4 New Messages
Digest #4607
Messages
Fri Jan 18, 2013 6:12 am (PST) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.stripes.com/news/us
Stars and Stripes
January 16, 2013
US seeking extension of Manas air base lease
John Vandiver
====
Most U.S. troops entering and leaving Afghanistan travel through Manas. In 2011, some 580,000 U.S. and allied personnel traveled through Manas, which also functions as an important refueling center.
In April 2010, military flights from Manas into Afghanistan were suspended following violent political upheaval in the country, which disrupted the movement of NATO troops. And in 2009, the U.S. nearly lost access to Manas when Kyrgyzstan’s parliament voted to evict the U.S. and close the base by August.
====
STUTTGART, Germany: The top U.S. diplomat for South and Central Asian affairs was in Kyrgyzstan on Wednesday as part of a U.S. effort to extend the soon-to-expire operational lease at Manas air base, a crucial transit hub for military operations in Afghanistan.
Assistant Secretary Robert O. Blake Jr.’s visit follows reports in Russian media that the former Soviet state has no intention of renewing the U.S. lease of Manas, which is slated to end next year.
“Kyrgyz President Almazbek Atambaev has said repeatedly that the agreement on the Transit Center at the Manas Airport in Bishkek will not be extended after its expiration in 2014,” presidential press secretary Kadyr Toktogulov toldthe Interfax news agency.
“Kyrgyzstan is currently working with its partners, among them Russia, the U.S. and other countries, on establishing a civilian transportation hub at the Manas Airport, which should start operations there after 2014,” Toktogulov told the Russian news agency.
Russia, which has long been leery of the U.S. military presence in Kyrgyzstan, also has bases in the country.
Atambaev has vowed to close the U.S. military section of the Manas facility when the current lease, which includes $60 million in annual U.S. rental payments, expires in July. However, the U.S. continues to press for an extension.
Blake, in an interview with Voice of America shortly before his three-day tour through Central Asia, said during his visit to Kyrgyzstan he intended to discuss extending the lease at Manas.
“Manas is a very important logistics operation for the United States, but also the center through which almost all our troops pass to go into Afghanistan,” he said.
Blake’s visit comes nearly one year after a similar trip by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who in March stopped in the Kyrgyz capital of Bishkek for talks focused on how to maintain a continued U.S. presence.
If the transit center were to shutter, it could complicate matters as the military presses ahead with its drawdown in Afghanistan. Most U.S. troops entering and leaving Afghanistan travel through Manas. In 2011, some 580,000 U.S. and allied personnel traveled through Manas, which also functions as an important refueling center.
While the transit center has been key to U.S. military logistical efforts, maintaining the facility hasn’t been without challenges. In April 2010, military flights from Manas into Afghanistan were suspended following violent political upheaval in the country, which disrupted the movement of NATO troops. And in 2009, the U.S. nearly lost access to Manas when Kyrgyzstan’s parliament voted to evict the U.S. and close the base by August. After negotiations, a new deal that tripled rental fees was struck, allowing the U.S. military to continue operating at Manas.
==============================
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.co
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups
==============================
Stars and Stripes
January 16, 2013
US seeking extension of Manas air base lease
John Vandiver
====
Most U.S. troops entering and leaving Afghanistan travel through Manas. In 2011, some 580,000 U.S. and allied personnel traveled through Manas, which also functions as an important refueling center.
In April 2010, military flights from Manas into Afghanistan were suspended following violent political upheaval in the country, which disrupted the movement of NATO troops. And in 2009, the U.S. nearly lost access to Manas when Kyrgyzstan’s parliament voted to evict the U.S. and close the base by August.
====
STUTTGART, Germany: The top U.S. diplomat for South and Central Asian affairs was in Kyrgyzstan on Wednesday as part of a U.S. effort to extend the soon-to-expire operational lease at Manas air base, a crucial transit hub for military operations in Afghanistan.
Assistant Secretary Robert O. Blake Jr.’s visit follows reports in Russian media that the former Soviet state has no intention of renewing the U.S. lease of Manas, which is slated to end next year.
“Kyrgyz President Almazbek Atambaev has said repeatedly that the agreement on the Transit Center at the Manas Airport in Bishkek will not be extended after its expiration in 2014,” presidential press secretary Kadyr Toktogulov toldthe Interfax news agency.
“Kyrgyzstan is currently working with its partners, among them Russia, the U.S. and other countries, on establishing a civilian transportation hub at the Manas Airport, which should start operations there after 2014,” Toktogulov told the Russian news agency.
Russia, which has long been leery of the U.S. military presence in Kyrgyzstan, also has bases in the country.
Atambaev has vowed to close the U.S. military section of the Manas facility when the current lease, which includes $60 million in annual U.S. rental payments, expires in July. However, the U.S. continues to press for an extension.
Blake, in an interview with Voice of America shortly before his three-day tour through Central Asia, said during his visit to Kyrgyzstan he intended to discuss extending the lease at Manas.
“Manas is a very important logistics operation for the United States, but also the center through which almost all our troops pass to go into Afghanistan,” he said.
Blake’s visit comes nearly one year after a similar trip by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who in March stopped in the Kyrgyz capital of Bishkek for talks focused on how to maintain a continued U.S. presence.
If the transit center were to shutter, it could complicate matters as the military presses ahead with its drawdown in Afghanistan. Most U.S. troops entering and leaving Afghanistan travel through Manas. In 2011, some 580,000 U.S. and allied personnel traveled through Manas, which also functions as an important refueling center.
While the transit center has been key to U.S. military logistical efforts, maintaining the facility hasn’t been without challenges. In April 2010, military flights from Manas into Afghanistan were suspended following violent political upheaval in the country, which disrupted the movement of NATO troops. And in 2009, the U.S. nearly lost access to Manas when Kyrgyzstan’s parliament voted to evict the U.S. and close the base by August. After negotiations, a new deal that tripled rental fees was struck, allowing the U.S. military to continue operating at Manas.
==============================
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.co
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups
==============================
Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:13 am (PST) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.globaltimes.cn/
Global Times
January 17, 2013
Time for Abe to leave hard-line diplomacy path
By Liu Gang
====
Abe is kicking off a visit to Southeast Asian countries to boost ties. He is also reportedly going to write a letter to NATO in the face of China's rising power. Meanwhile, he is seeking to amend the Peace Constitution and strengthen Japan's Self-Defense Forces, which will increase tensions.
The current situation Japan faces is similar to what it experienced prior to World War II. A gloomy economy has led to the spread of militarism both among the public and politicians.
====
At the end of 2012, the Liberal Democratic Party in Japan won the country's election. Its significance for Japan's politics goes much further than the election itself.
Japan's economy is suffering. While Japan's political parties are struggling to come up with policies to save the country, territorial disputes and the "China threat" theory ignite public sentiment. There is no doubt that newly elected Prime Minister Shinzo Abe will make use of these issues.
Japanese leaders should have the strategic vision and courage to acknowledge the significance of a resolved Sino-Japanese relationship and the negative impact of the two remaining in a spat.
The initiative lies with Japan, or Abe specifically, to restore relations. However, the recent actions of Abe and his cabinet are worrying.
Abe is kicking off a visit to Southeast Asian countries to boost ties. He is also reportedly going to write a letter to NATO in the face of China's rising power. Meanwhile, he is seeking to amend the Peace Constitution and strengthen Japan's Self-Defense Forces, which will increase tensions.
The current situation Japan faces is similar to what it experienced prior to World War II. A gloomy economy has led to the spread of militarism both among the public and politicians. Its neighboring countries are worried that Japan may take the path of militarism and nationalism as it did in the past. A wise politician is needed to save Japan from the desperate situation it is in now. The following aspects are worth Abe's consideration.
First, the leaderships of both sides need to restore mechanisms to boost mutual trust as soon as possible. In 2006 after the bilateral relationship worsened due to then prime minister Junichiro Koizumi, Abe paid a visit to China to mend ties. Now, China has lost confidence in Japanese leaders. It is Abe who should take the initiative to restore mutual trust.
Japan should also give up the so-called "nationalization" of the Diaoyu Islands and wait for opportunities for bilateral negotiations. Abe and his cabinet should communicate with China and make proposals and commitments to turn the East China Sea into an area for joint development and shared interests. Meanwhile, Japan should keep a cool head toward China's development.
Last but not least, both should seek common ground while putting aside differences. A joint declaration can be signed to solve territorial disputes by either shelving them for future settlement or trying to resolve them now. Building a rational and comprehensive relationship is still essential for both.
The author is board chairman of the China Tourism Revitalization Union in Okinawa, Japan.
==============================
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.co
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups
==============================
Global Times
January 17, 2013
Time for Abe to leave hard-line diplomacy path
By Liu Gang
====
Abe is kicking off a visit to Southeast Asian countries to boost ties. He is also reportedly going to write a letter to NATO in the face of China's rising power. Meanwhile, he is seeking to amend the Peace Constitution and strengthen Japan's Self-Defense Forces, which will increase tensions.
The current situation Japan faces is similar to what it experienced prior to World War II. A gloomy economy has led to the spread of militarism both among the public and politicians.
====
At the end of 2012, the Liberal Democratic Party in Japan won the country's election. Its significance for Japan's politics goes much further than the election itself.
Japan's economy is suffering. While Japan's political parties are struggling to come up with policies to save the country, territorial disputes and the "China threat" theory ignite public sentiment. There is no doubt that newly elected Prime Minister Shinzo Abe will make use of these issues.
Japanese leaders should have the strategic vision and courage to acknowledge the significance of a resolved Sino-Japanese relationship and the negative impact of the two remaining in a spat.
The initiative lies with Japan, or Abe specifically, to restore relations. However, the recent actions of Abe and his cabinet are worrying.
Abe is kicking off a visit to Southeast Asian countries to boost ties. He is also reportedly going to write a letter to NATO in the face of China's rising power. Meanwhile, he is seeking to amend the Peace Constitution and strengthen Japan's Self-Defense Forces, which will increase tensions.
The current situation Japan faces is similar to what it experienced prior to World War II. A gloomy economy has led to the spread of militarism both among the public and politicians. Its neighboring countries are worried that Japan may take the path of militarism and nationalism as it did in the past. A wise politician is needed to save Japan from the desperate situation it is in now. The following aspects are worth Abe's consideration.
First, the leaderships of both sides need to restore mechanisms to boost mutual trust as soon as possible. In 2006 after the bilateral relationship worsened due to then prime minister Junichiro Koizumi, Abe paid a visit to China to mend ties. Now, China has lost confidence in Japanese leaders. It is Abe who should take the initiative to restore mutual trust.
Japan should also give up the so-called "nationalization" of the Diaoyu Islands and wait for opportunities for bilateral negotiations. Abe and his cabinet should communicate with China and make proposals and commitments to turn the East China Sea into an area for joint development and shared interests. Meanwhile, Japan should keep a cool head toward China's development.
Last but not least, both should seek common ground while putting aside differences. A joint declaration can be signed to solve territorial disputes by either shelving them for future settlement or trying to resolve them now. Building a rational and comprehensive relationship is still essential for both.
The author is board chairman of the China Tourism Revitalization Union in Okinawa, Japan.
==============================
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.co
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups
==============================
Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:13 am (PST) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/o
China Daily
January 18, 2013
Japan's grand Asia-Pacific strategy
By Wu Huaizhong*
====
[B]esides the United States, Japan is so far the firmest supporter of the existing order. Japan's grand Asia-Pacific strategy is a strong pillar in sustaining US hegemony and the Western-dominated order, which goes against the development trend and direction of the global situation in the post-crisis era...
Japan is deliberately diluting East Asia's geopolitical and geo-economic significance, lowering the US' wariness and pulling in the US.
Japan's Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment is focused on strengthening the Japan-US alliance and trying to woo India, Australia and other countries to guard against China's rise.
====
In the post-crisis era, though Japanese politicians and pundits acknowledge the world is moving toward multi-polarization, their belief in "hegemonic stability" is still deep-seated and they recognize and support the Pax Americana in the Asia-Pacific region. Or, taking a step back, Japan at least believes in maintaining an order dominated by Western developed democracies in the Asia-Pacific and the fundamental task of Japan's long-term foreign strategy is taking in emerging powers that are capable of challenging and revising this "order".
Therefore, besides the United States, Japan is so far the firmest supporter of the existing order. Japan's grand Asia-Pacific strategy is a strong pillar in sustaining US hegemony and the Western-dominated order, which goes against the development trend and direction of the global situation in the post-crisis era, and is also against the diversification and multi-polarization of the regional pattern of evolving democratization in international relations.
Japan once actively pushed forward regional cooperation in East Asia. But on seeing China's fast economic growth, rising comprehensive strength and influence, Japan began to worry that China would take the leading role in promoting cooperation and constructing the regional order in East Asia. Thus, Japan began to advocate an expanded "East Asian Community", augmenting the "10+3", which comprises the 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations plus China, Japan and South Korea, to "10+6", with the inclusion of India, Australia and New Zealand, and is now pulling in the US.
In the economic field, Japan turned to Asia-Pacific cooperation from East Asian cooperation and intends to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations. Japan's argument is that dealing with China's "gigantism" and restricting it needs a big system or system expansion. In other words, with China's development and growth in economic size, the regional framework and system restricting China should expand and extend correspondingly so as to dilute and counterbalance China's power and influence.
In reality Japan is deliberately diluting East Asia's geopolitical and geo-economic significance, lowering the US' wariness and pulling in the US.
Japan's actions have undermined or at least diluted the process of East Asian cooperation and become a negative factor in East Asian cooperation.
Since former Japanese prime minister Yukio Hatoyama suffered a setback in turning Japan's US-centric foreign policy to a more Asia-focused policy, Japan's Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment is focused on strengthening the Japan-US alliance and trying to woo India, Australia and other countries to guard against China's rise. In recent years, Japan has developed increasingly close relations with India and Australia, forming sorts of quasi-alliances.
The unfolding of Japan's Asia-Pacific strategy is, to a large extent, centered on China and thus has an influence on China. In the economic field, Japan's regional cooperation policy (advocating an expanded East Asian Community and promoting the TPP negotiations) will dilute China's influence and make China face the pressure of an economic and trade hegemony led by the US and Japan. In a broad sense, this is a game scrambling for the leading role in East Asian cooperation.
Japan is trying to portray China as a revisionist country in the Asia Pacific, and intends to depict the competition between China and Japan as a battle between two forces, one that seeks to maintain the status quo, and one that seeks to challenge the existing order. In light of the Sino-Japanese disputes concerning maritime rights and interests and the sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands, Japanese politicians have not only called for the US to jointly contain China's "expansionist behavior", they also went to Europe to garner sympathy.
Meanwhile, Japan is making every effort to uphold the US' hegemony in the Asia-Pacific, and China faces increasing security and structural pressure from the Japan-US alliance. Japan's Asia-Pacific strategy has added to China's geopolitical difficulties and hindered China's rise in the region.
Moreover, Japan's military adjustment in a bid to match the US' strategic rebalancing toward Asia will have a remarkable impact on China's surrounding security environment. Japan is determined to develop a Dynamic Defense Force that can integrate its command, combat and intelligence with the those of US. Japan wants to ensure that it is capable of "island defense", including the Diaoyu Islands, using its own forces, namely the Japan Self-Defense Forces, while ensuring that it has the US' support should a conflict escalate.
The Self-Defense Forces will play a role in military surveillance, anti-submarine, air defense at sea, information sharing and become an important part within the framework of the US-Japan alliance in response to China's military buildup and activities. The US and Japanese forces want to forge a linked unity to deal with China and blockade the Chinese navy and air force inside the island chain.
This means that for a long time to come, Japan's strategy toward China will feature systematic competition, multilateral containment, military prevention, diplomatic distraction and economic competition, which in turn means more uncertainties for Sino-Japanese relations in a complicated transition period.
*The author is an associate researcher on Japanese studies with the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. The article is an excerpt from the Annual Report on Development of Asia-Pacific 2013.
==============================
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.co
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups
==============================
China Daily
January 18, 2013
Japan's grand Asia-Pacific strategy
By Wu Huaizhong*
====
[B]esides the United States, Japan is so far the firmest supporter of the existing order. Japan's grand Asia-Pacific strategy is a strong pillar in sustaining US hegemony and the Western-dominated order, which goes against the development trend and direction of the global situation in the post-crisis era...
Japan is deliberately diluting East Asia's geopolitical and geo-economic significance, lowering the US' wariness and pulling in the US.
Japan's Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment is focused on strengthening the Japan-US alliance and trying to woo India, Australia and other countries to guard against China's rise.
====
In the post-crisis era, though Japanese politicians and pundits acknowledge the world is moving toward multi-polarization, their belief in "hegemonic stability" is still deep-seated and they recognize and support the Pax Americana in the Asia-Pacific region. Or, taking a step back, Japan at least believes in maintaining an order dominated by Western developed democracies in the Asia-Pacific and the fundamental task of Japan's long-term foreign strategy is taking in emerging powers that are capable of challenging and revising this "order".
Therefore, besides the United States, Japan is so far the firmest supporter of the existing order. Japan's grand Asia-Pacific strategy is a strong pillar in sustaining US hegemony and the Western-dominated order, which goes against the development trend and direction of the global situation in the post-crisis era, and is also against the diversification and multi-polarization of the regional pattern of evolving democratization in international relations.
Japan once actively pushed forward regional cooperation in East Asia. But on seeing China's fast economic growth, rising comprehensive strength and influence, Japan began to worry that China would take the leading role in promoting cooperation and constructing the regional order in East Asia. Thus, Japan began to advocate an expanded "East Asian Community", augmenting the "10+3", which comprises the 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations plus China, Japan and South Korea, to "10+6", with the inclusion of India, Australia and New Zealand, and is now pulling in the US.
In the economic field, Japan turned to Asia-Pacific cooperation from East Asian cooperation and intends to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations. Japan's argument is that dealing with China's "gigantism" and restricting it needs a big system or system expansion. In other words, with China's development and growth in economic size, the regional framework and system restricting China should expand and extend correspondingly so as to dilute and counterbalance China's power and influence.
In reality Japan is deliberately diluting East Asia's geopolitical and geo-economic significance, lowering the US' wariness and pulling in the US.
Japan's actions have undermined or at least diluted the process of East Asian cooperation and become a negative factor in East Asian cooperation.
Since former Japanese prime minister Yukio Hatoyama suffered a setback in turning Japan's US-centric foreign policy to a more Asia-focused policy, Japan's Asia-Pacific strategic adjustment is focused on strengthening the Japan-US alliance and trying to woo India, Australia and other countries to guard against China's rise. In recent years, Japan has developed increasingly close relations with India and Australia, forming sorts of quasi-alliances.
The unfolding of Japan's Asia-Pacific strategy is, to a large extent, centered on China and thus has an influence on China. In the economic field, Japan's regional cooperation policy (advocating an expanded East Asian Community and promoting the TPP negotiations) will dilute China's influence and make China face the pressure of an economic and trade hegemony led by the US and Japan. In a broad sense, this is a game scrambling for the leading role in East Asian cooperation.
Japan is trying to portray China as a revisionist country in the Asia Pacific, and intends to depict the competition between China and Japan as a battle between two forces, one that seeks to maintain the status quo, and one that seeks to challenge the existing order. In light of the Sino-Japanese disputes concerning maritime rights and interests and the sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands, Japanese politicians have not only called for the US to jointly contain China's "expansionist behavior", they also went to Europe to garner sympathy.
Meanwhile, Japan is making every effort to uphold the US' hegemony in the Asia-Pacific, and China faces increasing security and structural pressure from the Japan-US alliance. Japan's Asia-Pacific strategy has added to China's geopolitical difficulties and hindered China's rise in the region.
Moreover, Japan's military adjustment in a bid to match the US' strategic rebalancing toward Asia will have a remarkable impact on China's surrounding security environment. Japan is determined to develop a Dynamic Defense Force that can integrate its command, combat and intelligence with the those of US. Japan wants to ensure that it is capable of "island defense", including the Diaoyu Islands, using its own forces, namely the Japan Self-Defense Forces, while ensuring that it has the US' support should a conflict escalate.
The Self-Defense Forces will play a role in military surveillance, anti-submarine, air defense at sea, information sharing and become an important part within the framework of the US-Japan alliance in response to China's military buildup and activities. The US and Japanese forces want to forge a linked unity to deal with China and blockade the Chinese navy and air force inside the island chain.
This means that for a long time to come, Japan's strategy toward China will feature systematic competition, multilateral containment, military prevention, diplomatic distraction and economic competition, which in turn means more uncertainties for Sino-Japanese relations in a complicated transition period.
*The author is an associate researcher on Japanese studies with the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. The article is an excerpt from the Annual Report on Development of Asia-Pacific 2013.
==============================
Stop NATO e-mail list home page with archives and search engine:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/
Stop NATO website and articles:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.co
To subscribe for individual e-mails or the daily digest, unsubscribe, and otherwise change subscription status:
stopnato-subscribe@yahoogroups
==============================
Fri Jan 18, 2013 11:13 am (PST) . Posted by:
"Rick Rozoff" rwrozoff
http://www.defense.gov/news/ne
U.S. Department of Defense
January 18, 2013
Panetta Urges New Focus for NATO
By Karen Parrish
====
The secretary listed some of those U.S. initiatives: deploying ballistic missile defense-equipped destroyers to Rota, Spain; establishing a new U.S. aviation detachment in Poland; and deploying U.S. Army battalions on a rotational basis to participate in the NATO Response Force.
Other key capabilities for the future that require investment [in addition to cyber warfare], Panetta said, include unmanned systems, surveillance and intelligence platforms, space defense and special operations forces.
[A]s NATO confronts other security challenges in Africa and the Middle East, Panetta recommended the establishment of "deeper partnerships with the Arab League [and] the Gulf Cooperation Council and build regular dialogue, exchanges and exercises with African organizations such as the African Union and ECOWAS in Western Africa."
"In particular, I strongly believe that Europe should join the United States in increasing and deepening our defense engagement with the Asia-Pacific region," Panetta said.
It is in the interests of both the United States and Europe, the secretary said, for NATO to become more outwardly focused and engaged in strengthening Asian security institutions such as ASEAN.
====
LONDON: As the International Security Assistance Force transitions to a sustaining role in Afghanistan by the end of 2014, will NATO retreat from its responsibilities, or innovate to develop and share the capabilities needed to meet growing, global security challenges?
Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta delivered a speech at King's College here today, built around that question.
The audience included students and faculty members of the school's Department of War Studies and the secretary noted it was "especially these young leaders" he wished to address.
The more than 60-year-old NATO alliance "remains the bedrock of America’s global...partnerships," Panetta said. "But today, after over 11 years of war, I believe we are at another turning point in the history of the transatlantic alliance."
...Panetta noted [that] the alliance - if it is to remain an effective, capable, enduring multilateral security alliance - must prepare to quickly respond to a wide range of security threats even as member nations, under budget pressures, spend less on their militaries.
..."We have got to build an innovative, flexible, and rotational model for forward-deployed presence and training.”
In transforming its capabilities, NATO must develop innovative alliance cooperation, invest in new frontiers, and build regional partnerships, he said.
Innovative cooperation, Panetta said, involves positioning and equipping forces so they can respond to threats rapidly and effectively. For example, he noted, the Defense Department has moved two heavy Army brigades out of Europe.
"But...this effort is not primarily about cuts," he said. "We will be supporting new rotational deployments, enhanced training and exercises, and other new initiatives that bolster the readiness of our forces and build their capacity to seamlessly work together."
The secretary listed some of those U.S. initiatives: deploying ballistic missile defense-equipped destroyers to Rota, Spain; establishing a new U.S. aviation detachment in Poland; and deploying U.S. Army battalions on a rotational basis to participate in the NATO Response Force.
...
Turning to "new frontiers," Panetta urged NATO commitment to cyber defense.
...
NATO must consider what its role should be in defending member nations from cyber attacks, the secretary said.
"We must begin to take the necessary steps to develop additional alliance cyber defense capabilities," he said. "To that end, I urge that in the coming year [that] NATO ministers hold a session to closely examine how the alliance can bolster its defensive cyber operational capabilities."
Other key capabilities for the future that require investment, Panetta said, include unmanned systems, surveillance and intelligence platforms, space defense and special operations forces.
"The time has come when nations can share critical capabilities...that enhance [our common] ability to...respond to common threats," he said.
Panetta said the third pillar for building the transatlantic alliance of the 21st century "must be a determined and proactive effort to build strong partnerships with nations and security organizations in other regions of the world."
...
"We see this every day in Afghanistan, where more than 20 non-NATO countries - Australia, Jordan, others - work alongside NATO countries in ISAF," he said. "And we saw the benefits of this approach in our Libya [operation] as well, where the Arab League and the Gulf Cooperation Council partnered with Europe and North America under a NATO umbrella...The presence of these regional partners has added credibility and capability to the alliance effort, and laid the groundwork for continued cooperation in the future."
And as NATO confronts other security challenges in Africa and the Middle East, Panetta recommended the establishment of "deeper partnerships with the Arab League [and] the Gulf Cooperation Council and build regular dialogue, exchanges and exercises with African organizations such as the African Union and ECOWAS in Western Africa."
NATO also must broaden the scope of alliance security discussions beyond European and regional issues, the secretary said.
"In particular, I strongly believe that Europe should join the United States in increasing and deepening our defense engagement with the Asia-Pacific region," Panetta said.
The U.S. "pivot" to Asia has caused concern in Europe, he acknowledged.
"But today those concerns should be put to rest," Panetta said. "Global security is not a zero-sum game, but neither are the security commitments of the United States. More importantly, Europe’s economic and security future is - much like the United States' - increasingly tied to Asia. After all, the European Union is China’s largest trading partner, [the Association of Southeast Asian Nations'] second-largest trading partner, and ranks third and fourth with Japan and South Korea."
It is in the interests of both the United States and Europe, the secretary said, for NATO to become more outwardly focused and engaged in strengthening Asian security institutions such as ASEAN.
"It is also in our interest to expand defense dialogue and exchanges with a full range of nations including China, where defense spending, according to one estimate, is projected to exceed the largest eight European nations combined, by 2015," the secretary said.
NATO member nations have a responsibility to demonstrate global leadership and to advance the ideals of peace and prosperity, he said.
"To that end, the United States and Europe should work together and ensure our efforts are coordinated through regular consultations between European and U.S. defense officials focused on Asia-Pacific security issues," Panetta said. "The bottom line is that Europe should not fear our rebalance to Asia, Europe should join it."
...
As he prepares to retire from a career in public service, the secretary said he recognizes a generational shift is underway.
"There will probably not be another U.S. secretary of defense with direct memories of World War II," he said. "Many of those entering military service today - and many of the young students here in this audience - were born years after the fall of the Berlin wall. Yet across the generations, the transatlantic alliance remains the rock upon which we will build our future security and our future prosperity."
U.S. Department of Defense
January 18, 2013
Panetta Urges New Focus for NATO
By Karen Parrish
====
The secretary listed some of those U.S. initiatives: deploying ballistic missile defense-equipped destroyers to Rota, Spain; establishing a new U.S. aviation detachment in Poland; and deploying U.S. Army battalions on a rotational basis to participate in the NATO Response Force.
Other key capabilities for the future that require investment [in addition to cyber warfare], Panetta said, include unmanned systems, surveillance and intelligence platforms, space defense and special operations forces.
[A]s NATO confronts other security challenges in Africa and the Middle East, Panetta recommended the establishment of "deeper partnerships with the Arab League [and] the Gulf Cooperation Council and build regular dialogue, exchanges and exercises with African organizations such as the African Union and ECOWAS in Western Africa."
"In particular, I strongly believe that Europe should join the United States in increasing and deepening our defense engagement with the Asia-Pacific region," Panetta said.
It is in the interests of both the United States and Europe, the secretary said, for NATO to become more outwardly focused and engaged in strengthening Asian security institutions such as ASEAN.
====
LONDON: As the International Security Assistance Force transitions to a sustaining role in Afghanistan by the end of 2014, will NATO retreat from its responsibilities, or innovate to develop and share the capabilities needed to meet growing, global security challenges?
Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta delivered a speech at King's College here today, built around that question.
The audience included students and faculty members of the school's Department of War Studies and the secretary noted it was "especially these young leaders" he wished to address.
The more than 60-year-old NATO alliance "remains the bedrock of America’s global...partnerships," Panetta said. "But today, after over 11 years of war, I believe we are at another turning point in the history of the transatlantic alliance."
...Panetta noted [that] the alliance - if it is to remain an effective, capable, enduring multilateral security alliance - must prepare to quickly respond to a wide range of security threats even as member nations, under budget pressures, spend less on their militaries.
..."We have got to build an innovative, flexible, and rotational model for forward-deployed presence and training.”
In transforming its capabilities, NATO must develop innovative alliance cooperation, invest in new frontiers, and build regional partnerships, he said.
Innovative cooperation, Panetta said, involves positioning and equipping forces so they can respond to threats rapidly and effectively. For example, he noted, the Defense Department has moved two heavy Army brigades out of Europe.
"But...this effort is not primarily about cuts," he said. "We will be supporting new rotational deployments, enhanced training and exercises, and other new initiatives that bolster the readiness of our forces and build their capacity to seamlessly work together."
The secretary listed some of those U.S. initiatives: deploying ballistic missile defense-equipped destroyers to Rota, Spain; establishing a new U.S. aviation detachment in Poland; and deploying U.S. Army battalions on a rotational basis to participate in the NATO Response Force.
...
Turning to "new frontiers," Panetta urged NATO commitment to cyber defense.
...
NATO must consider what its role should be in defending member nations from cyber attacks, the secretary said.
"We must begin to take the necessary steps to develop additional alliance cyber defense capabilities," he said. "To that end, I urge that in the coming year [that] NATO ministers hold a session to closely examine how the alliance can bolster its defensive cyber operational capabilities."
Other key capabilities for the future that require investment, Panetta said, include unmanned systems, surveillance and intelligence platforms, space defense and special operations forces.
"The time has come when nations can share critical capabilities...that enhance [our common] ability to...respond to common threats," he said.
Panetta said the third pillar for building the transatlantic alliance of the 21st century "must be a determined and proactive effort to build strong partnerships with nations and security organizations in other regions of the world."
...
"We see this every day in Afghanistan, where more than 20 non-NATO countries - Australia, Jordan, others - work alongside NATO countries in ISAF," he said. "And we saw the benefits of this approach in our Libya [operation] as well, where the Arab League and the Gulf Cooperation Council partnered with Europe and North America under a NATO umbrella...The presence of these regional partners has added credibility and capability to the alliance effort, and laid the groundwork for continued cooperation in the future."
And as NATO confronts other security challenges in Africa and the Middle East, Panetta recommended the establishment of "deeper partnerships with the Arab League [and] the Gulf Cooperation Council and build regular dialogue, exchanges and exercises with African organizations such as the African Union and ECOWAS in Western Africa."
NATO also must broaden the scope of alliance security discussions beyond European and regional issues, the secretary said.
"In particular, I strongly believe that Europe should join the United States in increasing and deepening our defense engagement with the Asia-Pacific region," Panetta said.
The U.S. "pivot" to Asia has caused concern in Europe, he acknowledged.
"But today those concerns should be put to rest," Panetta said. "Global security is not a zero-sum game, but neither are the security commitments of the United States. More importantly, Europe’s economic and security future is - much like the United States' - increasingly tied to Asia. After all, the European Union is China’s largest trading partner, [the Association of Southeast Asian Nations'] second-largest trading partner, and ranks third and fourth with Japan and South Korea."
It is in the interests of both the United States and Europe, the secretary said, for NATO to become more outwardly focused and engaged in strengthening Asian security institutions such as ASEAN.
"It is also in our interest to expand defense dialogue and exchanges with a full range of nations including China, where defense spending, according to one estimate, is projected to exceed the largest eight European nations combined, by 2015," the secretary said.
NATO member nations have a responsibility to demonstrate global leadership and to advance the ideals of peace and prosperity, he said.
"To that end, the United States and Europe should work together and ensure our efforts are coordinated through regular consultations between European and U.S. defense officials focused on Asia-Pacific security issues," Panetta said. "The bottom line is that Europe should not fear our rebalance to Asia, Europe should join it."
...
As he prepares to retire from a career in public service, the secretary said he recognizes a generational shift is underway.
"There will probably not be another U.S. secretary of defense with direct memories of World War II," he said. "Many of those entering military service today - and many of the young students here in this audience - were born years after the fall of the Berlin wall. Yet across the generations, the transatlantic alliance remains the rock upon which we will build our future security and our future prosperity."
