Can NATO play a role in the struggle against international terrorism? Will the alliance be able to defend our safety and security in a radically altered strategic environment? Can the old dog learn new tricks? This week NATO heads of state and government will answer these questions with an unequivocal "yes."
The months since the terrorist attacks on the US have been characterized by intense transatlantic debate. No holds were barred. Some Americans argued that the US no longer needed allies. Some Europeans argued that the US was irreversibly bent on unilateralism. Both views are wrong, and the Prague NATO summit will demonstrate why. The summit will bring home to even the greatest skeptics that when it comes to managing our long-term security, there is no alternative to Europe and North America acting together.
Tackling Terrorism
The events of Sept. 11 last year clearly invalidated the conventional wisdom that terrorists want a lot of people watching, not a lot of people dead. Once a largely domestic concern, terrorism has become a major threat to international security.
This is why NATO will help tackle terrorism. The invocation of NATO's collective self-defense obligation on Sept. 12 last year was only the beginning. A new NATO military concept for defense against terrorism will now follow, supported by the development of specific counter-terrorism capabilities. We will further increase our cooperation in preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction and in dealing with the consequences should prevention fail. In short, NATO will become the focus for coordinating and planning the multinational military contribution to our defense against terrorism and other new threats.
Enhancing Military Capabilities
Military capability is the crucial underpinning of our safety and security. It translates directly into political credibility. But we need capabilities that are different from those needed during the Cold War. We need forces that react more quickly, reach further and can remain in the field longer. Enhancing NATO's capabilities will thus prove to be the litmus test for the future of the Alliance. NATO will pass this test.
A new NATO Response Force will bring together the most advanced forces within the Alliance for taking ultra-quick action against new security threats. We will address shortfalls in our military posture through specific national commitments. Reprioritization, less duplication and better armaments cooperation are further steps that will ensure that the alliance retains its military edge. We will also see to it that our efforts tie in with steps by the EU to bolster its military capabilities.
The venue of the Prague summit -- the capital of one of NATO's most recent member states -- is a powerful symbol of the alliance's success in advancing Europe's unification.
But this job is not yet complete. That is why, at Prague, we will invite additional countries to join. This will end Europe's Cold War division for good and foreclose any return to the darker chapters of the continent's past.
Admission of new members will repeat the positive experience of the last enlargement round. Countries that will receive invitations to join NATO during the Prague summit will have had years of experience working with the Alliance as partners, notably in bringing peace and stability to the Balkans and southeast
Europe. Moreover, each will have benefited from several years of NATO-assisted defense reform. They will thus be net security contributors rather than mere consumers, making our alliance even stronger.
The attacks of Sept. 11 were masterminded by a Saudi who lived in Central Asia, planned by people from the eastern and southern shores of the Mediterranean living in Western Europe, and carried out in North America.
These facts illustrate better than anything the need for security partnerships that extend to Central Asia and across the Mediterranan. These partnership mechanisms already exist. At Prague, we will make them even more effective.
We will focus much more on combating terrorism together. We will intensify our cooperation on security sector reform. By enabling meetings in more flexible formats, we will make our partnership mechanisms even more responsive to the interests and concerns of each individual partner country.
Enhancing NATO-Russia Relations
Once upon a time, most people in the West looked at Russia as part of the security problem. No longer. Today, in a strategic environment marked by terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, Russia is very much part of the solution.
If the Prague summit will not showcase any grand new initiative, it is simply because we already launched a new NATO-Russia relationship last May at our special summit in Rome.
The new NATO-Russia Council created in Rome offers us an effective and flexible mechanism for joint analysis, joint decisions and even joint action. Much has already been achieved over the past six months to transform the political message of Rome into practical cooperation.
It was former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger who argued after the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington that tragedy could be turned into opportunity. NATO has been heeding this insight.
With stronger capabilities, new members and deepened partnerships, the alliance will demonstrate that it remains the premier instrument to address current and future security challenges. At Prague, this message will ring out loud and clear.
George Lord Robertson is secretary general of NATO.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers
RSS