill they had earned the following day by invading Crimea.

That’s so many lies in such a short span, so that unpacking all of them will produce a long article; but, those lies are the mainstream view in America’s news media, so, here goes the reality that demolishes them:

His Basic ‘History’ Is False

Everything he says about what preceded Crimea’s switching back to Russia (of which it had always been a part until 1954) is false.

The Sochi Olympics ended on 23 February 2014. Contrary to what Ben Hodges says, there was no Russian invasion of Crimea the next day (nor actually ever, but we’ll get to that later). According to wikipedia, which is edited by the CIA (and so it must be right, if not far-right — like Hodges is), the “2014 Ukrainian Revolution” started on 18 February 2014. This overthrow of a government was occurring in the one nation, Ukraine, that Zbigniew Brzezinski and others have said is the most crucial nation of all that must be turned hostile toward Russia in order for America to win against Russia. (Ending communism and the Soviet Union doesn’t slake the sheer bloodthirst of people such as Brzezinski and Hodges — and Obama: Russia must simply be crushed; the communist-v.-capitalist thing was just an excuse for these psychopaths; and the only reason why Obama in 2012 denied Romney’s “our number one geopolitical foe” remark about Russia, was in order to fool the electorate about Obama himself.)

Thus, grabbing Ukraine is more important to them (and their billionaire sponsors) than getting any of the twelve former Warsaw Pact nations that the U.S. had already brought into NATO. It’s not for what’s in Ukraine; it’s for what’s in Russia. (The Warsaw Pact itself had ended when the Soviet Union itself did, in 1991. The GHW Bush Administration promised Gorbachev that NATO would move “not one inch eastward,” but the U.S. constantly violates that promise, and then blames Russia for responding to its brazenness, as Russia must do for its own defense. If Obama and the U.S. Congress continue this, there will be a nuclear war.)

What happened five days before February 23rd, on 18 February 2018? Here is video of it; and, as is obvious there, Putin must have been fully informed of these rabidly anti-Russian riots in next-door Ukraine, even while he was at the Sochi Olympics. This video is from Hromadske TV. Hromadske TV was financed by three entities as shown in their 2014 Financial Report, a snippet of which is seen here, but the totality of which Financial Report was then removed from the Web because this information didn’t fit the West’s propaganda-line. I had read that Financial Report before it was taken down. This snippet published there is accurate. It shows that “Total cash inflows” during the second half of 2013 were $2,576,596, of which “Individual contributions” (by Ukrainian oligarchs) were $1,135,997; “The Embassy of the Kingdom of The Netherlands” was $793,089; “The Embassy of the United States of America” was $399,650; and George Soros’s “International Renaissance Fund” was $247,860. Consequently, that ’news’ report on Hromadske favored the people who were rioting against Ukraine’s democratically elected President, Viktor Yanukovych; and this Hromadske report said: “New wave of riots tonight in Ukraine…. and the president of Ukraine does nothing about it.” It blamed Yanukovych, for those riots against Yanukovych.

Here is more from Hromadske TV about the riots on that day,February 18th.

And here is the bloodshed on 20 February 2014, BBC Newsnight’s telecast about the violence.

Here is more of that bloodshed 20 February 2014, film-footage which was never telecast by BBC, their cut-outs.

Here is an independent video that was uploaded to the Web on 20 February 2014, showing a sniper reloading his rifle.

And here is Rupert Murdoch’s Sky News, simply assuming that the snipers on 20 February 2014 are “Police Snipers,”not U.S.-paid mercenaries who were merely dressed as if they were police.

But here is a video presenting evidence that U.S.-paid mercenaries is what they actually were.

And here is the shock that the EU’s foreign-affairs chief experienced when her own investigator told her that this was a coup, and not actually a revolution at all. (And yet, the EU went along with Obama’s sanctions.)

Well, what happened, then, on the day after the Sochi Olympics ended — the day that Hodges says that Russia “threw away whatever goodwill they had earned the following day by invading Crimea.”? Here is from the Guardian, reporting on Monday, February 24th:

Continue reading →

Book review: Ukraine — Zbig’s Grand Chessboard and How the West Was Checkmated

Posted by

0

Ukraine and the Apocalyptic Risk of Propagandized Ignorance
By David Swanson
June 16, 2015
davidswanson.org

I’m not sure if there’s been a better written book published yet this year than Ukraine: Zbig’s Grand Chessboard and How the West Was Checkmated, but I’m confident there’s not been a more important one. With some 17,000 nuclear bombs in the world, the United States and Russia have about 16,000 of them. The United States is aggressively flirting with World War III, the people of the United States have not the foggiest notion of how or why, and authors Natylie Baldwin and Kermit Heartsong explain it all quite clearly. Go ahead and tell me there’s nothing you’re now spending your time on that’s less important than this.

This book may very well be the best written one I’ve read this year. It puts all the relevant facts — those I knew and many I didn’t — together concisely and with perfect organization. It does it with an informed worldview. It leaves me nothing to complain about at all, which is almost unheard of in my book reviews. I find it refreshing to encounter writers so well-informed who also grasp the significance of their information.

Nearly half the book is used to set the context for recent events in Ukraine. It’s useful to understand the end of the cold war, the irrational hatred of Russia that pervades elite U.S. thinking, and the patterns of behavior that are replaying themselves now at higher volume. Stirring up fanatical fighters in Afghanistan and Chechnya and Georgia, and targeting Ukraine for similar use: this is a context CNN won’t provide. The partnership of the neocons (in arming and provoking violence in Libya) with the humanitarian warriors (in riding to the rescue for regime change): this is a precedent and a model that NPR won’t mention. The U.S. promise not to expand NATO, the U.S. expansion of NATO to 12 new countries right up to the border of Russia, the U.S. withdrawal from the ABM Treaty and pursuit of “missile defense” — this is background that Fox News would never deem significant. U.S. support for the rule of criminal oligarchs willing to sell off Russian resources, and Russian resistance to those schemes — such accounts are almost incomprehensible if you’ve consumed too much U.S. “news,” but are explained and documented well by Baldwin and Heartsong.

This book includes excellent background on the use and abuse of Gene Sharp and the color revolutions instigated by the U.S. government. A silver lining may be found, I think, in the value of nonviolent action recognized by all involved — whether for good or ill. The same lesson can be found (for good this time) in the civilian resistance to Ukrainian troops in the spring of 2014, and the refusal of (some) troops to attack civilians.

The Orange Revolution in Ukraine in 2004, the Rose Revolution in Georgia in 2003, and Ukraine II in 2013-2014 are recounted well, including detailed chronology. It’s truly remarkable how much has been publicly reported that remains buried. Western leaders met repeatedly in 2012 and 2013 to plot the fate of Ukraine. Neo-Nazis from Ukraine were sent to Poland to train for a coup. NGOs operating out of the U.S. Embassy in Kiev organized trainings for coup participants. On November 24, 2013, three days after Ukraine refused an IMF deal, including refusing to sever ties to Russia, protesters in Kiev began to clash with police. The protesters used violence, destroying buildings and monuments, and tossing Molotov cocktails, but President Obama warned the Ukrainian government not to respond with force. (Contrast that with the treatment of the Occupy movement, or the shooting on Capitol Hill of the woman who made an unacceptable U-turn in her car with her baby.)

U.S.-funded groups organized a Ukrainian opposition, funded a new TV channel, and promoted regime change. The U.S. State Department spent some $5 billion. The U.S. Assistant Secretary of State who handpicked the new leaders, openly brought cookies to protesters. When those protesters violently overthrew the government in February 2014, the United States immediately declared the coup government legitimate. That new government banned major political parties, and attacked, tortured, and murdered their members. The new government included neo-Nazis and would soon include officials imported from the United States. The new government banned the Russian language — the first language of many Ukrainian citizens. Russian war memorials were destroyed. Russian-speaking populations were attacked and murdered.

Crimea, an autonomous region of Ukraine, had its own parliament, had been part of Russia from 1783 until 1954, had publicly voted for close ties to Russia in 1991, 1994, and 2008, and its parliament had voted to rejoin Russia in 2008. On March 16, 2014, 82% of Crimeans took part in a referendum, and 96% of them voted to rejoin Russia. This nonviolent, bloodless, democratic, and legal action, in no violation of a Ukrainian constitution that had been shredded by a violent coup, was immediately denounced in the West as a Russian “invasion” of Crimea.

Novorossiyans, too, sought independence and were attacked by the new Ukrainian military the day after John Brennan visited Kiev and ordered that crime. I know that the Fairfax County Police who have kept me and my friends away from John Brennan’s house in Virginia have had no clue what hell he was unleashing on helpless people thousands of miles away. But that ignorance is at least as disturbing as informed malice would be. Civilians were attacked by jets and helicopters for months in the worst killing in Europe since World War II. Russian President Putin repeatedly pressed for peace, a ceasefire, negotiations. A ceasefire finally came on September 5, 2014.

Remarkably, contrary to what we’ve all been told, Russia didn’t invade Ukraine any of the numerous times we were told that it had just done so. We’ve graduated from mythical weapons of mass destruction, through mythical threats to Libyan civilians, and false accusation of chemical weapons use in Syria, to false accusations of launching invasions that were never launched. The “evidence” of the invasion(s) was carefully left devoid of location or any verifiable detail, but has all been decidedly debunked anyway.

The downing of the MH17 airplane was blamed on Russia with no evidence. The U.S. has information on what happened but won’t release it. Russia released what it had, and the evidence, in agreement with eye-witnesses on the ground, and in agreement with an air-traffic controller at the time, is that the plane was shot down by one or more other planes. “Evidence” that Russia shot the plane down with a missile has been exposed as sloppy forgeries. The vapor trail that a missile would have left was reported by not a single witness.

Baldwin and Heartsong close with the case that U.S. actions have backfired, that in fact whether the people of the United States have any idea what is going on or not, the power brokers in Washington have Second Amendmented themselves in the foot. Sanctions against Russia have made Putin as popular at home as George W. Bush was after he’d managed to exist as president while planes were flown into the World Trade Center. The same sanctions have strengthened Russia by turning it toward its own production and toward alliances with non-Western nations. Ukraine has suffered, and Europe suffers from a cut-off of Russian gas, while Russia makes deals with Turkey, Iran, and China. Evicting a Russian base from Crimea seems more hopeless now than before this madness began. Russia is leading the way as more nations abandon the U.S. dollar. Retaliatory sanctions from Russia are hurting the West. Far from isolated, Russia is working with the BRICS nations, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and other alliances. Far from impoverished, Russia is buying up gold while the U.S. sinks into debt and is increasingly viewed by the world as a rogue player, and resented by Europe for depriving Europe of Russian trade.

This story begins in the irrationality of collective trauma coming out of the holocaust of World War II and of blind hatred for Russia. It must end with the same irrationality. If U.S. desperation leads to war with Russia in Ukraine or elsewhere along the Russian border where NATO is engaging in various war games and exercises, there may be no more human stories ever told or heard.

 

French military intelligence chief testifies that NATO/U.S. intel got it wrong

Posted by

0

From Fort Russ

Here is a brief, but significant, extract from General Christophe Gomart’s report to the Assemblée Nationale. General Gomart is head of French Military Intelligence.  His complete report, given March 25, 2015, is here. 
Translator’s note: NATO’s credibility is also suspect in the German Chancellery, as may be seen here.
May 28, 2015
Translated from French by Tom Winter
“The real difficulty with NATO is that the American intel is in preponderance there, while the French intel is more or less taken for granted, hence the importance for us to supply the NATO commanders with enough information of French origin. 
NATO announced that the Russians were going to invade Ukraine, the while that according to our information at the DRM (Direction du Renseignement Militaire), there was nothing to support this hypothesis — we had in fact stated that the Russians had not deployed either command nor the logistics, that would permit envisaging a military invasion, notably field hospitals, and that the second-line units had been exhibiting no movement. 
The outcome demonstrated that we got it right, since, if any Russian soldiers had been sighted in Ukraine, it would have been a matter of a pressuring maneouvre on Ukrainian president Poroshenko than of any prelude to an invasion.”
http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/14/cr-cdef/14-15/c1415049.asp

NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg on NATO’s challenges

Posted by

0

At the Center for Strategic and International Studies,
May 27, 2015

Televised on C-SPAN

http://www.c-span.org/video/?326264-1/secretary-general-jens-stoltenberg-future-nato# — Video and transcript

More “Kool-Aid” from Stoltenberg. The biggest challenge seems to be telling the truth — but he doesn’t mention that. It’s truly frightening to see the common pool of “official narrative”. On this false foundation, these officials build and promote policy initiatives, and entice other government and military leaders to support them.

People in this video

  • Heather Conley Senior Vice President, Center for Strategic and International Studies->Europe, Eurasia and the Arctic
  • John J. Hamre President and CEO, Center for Strategic and International Studies

Uncorrected transcript

Unidentified Speaker

AM THE
00:00:19
 Unidentified Speaker

RESIDENT. BEFORE WE DO PUBLIC EVENTS WE ALWAYS START AVAILABLE SAFETY. IF ANYTHING HAPPENS TODAY, YOU ARE GOING TO FOLLOW MY DIRECTIONS AND IF I ASK YOU TO GO OUT OF THE EXITS THE STAIRWELL IS RIGHT IN THAT CORNER. WE WILL GO DOWNSTAIRS. IF WE HAD OUT TO THE NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC AND IN THE FRONT WE ARE GOING TO GO TO THAT THE BEAUTIFUL PARK FOR ENTERTAINMENT OR FOOD OR SOMETHING. JUST FOLLOW ME IF WE HAVE TO DO ANYTHING. IT WILL BE FINE. IT IS A PRIVILEGE TODAY FOR ME TO WELCOME THE SECRETARY GENERAL. I HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO SEE HIM FROM A DISTANCE FOR QUITE A FEW YEARS. AS I SAID I AM NOT KIDDING. I’M THE RESIDENT AND I DO HAVE A VERY FOND ATTACHMENT TO MY OWN HOME COUNTRY AND IN THAT CAPACITY, WATCHED THE SECRETARY GENERAL WHEN HE DID A MARVELOUS JOB AS PRIME MINISTER. I DON’T KNOW IF IT STARTED OUT AS A STATISTICIAN. THE ATTENTION TO DETAIL IS IMPECCABLE, BUT HIS POLICY INTEREST AND SCOPE IS VAST AND IT’S A COMBINATION OF SKILLS THAT WE NEED NOW. WE ARE FACING SOME VERY BIG CHALLENGES IN A WAY AND I THINK ALL OF US HAVE HOPED THE WAR HAD ENDED AND CHANGED THE TRAJECTORY OF HISTORY AND WE ARE NOW BACK TO A SCRATCHY RELATIONSHIP AND WE ARE GRATEFUL THAT SOMEONE OF THE TALENT AND CALIBER IS LEADING THE WAY FOR ALL OF US DURING THESE RATHER TRYING TIMES. IN OUR CONVERSATION WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ALL OF THE CHALLENGES THAT AMERICA FACES TODAY. DO WE HAVE THE FOUNDATION OF STRENGTH THAT WE HAVE IN NATO, AND IT’S ON A FOUNDATION THAT WE ARE GOING TO BUILD A SUCCESSFUL STRATEGY GOING FORWARD. SO I WOULD ASK YOU TO PLEASE WILL COME THE SECRETARY-GENERAL AND HIS EXCELLENCY. [APPLAUSE] >> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IT IS GREAT TO BE HERE TO ADDRESS THE AUDIENCE AND TO BE IN THIS
00:02:55
 Unidentified Speaker

BEAUTIFUL BUILDING. YOU TOLD ME WHEN WE WERE SITTING IN THE ROOM BEHIND HERE THAT WE ARE FAMILY FAMILIES FROM NORWAY AND THAT’S GREAT. BUT MORE THAN THAT, IT’S THE MOST BEAUTIFUL PLACE IN NORWAY. THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR BUILDING A POWER LINE AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONFLICTS I HAD DURING MY TIME SINCE I BUILT THE POWER LINE. I WILL DARE GO BACK. AND I ALSO KNOW THAT YOU ARE VERY PROUD OF THE ROOTS AND THERE ARE MANY REASONS TO BE PROUD OF THAT. IN ADDITION TO THAT, YOU HAVE RECEIVED THE ROYAL ORDER THAT IS THE HIGHEST HONOR MY COUNTRY CAN BESTOW ON THE FOREIGN CITIZENS COMBINED WITH THE FACT THAT FOR MANY YEARS YOU HAVE WORKED SO HARD TO DEVELOP THE BONDS AND THE CORPORATION BETWEEN NORTH AMERICA AND EUROPE TO THE TRANS-ATLANTIC BONDS THAT WE SEE SO RIGHTLY FOR THE SECURITY. I THINK THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE THESE ROOTS IN THE ORDER OF MERIT AND THE ENGAGEMENT AT LAST THE SIS ALL OF THAT MAKES YOU A PERFECT POST TO THE NORWEGIAN SECRETARY-GENERAL TO SPEAK ABOUT THE CHANGE IN THE SECURITY ENVIRONMENT. AND WHAT WE ASK THE TRANS-ATLANTIC COMMUNITY TO DO ABOUT THE CHANGING SECURITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT THAT WE ARE FACING SO WE ARE AT THE TIME FOR THE SECURITY IN THE FACE RAISING CHALLENGES. THE FABRIC OF THE SECURITY ORDER IS THE STATE. AND WE MUST BE PREPARED FOR THE LONG HAUL. THAT’S WHY WE NEED TO ADAPT. THE CHALLENGES ARE COMPLEX AND DIVERSE. THE ARAB SPRING HAS TURNED UP TO BRUTAL WINTER. THE OLD AND WEAK STATES ARE FUELING REGIONAL STABILITY. AND SECTARIAN STRIFE. THE OTHER EXTREMIST GROUPS SPREAD TERROR AND INTOLERANCE, AND INSPIRE ATTACKS FROM PARIS TO TEXAS AND PEOPLE MOVING LARGE NUMBERS MANY TO FLEE AND OTHERS TO FIGHT. NATO IS PLAYING ITS PART IN ADDRESSING THESE CHALLENGES IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA AND I’M READY TO SET OUT WHAT WE ARE DOING IN GREAT DETAIL. BUT LET ME IN MY OPENING REMARKS NOT ADDRESS THE CHALLENGES AND RECEIPT OF THE SOUTH WOULD FOCUS ON THE CHALLENGES THAT WE ARE FACING COMING FROM THE EAST AND I PROMISE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS RELATED TO THIS AFTERWARDS. THEY ARE COMING FROM BUT RESEARCH IN RUSSIA. IT’S CONTINUE TO BE ESTABLISHED UKRAINE AND ITS PROSPECTS TO GEAR UP. THIS CONFLICT HAS ALREADY COST OVER 6,000 LIVES. THE FIGHTING COULD FIGHTING COULD PLAY HER AT ANY MOMENT. THAT IS WHY I FULLY SUPPORT THE EFFORTS OF THE UNITED STATES AS WELL AS GERMANY AND FRANCE TO FIND A POLITICAL SOLUTION TO THE CRISIS IN UKRAINE. THE PATH TO PEACE IS THE FULL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MEANS OF — MINSK AGREEMENT. RUSSIA HAS A SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITY. IT SUPPORTS THE SEPARATISTS IN EASTERN UKRAINE WITH TRAINING, WEAPONS AND FORCES IT MAINTAINS A LARGE LEVEL ON UKRAINE BORDERS BUT WE CANNOT LOOK AT THE AGGRESSIVE ACTIONS. THEY ARE PART OF A DISTURBING PATTERN THAT GOES WELL BEYOND UKRAINE. AND THIS UNDERMINES THE PRINCIPLES OF EUROPEAN SECURITY. RESPECT FOR BORDERS, THE INDEPENDENCE OF STATES, TRANSPARENCY, PROJECTED A BUDDY OF MILITARY ACTIVITIES, AND THE COMMITMENT TO RESOLVE THE DIFFERENCES TO THE DIPLOMACY, NOT FORCE. LET’S LOOK AT RESPECT FOR BORDERS. THE UN CHARTER AND THE ACT ARE CLEAR. RUSSIA HELPED TO DRAFT THESE DOCUMENTS AND ASSIGNED THEM BUT IT HAS BROKEN ITS COMMITMENT. CRANIA HAS BEEN PART OF UKRAINE SINCE THE COUNTRY BECAME INDEPENDENT, BUT RUSSIA SEND IN TROOPS AND ORGANIZED THE SO-CALLED REFERENDUM THAT HAD NO INTERNATIONAL STANDARD AND CEASED PART OF ANOTHER COUNTRY. PRESIDENT PUTIN EVEN ADMITTED PUBLICLY THAT THE ANNEXATION HAD BEEN PLANNED IN ADVANCE. AFTER 2008, RUSSIA RECOGNIZED THE REGIONS AS INDEPENDENT STATES AND IT’S TAKEN ALMOST FULL CONTROL OVER BOTH BETWEEN THEM AND THE REST OF GEORGIA AND ALSO SENT TROOPS THAT THEY WANT OUT AND WHICH RUSSIA PLEDGED TO WITHDRAW IN 1999. SO THEY’VE BEEN VIOLATING THE INTEGRITY OF THE NEIGHBORS FOR YEARS AND CONTINUE TO DO SO. THAT BRINGS ME TO THE SECOND PRINCIPLE, THE INDEPENDENCE OF STATES. UKRAINE’S P5 DESIRE TO MOVE CLOSER TO THE EUROPEAN UNION WAS MET BY FORCE. SO WAS GEORGIA’S ASPIRATION TO JOIN NATO. MOLDOVA HAS RECEIVED CLEAR WARNINGS ABOUT THE MOVE TOWARD EUROPE. THEY CLAIM THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD REPRESENTS THE PRIVILEGED INTEREST BUT IT’S TO CREATE THE INFERENCE AND TAKE US BACK IN TIME. SO WHEN THE GREAT POWERS DREW THE LINES ON THE MAP AT THE EXPENSE OF THE SMALLER STATES, THE NATIONS WERE NOT FREE TO DECIDE THEIR OWN DESTINY THIS COULD CREATE A SEVERE INSTABILITY AND IT’S NOT THE SORT OF EUROPE THAT WE WANT. WE WILL ACCEPT AT THE END OF THE COLD WAR. THE THIRD IS TRANSPARENCY AND PREDICTABILITY IN THE MILITARY ACTIVITIES. WE BUILT A STABLE SYSTEM BASED ON FEWER FORCES, FEWER WEAPONS AND LARGE EXERCISES AND MORE INFORMATION SHARING. AN ARMY ARMS CONTROL AGREEMENTS TO BUILD TRUST AND CONFIDENCE ACROSS THE FORMER DIVIDING LINES THESE REDUCE THE RISK CALCULATIONS AND THE CONVENTIONAL FORCES IN EUROPE PUT LIMITS ON THE NUMBERS OF MOVEMENTS OF EQUIPMENT LIKE TANKS AND FIGHTER TANKS BUT RUSSIA UNILATERALLY SUSPENDED THE IMPLEMENTATION. THE OPEN SKIES TREATY ALLOWS US TO LOOK AT THE TERRITORY TO INCREASE TRANSPARENCY. BUT RUSSIA IS OBSTRUCTING THESE ACTIVITIES. BEYOND THE DOCUMENT THAT SETS UP THE RULES FOR REPORTING THE EXERCISES AND ALLOWS FOR INSPECTION. THEY HAVE FOUND WAYS AROUND IT TO AVOID THE LARGEST MILITARY EXERCISES IN THE POST-COLD WAR ERA. THREE OF THESE EXERCISES HAVE INCLUDED OVER 80,000 TROOPS. MOVING GREAT DISTANCES AND AT GREAT SPEEDS. IN FEBRUARY OF LAST YEAR IT WAS USED TO DEPLOY FORCES TO ANNEX CRIMEA. IT LED TO THE BUILDUP OF FORCES ON THE BORDER. RUSSIA IS CONDUCT IN ANOTHER STAFF EXERCISE WITH 250 ACROSS AND 700 PIECES OF HEAVY EQUIPMENT. NATO ON THE OTHER HAND STRIVES TO CREATE TRANSPARENCY AND PREDICTABILITY. OUR LARGEST EXERCISE IN 20 YEARS WILL TAKE PLACE NEXT FAULT IN ITALY. IT WAS ANNOUNCED A YEAR AGO IT WAS NOT A SNAP EXERCISE. NATIONAL OBSERVERS INCLUDING RUSSIA WILL HAVE ACCESS TO OUR EXERCISE AND YOU CAN FIND THE SCHEDULE OR THE PLANNED EXERCISES ON THEIR WEBSITE BECAUSE WE HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE. THEY ARE GIVING ALL THEY CAN TO MINIMIZE THE TRANSPARENCY OF WHAT ITS FORCES ARE DOING. AND THIS BRINGS ME TO MY FINAL PRINCIPLE. RESOLVING THE DIFFERENCES TO THE DIALOGUE, NOT FORCES. AT THE PATTERN THAT I HAVE DESCRIBED IN UKRAINE AND GEORGIA AND MOLDOVA, RUSSIA HAS THE ABILITY TO USE FORCE OR TO COERCE ITS NEIGHBORS. AND THE RECENT USE OF NUCLEAR RHETORIC EXERCISES THE OPERATIONS THAT ARE DEEPLY TROUBLING. AS OUR CONCERNS REGARDING ITS COMPLIANCE WITH THE NATIONAL NUCLEAR FORCES TREATY. PRESIDENT PUTIN’S EMISSION BUT HE CONSIDERED PUTTING RUSSIA AS THE FIVE NUCLEAR FORCES ON ALERT IS BUT ONE EXAMPLE. RUSSIA HAS ALSO SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED THE SCALE, THE NUMBER AND THE RANGE OF PRODUCTIVE FLIGHTS BY THE NUCLEAR BOMBERS ACROSS MUCH OF THE GLOBE. FROM JAPAN, TO CALIFORNIA, AND FROM THE BALTIC SEA. RUSSIAN OFFICIALS ANNOUNCED PLANS ON THE SYSTEMS AND THEY CLAIM THAT RUSSIA HAS THE RIGHT TO DEPLOY THE NUCLEAR FORCES TO CRIMEA. THIS WILL CHANGE THE BALANCE OF SECURITY IN EUROPE. WE LEARNED DURING THE COLD WAR THAT WHEN IT COMES TO NUCLEAR WEAPONS CAN’T CAUTION, PREDICTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY ARE VITAL. IT IS UNJUSTIFIED, DESTABILIZING AND DANGEROUS. ALL OF THIS TAKES PLACE AGAINST THE BACKGROUND OF THE SIGNIFICANT ARMAMENT PROGRAM. SOME OF ITS NEW MILITARY SYSTEMS WORKED ON THE PARADE DURING THE VICTORY DAY CELEBRATION. AND RUSSIA IS DEPLOYING ITS MOST MODERN SYSTEMS AND BASING THE MILITARY UNITS. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THESE ARE NOT RANDOM EVENTS. THEY FORM A BIGGER PICTURE WHICH IS OF GREAT CONCERN. RUSSIA IS A GLOBAL ACTOR THAT IS ASSERTING ITS MILITARY POWER, STARING AT AGGRESSIVE NATIONALISM, CLAIMING THE RIGHT TO IMPOSE ITS WILL ON ITS NEIGHBORS AND GRABBING LAND. WE REGRET THAT RUSSIA IS TAKING THIS COURSE BECAUSE WHEN RIGHT BECOMES RIGHT, THE CONSEQUENCES ARE GRAVE. FOR 25 YEARS, WE WORKED HARD TO INCLUDE, NOT ISOLATE RUSSIA. OUR AIM WAS A STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP. THE BORDERS WERE OPEN, TRADE WENT OUT AND TRUST INCREASED. THE G7 EXPANDED TO BECOME THE G-8 AND RUSSIA WAS INVITED INTO THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION. WE CREATED THE NATO RUSSIA COUNCIL AND OFFERED TO WORK TOGETHER ON MISSILE DEFENSE. WE COOPERATED FROM COUNTING PIRACY AND TERRORISM TO HELPING AFGHANISTAN. ALL OF THIS BENEFITED US AND IT BENEFITED RUSSIA. BUT TODAY THE CHOICES MADE BY MOSCOW HAVE TAKEN UP RELATIONS TO THEIR LOWEST POINT IN DECADES WE ARE NOT BACK TO THE COLD WAR BUT WE ARE FAR FROM THAT STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP. SO WE NEED TO ADAPT TO DEAL WITH THE CHALLENGES THAT MAY BE WITH US FOR A LONG TIME. THIS ADAPTATION WE ARE DOING IT IN THREE WAYS. REINFORCING OUR COLLECTIVE DEFENSE, REINFORCING OUR DETERRENCE, MANAGING RELATIONS WITH THE RESURGENT RUSSIA AND SUPPORTING OUR EUROPEAN NEIGHBORS. FIRST, STRONG DEFENSE. THE TASK IS COLLECTIVE DEFENSE. OUR COMMITMENT TO DEFEND EACH OTHER AND THE WASHINGTON TREATY IS AS STRONG AND RELEVANT TODAY AS EVER BEFORE. THAT’S WHY WE ARE IMPLEMENTING THE BIGGEST COLLECTIVE DEFENSE SINCE THE END OF THE COLD WAR. IT’S IN THE EASTERN PART OF EUROPE ON LAND AND WATER AND SEE BEEFING UP THE EXERCISE PROGRAMS WE ARE DOUBLING THE SIZE OF THE NATO RESPONSE FORCE. IT’S READY TO MOVE. OUR EUROPEAN ALLIES HAVE GUARANTEED TO BE THAT THIS COULD FORCE OVER THE COMING YEARS. AND WE ARE ESTABLISHING NEW UNITS ACROSS THE EASTERN PART OF OUR LIVES. TO FORCE THEM TO EXERCISE AND REINFORCE YESTERDAY I THINK PRESIDENT OBAMA FOR HIS LEADERSHIP. AND THE OPERATION ATLANTIC RESULT. ACROSS THE LINES THE PRESIDENT SENDS A CLEAR SIGNAL AMERICA STANDS WITH EUROPE AND EUROPEAN ALLIES ARE IN LOCKSTEP WITH THE UNITED STATES. THIS IS THE TRANS-ATLANTIC TEAMWORK. BUT THERE IS MORE TO DO BEFORE. WE ARE ENHANCING OUR CYBER DEFENSES AND MAKING IT CLEAR THAT THE CYBER ATTACK COULD TRIGGER A COLLECTIVE RESPONSE WE ARE WORKING WITH THE EUROPEAN UNION. WE ARE CAREFULLY ASSESSING WHAT RUSSIA IS DOING WITH ITS NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES. KEEPING NATO STRONG DOESN’T WORK FOR FREE SO WE MUST REDOUBLE OUR EFFORTS TO MEET THE DEFENSE INVESTMENT PLEDGE THAT WE MADE LAST YEAR TO STOP THE CUTS AND GRADUALLY INCREASE THE SPENDING TO 2% OF GDP AND SPEND BETTER. THIS BRINGS ME TO MY SECOND POINT. A STRONG NEED TO KNOW ISN’T ONLY THE BEST BUT IT ALSO PROVIDES US WITH THE BEST FOUNDATION TO MANAGE OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH RUSSIA. WE DO NOT SEEK CONSULTATION WITH RUSSIA NOR DO WE SEEK ITS ISOLATION. WE STILL ASPIRE TO A CONSTRUCTIVE RELATIONSHIP WITH RUSSIA BECAUSE THAT WOULD BENEFIT THE ATLANTIC SECURITY AND THE WHOLE INTERNATIONAL BORDER. BUT RUSSIA HAS CHANGED AND WE MUST ADAPT. IN DOING SO, WE WILL CHANGE BR. WE ARE STICKING TO OUR PRINCIPLES AND TO OUR INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENTS. WE ARE COMMITTED TO PRESERVING EUROPEAN SECURITY INSTITUTIONS AND AGREEMENTS. WE WILL REMAIN TRANSPIRED AND PREDICTABLE AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO RESPOND TO THIS INFORMATION WITH INFORMATION, NOT PROPAGANDA , AND WE WILL KEEP THE CHANNELS OF COMMUNICATION OPEN WITH RUSSIA. BOTH MILITARY TO MILITARY AND DIPLOMATIC BECAUSE THERE IS NO CONTRADICTION IN STRENGTHENING THE COLLECTIVE DEFENSE AND STAYING OPEN FOR DIALOGUE. ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS. IN THIS DIALOGUE WE WILL UPHOLD THE SOVEREIGNTY AND THE INTEGRITY OF ALL EUROPEAN COUNTRIES. THIS BRINGS ME TO MY THIRD AND FINAL POINT SUPPORTING OUR PARTNERS IN EUROPE. IT IS IN OUR INTEREST AS A TRANS-ATLANTIC COMMUNITY TO HAVE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE STABLE AND INDEPENDENT. THAT’S WHY NATO IS WORKING WITH GEORGIA, MOLDOVA AND UKRAINE TO HELP THEM CARRY OUT REFORMS AND BUILD STRONG INSTITUTIONS. OF THESE NATIONS ARE NOT THE FIRST OWNS. THEY ARE IN THE SOVEREIGN STATES AND HAVE THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO HELP THEM ON THE PATH. BECAUSE OF THE NEIGHBORS ARE MORE STABLE, WE ARE MORE SECURE. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, FOR DECADES AS A TRANS-ATLANTIC COMMUNITY WE’VE KEPT OUR PEOPLE SAFE. WE HAVE ERASED THE VISIONS IN EUROPE, WE’VE BUILT A LOOSE BASED ORDER THAT THE BENEFITS US ALL. BUT AS EVER CHALLENGES INCREASE, WE MUST ADAPT. TO PROTECT THE VALUES OF OUR OPEN SOCIETIES AND TO SUPPORT OUR PARTNERS THIS REQUIRED COMMITMENT AND SOLIDARITY THE WORLD IS CHANGING AND WE ARE CHANGING. BUT ONE THING THAT WILL NOT CHANGE IS OUR DETERMINATION TO STAY AND STAND UNITED. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] >> THANK YOU. THAT WAS A CLEAR AND CONCISE MESSAGE THAT
00:27:15
 Unidentified Speaker

IS URGENTLY NEEDED. WE ARE DELIGHTED THAT YOU COULD JOIN US. I AM THE SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT HERE AT THE CENTER AND WHAT A PRIVILEGE IT IS TO HAVE YOUR FIRST PUBLIC ADDRESS AS THE SECRETARY GENERAL IN WASHINGTON. WHAT WE THOUGHT WE WOULD DO FOR THE NEXT 30 MINUTES OR SO IS TAKE YOU UP ON YOUR OFFER TO ASK QUESTIONS AND MOVE TO THE CHALLENGES THAT WE SEE TO THE SOUTH BUT I’D LIKE TO ASK YOU A FEW QUESTIONS AND I THINK THE MOST CHALLENGING PART OF MY JOB IS TO LIMIT MY QUESTIONS. THERE IS SO MUCH WE CAN COVER. AFTER WE HAVE A FEW MINUTES HERE THEN WE WELCOME OUR AUDIENCE AND I KNOW THEY ASK VERY TOUGH QUESTIONS SO WE WILL ENGAGE IN THE CONVERSATION. SECRETARY, YOU’VE BEEN IN THE JOB FOR ABOUT SIX MONTHS, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT LONGER STARTING AFTER THE SUMMIT IN NEWPORT. AND YOU OFFERED A VERY FRANK ASSESSMENT OF THE MILITARY EXERCISE. BUT HOW HAVE THEY BEEN EXERCISING HAVEN’T DONE THIS TYPE OF DEFENSE IN QUITE A LONG TIME. WHAT ARE THE REFLECTIONS THAT YOU ARE SEEING. >> THAT GOES FOR THE ALLIES AND OF COURSE RUSSIA. SO MY POINT IS NOT TO ARGUE AGAINST EXERCISES. IF THE FORCES ARE TO EXERCISE THEM,
00:29:01
 Unidentified Speaker

THE CHALLENGE. IT IS UNDERMINING THE TRANSPARENCY AND AS IT IS STATED IN MY SPEECH REVIEWS THESE EXERCISES AS A DISGUISE FOR ANNEXING CRIMEA AND TO MASK THE TROOPS ON THE BORDERS OF UKRAINE AND ALSO TO SEND TROOPS INTO EASTERN UKRAINE TO SUPPORT THE SEPARATISTS SO THEY ARE USING THESE EXERCISES AS A WAY TO DISGUISE THE OPTIONS, AND BY DOING SO WITHOUT ANY WARNING THERE ARE DECREASING PREDICTABILITY IS AN INCREASING UNCERTAINTY, AND THAT IS THE OPPOSITE OF THE INTENTIONS DESCRIBED WHICH ARE AIMING SO THERE ARE WORRIED MISUNDERSTANDINGS AND THAT’S THE REASON WHY WE ARE FROM THE NATO SIDE TRANSPARENT, PREDICTABLE. SO YOU CAN GO ON THE WEBSITE JUST TO MEET SURE THAT THEY ARE TRANSPARENT ENOUGH. THAT IS PART OF THE RESPONSE TO GET THE ACTIONS OF RUSSIA AND UKRAINE AND WE WILL DO EVEN MORE EXERCISES BUT WE VOTED IN A TRANSPARENT AND A PREDICTABLE WAY. >> IS IT BEST TO RETURN RUSSIA TO THE DOCUMENT THAT THEY FIND OR DO WE NEED SOMETHING NEW? SOME
00:31:12
 Unidentified Speaker

SUGGEST WE NEED A CODE OF CONDUCT TO GET TO THE NOTIFICATION TO THE AIRCRAFT THAT HAVE TURNED OFF TRANSPONDERS AS THEY ARE FLYING INTO CROWDED CIVILIAN AIRSPACE. HOW DO WE MEET ITS IMMEDIATE CHALLENGE? DO WE NEED A CODE OF CONDUCT IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE? >> IT WAS A VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD THING TO
00:31:51
 Unidentified Speaker

DO TO EXERCISE THE MILITARY ACTIVITY. THEN OF COURSE, WE ARE ALWAYS WORKING ON HOW WE CAN DEVELOP THESE KIND OF AGREEMENTS IN THE GOVERNMENT. THEY ARE NOT NATO AGREEMENT. BUT OF COURSE THE ALLIES ARE TAKING PART IN THE AGREEMENTS IN DIFFERENT WAYS AND WE HAVE A SPECIAL FOCUS ON THE RISK OF AIR ACTIVITY. THEY’VE INCREASED THE ACTIVITY BY AROUND 50% BY INTERCEPTING A FEW YEARS AGO. THEY PROVIDED A REPORT OF THE MILITARY ACTIVITY AND ALSO WITHOUT THE TRANSPONDERS. AND NATO WAS COMMENDED FOR THE WAY THAT WE ARE CONDUCTING WITHOUT TRANSPONDERS TO THE CIVILIAN AIR TRAFFIC. SO TO TURN ON TRANSPONDERS. YOU HAVE PAINTED A STARK PICTURE OF THE AGGRESSIVE POSTURE OF THE NUCLEAR ISSUE. AT LAST SEPTEMBER’S NEWPORT SUMMIT THERE WERE ACTIONS THAT YOU MENTIONED THE HIGH READINESS TASK FORCE AND A VARIETY OF OTHER ISSUES. AS WE LOOK FORWARD TO NEXT YEAR’S SUMMIT IN JULY, YOU MENTIONED THIS FOR THE LONG HAUL. DO YOU SEE THAT AS ONE OF THE IMPLEMENTATIONS OF WHAT HAPPENED AT NEWPORT OR DO YOU SEE IT MOVING INTO THE LONG HAUL, THE LONG-TERM STRATEGIC POSTURE? WE HOSTED THIS LAST WEEK AND ARGUED FOR THE INITIATIVE FOR THE STRATEGIC ADAPTATION AND LONG-TERM PERMANENT PRESENCE. WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS AS YOU LOOK AT THE NEXT ADVANCE? TO MAKE WE ARE LOOKING AT THE CHANGED SECURITY ENVIRONMENT AND THEREFORE WE HAVE TO ADAPT TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND IT HAS TO BE BIG AND FUNDAMENTAL AND THEREFORE I VERY MUCH BELIEVE THAT WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO IS CHARGE THE WAY FORWARD IN THIS ADAPTATION OF NATO. THAT IS PARTLY ABOUT INCREASING THE COLLECTIVE DEFENSE. THEY HAVE TO DO MORE BUT ALSO OF COURSE ADDRESSING THE ELEMENTS FOR INSTANCE CYBER INTELLIGENCE AND MANY OTHER WHERE WE HAVE TO DO MORE AND DEVELOP THE NEW CAPABILITIES AND ADAPT. THEN I WILL ADD THAT IN ADDITION TO OUTLINING THE NEXT PHASE. IT IS WHERE WE TAKE STOCK BECAUSE IMPLEMENTATION IS ALSO IMPORTANT. MANY MAKE DECISIONS THAT ARE NOT AS GOOD AS THEY SHOULD BE SO ITS IMPORTANT TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE IMPLEMENTING A READINESS ACTION PLAN IN FORCES AND NOT LEAST OF WHICH COMES TO DEFENSE INVESTMENTS AND STARTING TO INCREASE. >> A FOLLOW-UP ON THE STABILITY I THINK HE MENTIONED THERE IS A BIT OF A TIME GAP AS RUSSIA PUTS FORWARD
00:36:53
 Unidentified Speaker

THE STATE BORDERS. THEY HAVE A 48 HOUR DEPLOYMENT AND IT COULD BE SOMETHING OF A FASTER SPEED POTENTIAL USING HYBRID TACTICS. ARE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT TIMING AND HOW FAST THEY CAN DEPLOY THE SCENARIO? >> THAT’S THE REASON WE HAVE INCREASED THE
00:37:26
 Unidentified Speaker

PREPAREDNESS. WE HAVE THE TROOPS BASED BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THEY WILL BE THERE AND THIS IS THE COMBINATION OF THE ABILITY TO REINFORCE AND I WELCOME THE BORDER COUNTRIES ARE NOW INCREASING THEIR OWN INVESTMENTS IN THE FANS. WE WILL ESTABLISH A PRESENCE IN THE WAY THAT WE ESTABLISHED A COMMAND UNITS AND THAT IS SOMETHING NEW AND I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT IN THE NATO PRESENCE IT WILL ALSO MAKE REINFORCEMENT EASIER. SO NATIONAL PRESENCE AND INCREASED PREPAREDNESS BUT IN ADDITION TO THAT WE HAVE THE ASSURANCE MEASURES WITH MORE TROOPS ON THE GROUND, SO IT’S THE WHOLE COMBINATION THAT PROVIDES WHAT IS SO IMPORTANT FOR ME. >> ONE LAST QUESTION BEFORE I TURN TO THE AUDIENCE AND OPEN UP THE FLOOR FOR QUESTIONS. ANOTHER ASPECT OF MANAGING RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA IS ABOUT THE AGENDA AND I CAN’T
00:39:25
 Unidentified Speaker

LET YOU GO UNLESS I ASK A QUESTION ABOUT 2012 SECRETARY CLINTON ARGUED AFTER THE CHICAGO NATO SUMMIT THAT THIS WOULD BE THE SUMMIT THAT WOULDN’T OF THAT WOULDN’T BE DISCUSSED AND WE HAD ANOTHER SUMMIT THAT WASN’T TACKLED AS WE HEADED TOWARDS WARSAW. OBVIOUSLY NOT JUST FOR GEORGIA AND UKRAINE IN THE ALLIANCE, BUT TODAY’S COALITION PLATFORM SUGGESTED THEY ARE KEEPING OPTIONS OPEN. IS THERE A PATH FORWARD? >> IT HAS BEEN HISTORICAL SUCCESS AND OF COURSE A COMBINATION HAS REALLY
00:40:22
 Unidentified Speaker

TRANSFORMED. I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT TO UNDERLINE THAT PRINCIPLE OF EVERY NATION TO DECIDE ITS OWN PATH INCLUDING ARRANGEMENT IT WANTS TO BE PART OF. IT’S SOMETHING THAT RUSSIA HAS ALSO ASSIGNED TO. AND THE CONSEQUENCE OF THAT IS WHETHER ANOTHER COUNTRY WILL BECOME A MEMBER IS GOING TO BE DECIDED BY THAT COUNTRY AND THE ALLIES. NO ONE ELSE HAS THE RIGHT TO DENY OR TO CHOOSE THE PATH IT WANTS. WE’VE DECIDED THAT WE WILL MAKE THE DECISIONS ON MONTENEGRO BY THE END OF THIS YEAR SO THIS WILL BE AFTER THE MEETING IN NATO. I AM RELUCTANT IF I SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THAT IT WILL CONTRIBUTE IN A POSITIVE WAY SO THEY HAVE TO DECIDE WHETHER THEY APPLY. >> OKAY. WE ARE READY TO UNLEASH THE AUDIENCE. WE HAVE ABOUT 15 MINUTES. CAN WE BUNDLE A FEW QUESTIONS
00:42:22
 Unidentified Speaker

IF YOU COULD IDENTIFY YOURSELF AND AFFILIATION WE HAVE MICROPHONES PASSING AROUND YOU TO SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO SPEAK VERY DIRECTLY. WHY DON’T WE START IN THE BACK. I SEE QUESTIONS IN THE BACK JUST WAIT FOR THE MICROPHONE PLEASE. >> THANK YOU. I’M A FELLOW AT THE ENDOWMENT FOR DEMOCRACY. I HAD THE PLEASURE OF MEETING YOU A FEW
00:42:55
 Unidentified Speaker

YEARS AGO AND THE YOUNG ACTIVISTS IN GEORGIA NOW MY QUESTION ON THE FELLOWSHIP I WAS BENIGHTED AND I HOPE THAT YOU COULD HELP ME FIND AN ANSWER WHEN THEY RESHAPED THE SOVIET UNION HAD HELPED THE ORGANIZATION MAINTAIN ITS STRENGTH. MY QUESTION IS REGARDING GEORGIA. WOULD YOU THINK THAT THEY WOULD MAKE ANOTHER STEP TOWARDS THE MEMBERSHIP PLAN OR IF NOT, WHAT WE JUST SAY THAT IT WOULD BE FOR GEORGIA LIKE WITH GEORGIA BENEFIT FROM THE LONG-TERM PARTNERSHIP VERSUS MEMBERSHIP? >> THIS WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO ASK FOR
00:43:58
 Unidentified Speaker

INTERNSHIPS. >> THANK YOU SECRETARY GENERAL. I WANT TO SEE IF I CAN PUSH YOU A LITTLE BIT. WE HAD A BIT OF DEVELOPMENTS TAKING
00:44:09
 Unidentified Speaker

PLACE IN THE PARTNERSHIP. HOW DO YOU SEE THIS GOING FORWARD AS A PARTNERSHIP AND IN TERMS OF THE MEMBERSHIP ABOUT KEEPING THE OPTIONS OPEN IT TO SEE IF I CAN GET YOUR TAKE ON HOW USEFUL IT WOULD BE AND WHAT THAT REALLY HELP THEM TO REASSURE THEM AND WOULD IT EVEN BE PRODUCTIVE FOR RUSSIA. >> WE WILL TAKE ONE MORE RIGHT
00:44:47
 Unidentified Speaker

HERE. >> ITALY IS VERY PROUD OF BEING THE PROVIDING POLICE TO THE STATES AS WE SPEAK. WE ARE ONE OF THOSE NATIONS THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE
00:45:01
 Unidentified Speaker

LEADING NATIONS CONTRADICTING TO THE CYBER CENTER AND AT THE SAME TIME I WOULD BE INTERESTED ON WHAT THE ROLE COULD BE IN THOSE CHALLENGES. THANK YOU. >> SO THE COMPLEXITIES OF THE SOUTH. >> THE
00:45:37
 Unidentified Speaker

SECRETARY-GENERAL OF NATO THAT IS A GOOD LOOK
00:45:58
 Unidentified Speaker

AND THEY HAVE A CLOSE PARTNERSHIP WITH GEORGIA. WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF IMPLEMENTING THE SUBSTANTIAL PACKAGE WHICH IS EXPANDING FURTHER INTO PARTNERSHIP WITH GEORGIA. WE ARE ESTABLISHING THE TRAINING CENTERS AND WE ARE REALLY DOING SUBSTANTIAL ACTIVITIES. AND IN THE DEFENSE CAPACITY BUILDING IN GEORGIA WHICH INCREASES THE ABILITY TO DEFEND ITSELF I THINK THAT’S IMPORTANT FOR THE REGION. BUT WHEN IT COMES TO MEMBERSHIP THERE IS NOTHING MORE TO SAY THAN WHAT HAS BEEN STATED AGAIN AND AGAIN. I WAS AT THE SUMMIT IN 2008 WHERE WE MADE THE DECISIONS. THEY ARE RESTATED BUT WHAT WE DECIDED WAS THE FIRST APPLICANT AS THEY WERE GOING TO ADDRESS LATER THIS YEAR. THEN ON SWEDEN I APPRECIATE WHAT WE HAVE WITH GEORGIA AND THEY ARE CONTRIBUTING TO A LOT OF THE CORPORATIONS SO WE HAVE AN IMPORTANT PARTNERSHIP THAT WE HAVE TO PARTICIPATE IN AND DEVELOP. THEN YOU SAID YOU WOULD TRY TO PUSH IT FURTHER BUT WOULDN’T SUCCEED. IT’S EASY TO JOKE ABOUT THIS ABOUT A THINK IT’S SO IMPORTANT THAT EVERYTHING I SAY ABOUT THE ADVANTAGE OF THE SOCIETY ARE THE ADVANTAGES AND FOR THE MISUSE IF I WAS A JOURNALIST OR A SCIENTIST OR ANYTHING ELSE BECAUSE I’M THE SECRETARY GENERAL AND THEN THAT’S THE REASON THAT WE JUST HAVE TO FOLLOW THAT AND THE DEMOCRATIC POSITION IN THE COUNTRIES TO DECIDE WHETHER THEY WOULD LIKE TO APPLY IN THE SAME WAY AS ANY OTHER APPLICATION THAT LETS ME ADD ANOTHER. WE HAVE A PARTNERSHIP WITH SWEDEN AND FINLAND AND THERE ARE ENHANCED OPPORTUNITIES AND WE ARE DOING MORE AND MORE TOGETHER WITH THEM AND WE ARE SHARING INFORMATION AND WORKING CLOSELY TOGETHER WITH THEM AND WE DECIDED TO GO FURTHER IN DEVELOPING OUR PARTNERSHIP SO THEY ARE REALLY CLOSE PARTNERS. TO THE EAST WE SEE THE CHALLENGES IN THE STATE AND WE RESPOND IN A WAY THAT IS FAMILIAR TO WHAT WE’VE DONE BEFORE AND IN THE SOUTH WE ARE FACED WITH NON- STATE CHALLENGES AND THAT IS A MIXED AND COMPLICATED PICTURE WITH VIOLENCE AND TURMOIL. WE ALSO SEE THE ATTACKS TAKING PLACE IN SOME OF THE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS. I WOULD WELCOME THAT ALL ALLIES CONTRIBUTE TO THE COALITION AND I THINK WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND ONE OF THE REASONS THE PARTNERS CAN CONTRIBUTE IS BECAUSE THEY HAVE DEVELOPED INTEROPERABILITY. THEY’VE LEARNED HOW TO WORK TOGETHER IN AFGHANISTAN SO EVEN THOUGH THIS ISN’T A NATO OPERATION IT IS VERY USEFUL. THEN IN ADDITION, THEY DECIDED TO DEVELOP THE CAPACITY TO BECAUSE THEY ARE ON THE IDEA TO PROJECT TO THE STABILITY AND BY BUILDING THE LOCAL FORCES THEY CAN TAKE MORE OF THIS POSSIBILITY FOR THE SECURITY AND THEREBY WE CAN PROTECT THE LARGE NUMBER OF THE FORCES AND WE ARE DOING THAT IN JORDAN. WE HAVE REDUCED AND WE ARE NOW IN THE PROCESS OF HELPING THEM BUILD INSTITUTION REFORMS AND INCREASED THEIR ABILITY. WE STAND READY TO DO THAT IN LIBYA WHEN THE SITUATION ON THE GROUND ALLOWS. AND EVEN IF WE DON’T CALL IT THE CAPACITY BUILDING. THEY TAKE THE FULL RESPONSIBILITY IN THE FUTURE FOR THEIR OWN SECURITY. AND I THINK THAT TO DEVELOP AND TAKE MORE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR OWN SECURITY IS IMPORTANT FOR THE COUNTRIES BUT ALSO NATO AND WE HAVE TO DO MORE OF THAT. >> WE WILL TAKE A VITAMIN AROUND ON THE NEXT THREE QUESTIONS. WE HAVE ONE IN THE BACK RIGHT
00:53:06
 Unidentified Speaker

THERE. >> THANK YOU. VOICE OF AMERICA. I WOULD LIKE TO
00:53:15
 Unidentified Speaker

ASK THE HERE IN THE UNITED STATES HEAR MORE VOICES NOW IN THE MEDIA AND ON THE INTERNET THAT UKRAINE AND THE STANDOFF WITH RUSSIA IS MOSTLY A EUROPEAN PROBLEM AND WHAT WOULD YOU SAY TO THOSE PEOPLE THAT SAY THAT IT SHOULD BE PUTTING MOST EFFORT INTO RESOLVING THE CRISIS AND IT SHOULD BE GERMANY OR FRANCE LEADING THE WAY? THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. SHOULD WE TAKE ONE MORE IN THE BACK IN THE CORNER
00:53:54
 Unidentified Speaker

PLEASE? >> GOOD MORNING. I AM A BRITISH EXCHANGE IN DC. IT WAS A FASCINATING EXERCISE HERE LAST YEAR WHICH
00:54:07
 Unidentified Speaker

CONSIDERED THE SCENARIO ON ONE OF THE MOST INTERESTING THINGS IN THE AUDIENCE AND THERE WAS ALMOST NO AGREEMENT ON WHAT CONSTITUTED A BREACH OF ARTICLE FIVE. I WONDER IF YOU CAN TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE CHALLENGE OF DEFINING THE THRESHOLD AT WHICH IT IS BREACHED PARTICULARLY AND THEN IN A NAME LIKE CYBER AND ALSO MAYBE SPEAKS LIKELY TO DEALING WITH AN ADVERSARY THAT THE DETERMINEDLY STAYS BELOW THAT THRESHOLD. >> FANTASTIC QUESTION. I THINK WITH TIME AND GOING TO HAVE YOU RESPONDED TO THIS QUESTION. >> UKRAINE
00:54:43
 Unidentified Speaker

IS IN EUROPE IS A PROBLEM OR A CRISIS WHICH AFFECTS NOT ONLY THE EUROPEAN COUNTRIES BUT THE INTERNATIONAL LAW AS A VIOLATED AND
00:54:54
 Unidentified Speaker

UNDERMINES THE WHOLE IDEA OF THE ORDER THAT IS BASED ON THE RULES. SO OF COURSE IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THE GLOBAL ORDER AND WHEN THE BALL IS VIOLATED IN THE WAY THAT WE HAVE SEEN UKRAINE WHEN IT COMES TO THE ANNEXATION OF THE ILLEGAL ANNEXATION OF CRIMEA. EUROPEANS ARE IN THE LEAD WHEN IT COMES TO TRYING TO FIND SOLUTIONS BECAUSE FRANCE AND GERMANY IN PARTICULAR ARE REALLY IN THE LEAD. .. THERE’S ALSO GLOBAL CHALLENGE AND THE CHALLENGE WHICH TRANS-ATLANTIC ALLIANCE IS ADDRESSING. THEN WHEN IT COMES TO ARTICLE V, THE IMPORTANT THING IS THAT NATO STANDS READY TO PROTECT AND DEFEND ALL ALLIES AGAINST ANYTHING. AND WHEN IT COMES TO FOR INSTANCE, FIBER, THINK IMPORTANT THING WITH IT, WAS TO DECIDE THE CYBERATTACK CAN — BECAUSE WE’VE GOT CYBER AND POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AS A CONVENTIONAL ATTACK. AND, THEREFORE, WE ARE DEVELOPING OUR CAPABILITIES TO RESPOND PARTLY TO DETECT WHO IS BEHIND. OUR MAIN RESPONSIBILITY IS TO DEFEND OUR OWN NATO NETWORKS. WE ARE DEVELOPING TEAMS, CAPABILITIES, DOING MORE EXERCISES WITH CYBER DEFENSE EXERCISE. SO WE ARE INCREASING OUR READINESS TO CYBER DEFENSE. BUT THERE ARE ALSO ASSISTING IN HELPING ALLIES IN DEVELOPING THEIR OWN CAPABILITIES TO DO CYBER DEFENSE. AND AS ALWAYS, EVERY SITUATION, EVERY ATTACK IS UNIQUE BUT I THINK WHAT TRUST EVER LIKE THAT NATO WILL RESPOND AND THE PROPORTIONATE WAY COME IF AND WHEN NEEDED, WHATEVER KIND OF ATTACK WHICH ARE LAUNCHED AGAINST US. >> THE ONE THING WE LEARNED WAS POLITICAL LEADERS NEED TO EXERCISE HOW TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS WHEN THEY ARE FELLOW THRESHOLD LEVELS. IT HAS TO BE PRACTICED
00:57:58
 Unidentified Speaker

AND UNDERSTOOD BECAUSE ATTRIBUTION WILL NEVER BE PERFECT AND WHEN POLITICAL WILL IS PERHAPS NOT THERE, IT’S REALLY LEADERS SITTING AROUND THE TABLE EXPLORING WHAT WOULD THAT MEAN, WHAT WOULD WE NEED, WHAT IS THE INTELLIGENCE REQUIRED? THAT’S ONE AREA RECEIVED CRITICAL LEADERSHIP COULD GAIN SOME VALUE AND PRACTICING AT DECISION-MAKING PROCESS WORKS. >> FIRST OF ALL I BELIEVE IN EXERCISES. SECOND I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT EXERCISING POLITICAL LEADERS. THIRD WE NEED UTAH’S POLITICAL LEADERS BECAUSE WE HAVE ELECTED THEM,
00:58:31
 Unidentified Speaker

AND RELATED TO THAT I THINK IS WE HAVE IN EVERY NATO SET UP IN X. HAPPENS, WHY WE RESPOND TO AT SOME STAGE AFTER PREPARED FOR STRATEGIES, YOUR PLAN, EXERCISE, IMAGINE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS BUT AT THE END IT WILL BE A DECISION TAKEN BY POLITICAL LEADERS HOW TO RESPOND. THEREFORE, WE NEED THE CAPABILITIES, THE CAPACITY TO RESPOND. WE NEED TO EXERCISE. WE CAN NEVER HAVE A SPECIFIC REASON EXACTLY ARE WE GOING TO RESPOND TO EVERY POSSIBLE AND IMPOSSIBLE THREAT. BECAUSE THE WORLD AND IF YOU CHOOSE TO COMPLEX. AS LONG AS YOU THEIR CAPACITIES, THE CAPABILITIES AND THEY ARE EXERCISED, WE HAVE TO TRUST OUR POLITICAL LEADERS ARE ABLE TO TAKE THE RIGHT DECISIONS SPIRIT THAT IS A VERY POSITIVE NOTE TO END ON. SECRETARY GENERAL STOLTENBERG, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR CLARITY, MESSAGE, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO WATCHING HOW NATO DEFAULTS IN THE NEXT YEAR ON THE ROAD TO OUR NEXT SUMMIT IN WARSAW IN JULY OF NEXT YEAR. PLEASE JOIN IN THANKING SECRETARY GENERAL STOLTENBERG. [APPLAUSE] A. >> THANK YOU ALL FOR JOINING US. HAVE A GREAT REST OF THE DAY. [INAUDIBLE
01:00:06
 Unidentified Speaker

CONVERSATIONS] [INAUDIBLE CONVERSATIONS] [INAUDIBLE CONVERSATIONS] >> AS OF THIS EVENT COMES TO TO A CLOSE, OFFICIALS IN JERUSALEM ARE TELLING THEY A.P. TODAY

*The transcript for this program was compiled from uncorrected Closed Cap

NATO attempt at “interim” government in Syria echoes Libya model

Posted by

0

Posted on Syria Solidarity Movement.org
From Activist Post, May 6, 2015

The immediate clamor from the Western mainstream press regarding the fall of Idlib to Western-backed al-Qaeda/ISIS forces revealed part of the NATO plan as much as it involved the simultaneous participation of a media campaign designed to weaken the morale of the Syrian people and present a sense of inevitability amongst Syrian and all other populations following the crisis that the Syrian government was on its way out.

Such media hysteria has been the norm in the West in regards to Syria. However, in terms of the recent media blitz over Idlib, the goal, which has been part of the NATO-Turkish plan since early on in the conflict was to enable the capture of a major Syrian city so as to provide a physical seat of what would then be presented as the “government in exile” in the form of an “interim” or “transitional” government.

While the GIE/interim government would be painted as a modern-day grouping of Founding Fathers and freedom lovers bravely standing up to a dictator, the reality would be a gaggle of terrorists and jihadists bent on imposing Sharia law and washing themselves in bathtubs full of Western money.

Such can be seen in the fact that, only a matter of days after taking the city, the death squads that can barely govern their interactions with one another announced that they were well on their way to establishing a “civilian government” in Idlib.

As the Wall Street Journal reported in its article, “Syrian Opposition Tries To Govern Newly Won Idlib City,”

The rebel groups that took over a provincial capital in northwest Syria over the weekend are now trying to consolidate control and establish civil governance.

After days spent tearing down the ubiquitous images of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, the coalition of Islamist groups, which includes al Qaeda’s Nusra Front, say they will help form a civilian government to run Idlib, capital of Idlib province. For now the streets are full of armed fighters with little organizational direction.

[…]

The opposition has a lot to prove in terms of governance as much of the territory it controls is beset by crime, corruption and a lack of services— in addition to regular attacks by the Syrian regime. The political opposition in exile, the Syrian National Coalition, has provided funding for local councils but the money has often been scarce and unreliable.

Note how the WSJ refers to the “opposition,” “al-Qaeda,” “al-Nusra Front,” and “rebels” as they should rightly be described – as the same entity.

Still, as Tony Cartalucci of Land Destroyer Report and New Eastern Outlook wrote, the Turkish media also seized upon the jihadist victory and began calling for Idlib to be used as the Capital seat for an “interim” government. Of course, such an “interim” government would be presented as the legitimate government of Syria that finally found a physical seat of power after the ouster of Bashar al-Assad.

There is little doubt that such an interim government would not only consist of jihadists and the subsequent imposition of Sharia law, but also of the parasites and traitors that make up the Syrian National Coalition, a group of pathetic individuals who lap up the luxury of five star hotels paid for by Saudi and American money.

The forming of an “interim” (albeit illegitimate) government would follow the model of Libya, the NATO conquest that preceded Syria. Indeed, the goal of developing an “interim” government located inside Syria and protected by NATO bombing campaigns by virtue of the establishment of a “buffer zone” or “no-fly zone” has been one that NATO and the GCC have drooled over for quite some time.

Early on, it appeared that Aleppo was the preferred target for NATO in its bid to establish a “transitional” government but that attempt was ultimately defeated by the Syrian military, with Syrian control over Aleppo only growing in recent months. Damascus also seemed to have been a target if, for no other reason than the fact that it is the Syrian Capital city. However, those attempts have brought little favor to the death squads either.

Idlib, however, has been another story, with the jihadists sweeping in to take control of the territory in a manner so swift as to confuse many onlookers unfamiliar with the details of the Syrian crisis. For this reason, it is important to note that the city of Idlib lies only miles away from the Turkish border.

The location of Idlib in relation to Turkey is important because it is from Turkey that a steady supply of weapons and fighters are entering Syria. It is thus no coincidence that the presence of Jobhat al-Nusra is strongest in the areas bordering Turkey (as well as those bordering Jordan, another supporter of jihadist forces).

While the mainstream Western press is busy presenting Assad as having lost control of the overwhelming majority of the country and providing maps that are inconsistent with the realities on the ground, the truth is that the Syrian forces are on their way to returning Idlib to government control but are attempting to do so in a way that minimizes loss of civilian life. Indeed, the SAA is already in control of the Southern portion of Idlib, it is only a matter of time before the SAA is able to retake the city, providing there are no more mass injections of jihadists into the fray.

At the end of the day, it is important to remember that the U.S. airstrikes and its attempts to create a “buffer zone” inside Syria are nothing more than a farce. The death squads running amok in Syria are themselves entirely creatures of NATO and they remain under NATO’s command. The true enemy of ISIS, al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, and the cannibals of the Levant has always been and continues to be Bashar al-Assad.

There will be no “interim” government or “transitional phase” that will ever be legitimate in the context of the NATO, Anglo-American assault on Syria.

http://www.activistpost.com/2015/05/nato-attempt-at-interim-government-in.html

http://www.syriasolidaritymovement.org/2015/05/08/nato-attempt-at-interim-government-in-syria-echoes-libya-model/

European values on display as NATO and Ukraine partner in war: One for all, all for one

Posted by

0

“If Ukraine falls, all of us will fall.”

As Ukraine is eaten with rot from within, directly supported by NATO and its financial partners,  this statement by a NATO foreign minister may be prophetic.

Beware: the NATO alliance is poisoning and stripping each country. The enemy is not outside. The NATO-allied leaders are responsible.

No one at this meeting of ministers apparently objected to the Kiev government’s actions. That means they approve of Kiev attacking its own citizens.  Who’s next?

From Stop NATO

Interfax-Ukraine
May 14, 2015
Ukraine pleased with support from NATO allies – Klimkin

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin has said his country is pleased with the support it has received from its NATO allies, especially over its territorial integrity.

“Everyone was talking at the meeting about support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine,” Klimkin said on the results of a meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Antalya, Turkey.

He quoted the statement of one of the ministers who attended the meeting, which impressed him: “If Ukraine falls, all of us will fall.”

Saying it was “extremely important” to hear the messages of support and to hear messages of commitment to the reforms being carried out in Ukraine, Klimkin said: “I especially express my gratefulness to all the allies who have provided for Ukrainian military forces and the National Guard.”

https://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2015/05/14/nato-and-ukraine-at-war-one-for-all-all-for-one/

NATO provides active support for Kiev government

Posted by

0

“Our partnership is strong, and getting stronger.”
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg

It’s hard to imagine the trance state in which these NATO leaders live. What drugs are they consuming that render them so immune to common sense and humanity?

When they see the proof in front of their eyes of Nazism and war crimes, yet applaud and supply the ones who commit these foul deeds, what does that mean for us who live under their dictates and also pay for this war?

Stop NATO has ongoing coverage from NATO and military sources about what is taking place.

Posted on Stop NATO

North Atlantic Treaty Organization
May 13, 2015
NATO stands firm in support for Ukraine

20150513_150513k-011_rdax_775x516

NATO Foreign Ministers have reconfirmed their full support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and have called on Russia to cease its destabilisation of eastern Ukraine. Under the chairmanship of Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, the Allied ministers met with their Ukrainian counterpart Pavlo Klimkin in a session of the NATO-Ukraine Commission in Antalya, Turkey on Wednesday (13 May 2015).

Opening remarks by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg at the start of the NATO-Ukraine Commission
“We strongly condemn Russia’s aggressive actions in eastern Ukraine” the Secretary General said, calling on Russia “to fully abide by international law.” Mr. Stoltenberg also underscored that “Russia’s annexation of Crimea is illegal and illegitimate; we do not and we will not recognize it.”

The Secretary General further expressed concerns about Russian “statements about possible future stationing of nuclear weapons and delivery systems in Crimea”. He added that NATO is “concerned by Russia’s efforts to further build up its presence in the Black Sea region,” warning that “this could have further implications on regional stability.”

…

On behalf of all Allies, the Secretary General called on Russia to stop destabilising eastern Ukraine; withdraw its support for the separatists; withdraw its forces and military equipment from Ukraine and along the border; and fully support a political solution.

Mr. Stoltenberg welcomed Ukraine’s efforts to promote reform and reconciliation, and urged the Ukrainian government to continue on this path.

“We strongly encourage the government of Ukraine to continue its efforts, at full speed”, the Secretary General said.

He noted that “our close cooperation will strengthen Ukraine’s ability to defend itself”.

Mr. Stoltenberg underlined that “we have stepped up our support to Ukraine on command and control; logistics; cyber defence; and rehabilitation of wounded soldiers.” He added that the Alliance has strengthened its office in Kyiv, and provided advisors to the Ukrainian government. The Secretary General further noted that “Ukraine will host a NATO-led exercise on disaster response this autumn.”

“Our partnership is strong, and getting stronger,” the Secretary General concluded.

https://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2015/05/14/nato-fully-backs-ukraine-in-13-month-proxy-war-with-russia/

Battlefield: Black Sea; US-NATO escalation and provocation

Posted by

0

It seems the policy now is to both prepare for war and work to ensure that it comes to fruition.

From New Eastern Outlook, May 14, 2015
By Eric Draitser

While the war in Ukraine has raged on for more than a year, the growing conflict between the US-NATO and Russia has taken on new dimensions. From economic warfare waged by the West in the form of sanctions, to the diplomatic rows over the commemoration of Victory Day in Moscow, more and more it seems that relations between East and West are fraying beyond repair. Though it may seem that this conflict is escalating into simply an extension of what was once known as the Cold War, the potential exists for a hot war of global dimensions.

Lost amid the cacophony of saber-rattling and chest-thumping in Washington and Brussels is the quietly emerging, and infinitely dangerous, military deployment in the Black Sea. Once seen as a no-go zone for the US and NATO, the Black Sea, with its expansive Russian shores, has recently become the site of a slew of provocative military moves by the US, and equally significant counter-moves by Russia. Adding fuel to this potential fire is the participation of Chinese naval assets in this quietly brewing cocktail of global conflict.

The presence of US military assets all throughout the Black Sea region is undoubtedly provocative as it is pushing perilously close to Russia’s borders. The potential for escalation – premeditated or otherwise – puts the entire region, and indeed the entire world, at risk of catastrophe.

This article will focus on the US-NATO military developments in and around the Black Sea. While by no means a comprehensive listing of all of Washington’s moves in the region, it is an attempt to provide a glimpse into a little discussed theater of deployment for the West – one that is regarded as a very serious threat by Moscow.

Washington Swimming in the Black Sea

There is no doubt that US strategy vis-à-vis Russia places tremendous strategic importance on maintaining and expanding a robust military presence in and around the Black Sea. Recent moves by the US-NATO military forces make this fact all the more apparent. Having deployed a significant amount of forces to littoral countries, as well as initiating a series of critical military exercises and drills, Washington is demonstrating unequivocally its commitment to escalating the conflict with Russia.

Nearly a year ago, in June 2014, former Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel laid bare US intentions. In the wake of President Obama’s public announcement of $1 billion to expand the US military presence in Eastern Europe, Hagel stated that the billion dollar commitment was for a “stronger presence of US ships in the Black Sea,” and that “[The US] will sustain that tempo going forward.” Put in slightly more understandable terminology, the US committed a significant monetary investment to the permanent expansion of its military presence in and around the Black Sea.

The permanence of this new commitment is what is striking because, unlike much of the bluff and bluster from Washington over Ukraine and related issues, this represents a military deployment with real tactical value. It is not mere rhetoric, it is military escalation. And, in the year since the announcement was made, this process has evolved in earnest.

The US Army is currently, or will soon be, leading a series of critical military exercises in the Black Sea. One notable one is known as Noble Partner. This series of exercises is being conducted with the de facto NATO member Georgia which has effectively become a forward arm of NATO military forces. As the official page of the US Army noted:

Noble Partner will support Georgia’s contribution of a light infantry company to NATO Response Force, or NRF… The exercise will focus on unified land operations … Exercise Noble Partner provides an opportunity for the U.S. military to continue its training relationship with the Georgian Armed Forces as the sponsor of Georgia’s participation in the NRF. The NRF provides a rapid military response force to deploy quickly, wherever needed…. Exercise Noble Partner will include approximately 600 U.S. and Georgian Service members incorporating a full range of equipment… Georgian forces will operate alongside U.S. forces with their BMP-2 Infantry Combat Vehicle. The exercise will consist of both a field training exercise and a live-fire exercise.

However, as part of the US military training, a significant amount of military hardware is being shuttled across the Black Sea in an unprecedented move by the US which has never so brazenly treated this body of water as its own backyard. As the US Army page wrote:

Fourteen Bradley Infantry Fighting vehicles and several wheeled-support vehicles, roughly 748 metric tons of steel and rubber, cut across the Black Sea…bound for the port in Batumi, Georgia, May 2. This is the first time that the U.S. Army has deployed a mechanized company worth of equipment across the Black Sea. The equipment will support the 2nd Battalion, 7th Infantry Regiment, 3rd Infantry Division Soldiers, participating in Exercise Noble Partner.

Taken in combination with Hagel’s comments a year ago, it is clear that the US is committed to escalating its military presence in the Black Sea. Of course, it is self-evident that such a strategic development must be seen as an attempt to both outgun and intimidate Russia in its traditional sphere of influence.

Additionally, and concurrent to these military exercises, is the planned Trident Joust 2015, which according to US Navy Admiral Mark Ferguson, will “test the capability of the NRF [NATO Response Force] command and control element to work at full operational capacity in a deployed location…TRIDENT JOUST 15…will reinforce the NATO Readiness Action Plan from the Wales Summit and project assurance measures to all NATO allies.” Trident Joust should be understood as an attempt to prepare NATO’s military architecture for possible rapid deployment in the Black Sea region, ostensibly as a defense against so-called Russian aggression while in reality seeking to expand NATO military capability against the backdrop of the war in Ukraine and increased tensions with Moscow.

At no time during the Cold War did the US engage in such openly hostile and belligerent actions designed more to provoke than to defend. It seems the policy now is to both prepare for war and work to ensure that it comes to fruition. As if to make it even more transparent what Washignton’s intentions are with Trident Joust, Admiral Ferguson was quoted as saying “I appreciate the efforts of Romania as we work on other measures to transform the Alliance, such as the formation of the Multinational Division Southeast and the NATO Force Integration Unit.”

There are other important military moves that the US-NATO have made in the Black Sea in recent months, all designed to send a stern warning to Russia. NATO’s Standing NATO Maritime Group Two (SNMG2) recently completed its training exercises “designed to improve interoperability and enhance rapid integration of Alliance maritime assets… The force trained on anti-air, anti-submarine and anti-surface warfare procedures during separate exercises with the Turkish, Bulgarian and Romanian navies.” As part of SNMG2, NATO deployed significant military assets to the Romanian port of Constanta, not coincidentally a short distance across the Black Sea from Crimea and Russia’s fleet at Sevastopol. Participating in the SNMG2 was the USS Vicksburg with its Mark 41 Vertical Launching System, Harpoon anti-ship missiles, and arsenal of guns. In addition were Canadian, Italian, and Turkish warships, all carrying significant firepower of their own.

Aside from these specific sets of naval exercises, the US has had major assets in and around the Black Sea to participate in a series of one-off maneuvers and a variety of drills in the past year, even before Secretary Hagel’s public announcement in June 2014. These include the recently decommissioned USS Taylor which spent much of 2014 in the Black Sea. Perhaps not so coincidentally, this US frigate is now slated for sale to Taiwan in a move that is likely to be met with disapproval in Beijing. Additionally, the USS Donald Cook, a missile destroyer, conducted exercises with the USS Taylor and Romanian Navy. Also, the USS Truxton and USS Vella Gulf both logged significant time in the Black Sea in 2014, undoubtedly motivating Russia to move quickly to ramp up its naval and military capabilities.

It is interesting to note that Russia’s moves in Crimea in 2014 came within a matter of days of the entrance into the Black Sea of these US naval assets. Anyone who doubts that Moscow’s decision to support Crimea’s vote for reunification with the Russian Federation was motivated by something other than military and strategic pragmatism would do well to examine this timeline of events.

All of this makes plain that the US and its NATO arsenal are gearing up for a “pivot” – to borrow the grossly overused terminology of the Obama administration and the Pentagon – that will see their forces focused on the Black Sea, just as they have shifted attention to the Baltic Sea even more so in recent months. It does not take exceptional powers of deduction to see what the US intends: continued escalation, force preparedness, and intimidation against Moscow. However, it is equally apparent that such provocative moves raise the risk of a misstep, an accident or misunderstanding that could touch off a major military conflict. Considering the players involved, such a blunder could spark World War 3.

A forthcoming article will focus on the countermoves that Russia is employing to confront US-NATO aggression near Russia’s borders. The article will focus specifically on the fast-developing military relationship between Russia and China.

Eric Draitser is an independent geopolitical analyst based in New York City, he is the founder of StopImperialism.org and OP-ed columnist for RT, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
http://journal-neo.org/2015/05/14/battlefield-black-sea/