26 July 2011 — Stop NATO
- Libya Accuses NATO Of Bombing Hospital, Killing Seven People
- NATO-ASEAN Partnership Against China?
- U.S. Central Command Gets Own Spy Satellite For Greater Middle East War Zones
- Georgia: U.S. Marines Lead Counterinsurgency Training
- NATO Blackmails Turkey Over Chinese, Russian Air Defense Systems
- British Attack Helicopter Injures Five Afghan Children
- Afghanistan: Major NATO Air Base Attacked
Libya Accuses NATO Of Bombing Hospital, Killing Seven People
http://www.rferl.org/content/qaddafi_government_libya_accuses_nato_bombing_hospital/24276647.html
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
July 25, 2011
Qaddafi Government Accuses NATO Of Bombing Hospital
The government of…Muammar Qaddafi has accused NATO of bombing a hospital and killing seven people in Zlitan, east of the capital, Tripoli.
Government minders took journalists to the destroyed hospital and showed them several food warehouses that the government said were damaged in the air strikes.
A NATO spokesman said the alliance would not release information on the strikes before July 26.
…
compiled from agency reports
====
NATO-ASEAN Partnership Against China?
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2011/07/26/sketching-out-a-future-asean-nato-partnership.html
Jakarta Post
July 26, 2011
Sketching out a future ASEAN-NATO partnership
Evan A. Laksmana*
-NATO should at least start thinking of engaging ASEAN early to avoid any surprises when a new, region-wide crisis in Asia comes knocking. For ASEAN, if we are serious about boosting our regional security community building, would it hurt to learn from a multi-national organization that has had the longest practical experience in the endeavor?
Jakarta: As the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) enters its seventh decade and as ASEAN consolidates its regional community building ahead of and beyond 2015, the bodies have much to learn from each other.
For NATO, ASEAN will be increasingly critical for the future of Asian stability and order and would be an ideal candidate for a strategic counterpart to tackle common regional and global security challenges — especially when ASEAN consolidates its regional community building, allowing it to share NATO’s role as a community of like-minded nations…
Southeast Asia’s geopolitical, geo-strategic, and geo-economic value also suggests that NATO’s future missions beyond its traditional area of operations might increasingly depend on ASEAN.
For ASEAN, as it further institutionalizes common security and defense arrangements, NATO’s ability to conduct multilateral defense planning and operations — as well as the standardization of arms, joint procurement or regional research and development — provides a wealth of learning materials and proven practices. There is also something to be learned from NATO’s multilateral crisis management.
And as some ASEAN militaries still struggle to improve operational readiness and effectiveness while circumnavigating the complexities of institutional management, NATO’s educational and training reform programs will come in handy.
If we can venture into the future for a second, how would a dialogue or partnership mechanism between ASEAN and NATO look?
Any future ASEAN-NATO partnership could at least be placed within five major policy areas: peacekeeping, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR), maritime security, defense reform and counterterrorism.
On maritime security, for example, there is much to learn from each other and there is ample room for cooperation between ASEAN and NATO in counter-piracy efforts, especially in the Gulf of Aden where the Alliance has an ongoing naval operation as part of the Standing NATO Maritime Group 1.
The same could be said for peacekeeping and HADR operations, where NATO has had a wealth experience, while ASEAN is in the process of revamping its own capabilities. Indeed, both are among the top agendas of Indonesia as ASEAN chair nation this year.
These five areas of engagement could be further executed in four levels of cooperation: strategic, institutional, operational and people-to-people.
Strategically, NATO can engage ASEAN in discussions and dialogue regarding the five security issues using two tracks.
In track one, the ASEAN Defense Ministers’ Meeting Plus (consisting of all ASEAN countries plus Australia, the US, China, South Korea, Japan, India, Russia and New Zealand) as well as the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) provide critical dialogue venues.
In track two, two groupings are crucial: the ASEAN Institutes of Strategic and International Studies (ASEAN-ISIS), a network of nine major think tanks in Southeast Asia, and the Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia Pacific (CSCAP), a network of nearly all major Asia Pacific think tanks.
Both are critical because they have access — and have been recognized as such — to the track one process within ASEAN and the ARF. CSCAP in particular has several study groups that may be of interest to NATO, such as those pertaining to WMD proliferation, cyber crime or regional naval enhancement.
Institutionally, NATO could explore future cooperation or collaboration with either the ASEAN Secretariat, the network of ASEAN Peacekeeping Centers, the ASEAN Center for Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief or even the ASEAN Institute for Peace and Reconciliation.
Such links could either explore practical issues of cooperation or focus on research regarding common issues of interest dealing with HADR, crisis management, maritime security or peacekeeping operations. They could also open the way for a future operational collaboration.
NATO, for example, could participate in a future region-wide peacekeeping or HADR exercises. This could either be done through the creation of a new venue or by piggybacking on existing operations such as Garuda Shield, ARF DIREX or ADX.
Other forms of diplomatic defense activities such as port visits or officer exchanges that are more practical and ‘neutral’ might also help alleviate some of the sensitivities of regional countries regarding NATO’s visibility.
Only then, perhaps, can we consider various exercises to deepen the defense reform or transformation process in certain ASEAN countries or focus on new missions such as improving counterterrorism capabilities.
Finally, at the people-to-people level, NATO could engage ASEAN through research and academic engagements with regional think tanks and universities or through various public diplomatic events.
This would slowly and gradually raise the public profile and awareness of NATO’s potential contribution to regional stability.
If we can now come back down to earth for a while, it is easy to think of these sketches to be ahead of their time. This is at least the writer’s impression from discussions with various NATO officials on a recent trip.
While acknowledging the growing importance of non-member partners of NATO, they would prefer the Alliance to have a more careful and calibrated approach to regional engagements, especially given existing budgetary constraints, the various intra-alliance debates and regional sensitivities in Asia about NATO — as well as the imperative to conclude current operational missions.
But it should be remembered that Asians in general — and Southeast Asians in particular — need time to warm up to new actors, which is why we always prefer a sustainable ‘process’ to deepen our sense of comfort with each other.
As such, NATO should at least start thinking of engaging ASEAN early to avoid any surprises when a new, region-wide crisis in Asia comes knocking. For ASEAN, if we are serious about boosting our regional security community building, would it hurt to learn from a multi-national organization that has had the longest practical experience in the endeavor?
*The writer is a Center for Strategic and International Studies researcher in Jakarta. This article is based on a paper he presented in Brussels, Belgium, at a NATO-Asia security dialogue.
====
U.S. Central Command Gets Own Spy Satellite For Greater Middle East War Zones
http://www.stripes.com/news/centcom-s-spy-satellite-set-to-beam-images-from-war-zones-1.150088
Stars and Stripes
July 25, 2011
CENTCOM’s spy satellite set to beam images from war zones
By Chris Carroll
WASHINGTON: Commanders in Afghanistan and Iraq will soon be able to track the enemy with their own spy satellite.
ORS-1, developed by the Pentagon’s Operationally Responsive Space Office and launched June 29, is the first satellite dedicated to a single combatant command. It’s scheduled to start beaming back tactical imagery in August after a check of the satellite’s systems is completed in orbit.
…
The satellite adds a layer to CENTCOM’s arsenal of intelligence tools…Requests from combat commanders for overhead imagery that might have previously been handled by a slow-moving drone could be assigned to the satellite orbiting earth at more than 17,000 mph.
…
The 900-pound, dishwasher-sized satellite will survey the battlefield from orbit 280 miles high, using the same camera as the U-2 spy plane or Global Hawk drone – attached to a telescope that makes the satellite look similar to a tiny Hubble Space Telescope tilted toward the Earth.
An orbit that carries it over the CENTCOM region every 90 minutes will let OSR-1 train its camera on any given spot for about 10 minutes…It will be able to survey many locations across a broad area very quickly…and commanders can dispatch a drone to linger over areas identified by the satellite that need more in-depth coverage.
…
‘From the time we got authority to proceed from the secretary of the Air Force to the time we launched was about 32 months. In a space acquisition context that’s lightning speed.’
====
Georgia: U.S. Marines Lead Counterinsurgency Training
http://www.eucom.mil/english/fullstory.asp?article=Reserve-Marines-Georgian-soldiers-train
U.S. European Command
July 25, 2011
Side by Side: Reserve Marines and Georgian soldiers train together
Cpl. Nana Dannsaappiah, Black Sea Rotational Force
VAZIANI TRAINING AREA, Republic of Georgia: Georgian soldiers can be found fighting alongside U.S. Marines on the frontlines of the Afghanistan. But to ensure both parties work well together on the battlefield requires practice conducted on the training grounds.
Marines from Anti-Terrorism Battalion based in Rochester, N.Y., and Black Sea Rotational Force 11, along with soldiers from the Georgian 4th Infantry Brigade practiced Military Operations in an Urban Terrain (MOUT) here during Exercise Agile Spirit 2011.
Agile Spirit is designed to increase interoperability between the forces by exchanging and enhancing each country’s capacity in counterinsurgency (COIN) and peacekeeping (PKO) operations, including: small unit tactics, convoy operations, and counter-Improvised Explosive Device training.
…
In Overseas Contingency Operations, Marines conduct COIN operations in which they encounter enemies hiding in small towns and villages…The interoperability training between the Georgians and the Marines focused on overcoming MOUT challenges by sharing proven tactics and techniques among each other and practicing them numerous times.
…
With almost 1,000 troops contributing in Operation Enduring Freedom in the Helmand province, room-clearing techniques, MOUT and COIN training can really help while fighting on the frontlines alongside U.S. Marines.
…
The Marines and the Georgian Armed Forces will be training alongside each other for the next two weeks of Agile Spirit. This type of training and interoperability is a stepping stone to the success of the joint missions that are currently being conducted in Afghanistan.
Black Sea Rotational Force 11 is a rotational deployment of Marines to the Black Sea, Balkan and Caucasus regions to work with partner and allied nations to help build their military capacity…and build enduring partnerships with 13 nations throughout Eastern Europe.
====
NATO Blackmails Turkey Over Chinese, Russian Air Defense Systems
Hürriyet Daily News
July 25, 2011
NATO warns Turkey against buying Chinese, Russian air defense systems
NATO may avoid sharing ballistic missiles intelligence with Turkey if the nation decides to buy Chinese or Russian systems for its missile defense program
Ankara: Ankara would have to operate without NATO’s intelligence information on incoming ballistic missiles if it chooses to buy Chinese or Russian systems for its national air and missile defense program, officials of the Western alliance have warned Turkey.
Participating in the ongoing competition to win Turkey’s national air and missile contract are the U.S. partnership between Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, with their Patriot air defense systems; Russia’s Rosoboronexport, marketing the S300; China’s CPMIEC (China Precision Machinery Export-Import Corp.), offering its HQ-9; and the Italian-French Eurosam, maker of the SAMP/T Aster 30. Turkey is planning to make its selection late this year or early next year.
Many Western officials and experts say that since the Russian and the Chinese systems are not compatible with NATO systems, their potential eventual victory might provide them with access to classified NATO information, and as a result may compromise NATO’s procedures.
But despite this criticism, Turkey so far has ruled against expelling the Chinese and Russian options, saying there is no need to exclude them from the Turkish competition.
One Western expert countered that ‘if, say, the Chinese win the competition, their systems will be in interaction, directly or indirectly, with NATO’s intelligence systems, and this may lead to the leak of critical NATO information to the Chinese, albeit inadvertently. So this is dangerous.’
‘NATO won’t let that happen,’ another Western official told the Hürriyet Daily News on Monday. ‘If the Chinese or the Russians win the Turkish contest, their systems will have to work separately. They won’t be linked to NATO information systems.’
This was the first time NATO has strongly urged Turkey against choosing the non-Western systems.
‘One explanation is that Turkey itself doesn’t plan to [ultimately] select the Chinese or Russian alternatives, but still is retaining them among their options to put pressure on the Americans and the Europeans to [lower] their prices,’ the Western expert said.
Turkey’s long-range air and missile defense systems program (T-Loramids) has been designed to counter both enemy aircraft and missiles.
NATO missile shield
…
The Western alliance decided during a leaders’ summit meeting in Lisbon in November last year to create the collective missile shield…Ankara agreed to the decision only after the alliance accepted a Turkish request that Iran or other countries would not be specifically mentioned as potential sources of threats.
NATO now is seeking to deploy a special X-band radar in Turkish territory for the early detection of missiles launched from the region.
Senior U.S. and Turkish officials discussed the matter in mid-July in Istanbul on the sidelines of a visit by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and both sides reported progress toward an eventual deployment of the X-band radar on Turkish soil.
Ideally, in the event of a launch of a ballistic missile…it would be detected by the X-band radar, and U.S.-made SM-3 interceptors – based on U.S. Aegis destroyers to be deployed in the eastern Mediterranean and later possibly in Romania – would then be fired to hit the incoming missile mid-flight.
====
British Attack Helicopter Injures Five Afghan Children
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14277631
BBC News
July 25, 2011
Afghan children injured by UK Apache helicopter attack
Five Afghan children were injured in a strike carried out by a British Apache attack helicopter, the Ministry of Defence has said.
They were working in a field in the Nahr-e-Saraj area of Helmand Province on Saturday…
Civilian deaths
…
According to a recent United Nations report, the first six months of 2011 were the deadliest for civilians in Afghanistan since the war began in 2001.
The country saw 1,462 civilian deaths in January to June, a 15% increase on the same period last year. Most of the deaths were caused by roadside bombs and anti-government forces such as the Taliban.
While the total number of people killed by pro-government action fell by 9%, more people died in Nato air strikes, leaving 79 Afghans dead in the period in question.
More than half of those deaths have been attributed to the use of Apache ground attack helicopters.
====
Afghanistan: Major NATO Air Base Attacked
Agence France-Presse
July 25, 2011
Militants attack NATO airbase in Afghanistan
JALALABAD, Afghanistan: Militants injured two security forces personnel in a grenade attack Monday on a major NATO airbase at an airport in the eastern Afghan city of Jalalabad, the local police chief said.
‘A few men threw hand grenades at the airport gate and the troops returned fire and the attackers fled,’ said Sardar Sultani, the police chief for Nangarhar province, of which Jalalabad is the capital.
Two members of the security forces were ‘slightly injured’, he said, without specifying if they were foreign or Afghan military or police.
Witnesses had reported seeing explosions, including rocket fire, at the entrance to the airport.
…
An AFP correspondent in Jalalabad said he had heard gunfire, which lasted between 10 and 15 minutes, coming from the airport. He said that the shooting had stopped, but several helicopters were flying over the area.
NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said it was unable to comment on the attack.
Jalalabad airport, which is heavily protected by US forces, is a key ISAF airbase.
In November 2010, eight Taliban insurgents, including one wearing a suicide belt, opened fire at the airport without inflicting casualties, before being killed.
And in June last year the Taliban attacked the same base in broad daylight with rocket launchers and a car bomb. Two foreign soldiers were injured and several militants killed.
The New Dark Age 
Leave a comment