💾 Archived View for gmi.noulin.net › mobileNews › 2605.gmi captured on 2023-06-16 at 20:04:16. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2023-01-29)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
2010-11-19 08:45:37
08:29 UK time, Thursday, 18 November 2010
Nato members are gathering in Portugal for what is being billed as one of the
most crucial summits in the alliance's 61-year history. What is Nato's role in
the world?
Afghanistan will be top of the agenda, with plans to bring Nato's combat
operations to an end by 2014.
The 28 member states are also hoping to reach a "New Strategic Concept" to
shape the way Nato defends itself against threats over the next decade. The UK
government is backing proposals for radical changes which could see the number
of Nato agencies which look after areas such as logistics, communications,
research and training cut from 14 to three.
What is the future for Nato? Will the cuts affect its effectiveness in
countering future threats? Can the 28 member countries reach consensus? And
what be the next step in Afghanistan?
Although I agree that NATO should be cut down my fear would be that it makes
the wrong kind of cuts. It would be cheaper to put the headquarters in another
country Belgium is already an expensive place, and already houses nearly all
the European Institutions.
Well since the UKs armed forces have now been reduced to a level that Neville
Chamberlin would be proud of and we could not even defend ourselves against an
attack from Isle of Sheppey I think that NATO is still very important.
We will need John Wayne and his mates to gallop to our rescue (forget the
French) should we ever need them again, although I cannot see why they would
want to help this country anymore.
Is Nato still relevant?
Tricky one.
Nato was designed designed to give the west protection against large scale
threats, such as those posed by say a Soviet invasion of Europe.
At the moment, although Nato is in afghanistan it seems to be there more as a
fig leaf for US policy rather than an independent peace keeping force.
Maybe the answer is to stop using Nato as world police, let that role be filled
by UN troops, and leave Nato for serious large scale, conventional security
threats.
Yes in fighting terrorism but not where that means invading other peoples
countries which in turn makes the invaders country less safe.
The problem is that NATO is a solution to a problem that has disappeared - the
cold war!!! Given this solution still exists in a largely unaltered form it
needs revising and reviewing to reduce its overall costs while raising
performance and efficiency.
NATO needs to change. It is better to modify an existing organisation than to
start again with a new one. Perhaps we should think of bringing Russia in as we
share many common interests. I am not saying we should all gang up on China,
heaven forbid! What ever we do we must work for peace and with two former
adversaries on board we might just have a little experience on that score!
NATO's reason for being was to allow western Europe to defend itself against a
very real, at the time, Soviet threat.
That threat's gone, but NATO is still here.
NATO still has a role in terms of standardisation and general cooperation
between European and North American armed forces, but that doesn't require a
huge bureaucracy.
Also, I don't like the idea of us being tied in to a mutual defence pact with
many of the east European states. They're nothing but a problem to us as
members of the EU.
Looking at the damage letting East Europeans in to the UK has done to this
country, I'd be very reluctant to see us wasting troops and money defending
them.
HYS - "Is Nato still relevant?":
Yes - more than ever before - BUT:
This World faces more dangerous Nations / States that threaten World peace than
in the past. The weapons they could use are also more dangerous too.
It is true, that being dependent on those self-serving 'ambivalent' NATO
Nations for it's Logistics etc, DOES make NATO far weaker than it needs to be.
It has become too much of a 'squabbling-pot' in recent years - It needs to
sreamline for effectiveness.
Therefore, the Command-structure SHOULD be re-arranged as suggested.