Stop NATO News: February 12, 2012

12 February <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>2012 — Stop NATO

  • Turkey: NATO Could Its Invoke Its Article 5 For War Against Syria
  • NATO Ground Forces Operational Headquarters To Be Built In Turkey
  • CNN Poll: Should NATO Intervene In Syria?
  • Pentagon To Upgrade 30,000-Pound Earth Penetrator Bombs
  • NATO ABM: New-Generation Russian Radar Put On Combat Duty
  • NATO Still Considering Israeli Missile Ship Participation

<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey: <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO Could Its Invoke Its Article 5 For <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>War Against Syria

http://www.sundayszaman.com/sunday/newsDetail_getNewsById.action?newsId=271159

Sunday’s Zaman
February 12, <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>2012

<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO intervention in Syria depends on allies’ political choice
Gozde Nur Donat

ANKARA: [If] millions [sic] of refugees to flee to <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey’s southern border, some analysts claim this would potentially constitute an <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Article V situation, which could lead Ankara to call for a <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO collective defense initiative.

The failed resolution on Syria at the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>UN Security Council, which was rejected after Russia and China vetoed the proposals, has led some to speculate that <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey, along with its <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO allies, may intervene in Syria to check the growing crisis. Experts suggest that the political will of the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO allies is a decisive factor in whether or not <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Article V is invoked, which is a distinct possibility if <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey finds itself facing a refugee crisis that cannot be handled alone.

In an interview with Sunday’s Zaman last week, ?lter Turan, professor of political science at ?stanbul Bilgi University, claimed that ‘any decision on Syrian intervention that is not backed by the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>UN would be not a legal, but a political, choice.’

<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO’s ‘right to collective defense’ does not require the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>UN to pass a resolution authorizing such an intervention, but it would be desirable to have the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>UN on board if <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO takes military action. Whether or not <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO launches an intervention will be the sole decision of treaty partners, who will assess the severity of the perceived threat.

An example of <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO using force as a result of political choice is the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>US operations in Afghanistan beginning on Oct. 7, 2001. The invasion was justified by the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>US under the terms of <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO’s <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Article V, which ensures that if a <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO ally is the victim of an attack, each and every other member of the organization will consider this as an act of violence against all members and will provide assistance.

…Intervention was justified under the terms of <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Article V, although some claimed that <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO violated the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>UN charter by doing so because the UNSC did not specify a right to self-defense in its 2001 resolutions. Furthermore, there was no investigation proving an al-Qaeda involvement in the Sept. 11 attacks that was internationally accepted as being legal.

In another case, a cyber attack allegedly launched by Russia against <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO member Estonia’s government networks in 2006 led to discussion over whether it could be interpreted as constituting an <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Article V incident, but <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO investigators were unable to find evidence that the attack was the work of the Russian government.

====

NATO Ground Forces Operational Headquarters To Be Built In Turkey

http://vestnikkavkaza.net/news/politics/22972.html

Vestnik Kavkaza
February 12, <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>2012

Operational headquarters of <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO ground forces to be built in Izmir, <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey

In the near future Izmir in <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey will host the operational headquarters of <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO ground forces, which will be of great importance for the Alliance, <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO Secretary General Anders Rasmussen told a meeting dedicated to the 60th anniversary of <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey’s membership in <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO, Turkish media reports.

‘I appreciate the significant contribution of <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey to our operations in the Balkans, in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Libya, as well as the recent announcement of the placing of the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>ABM systems on Turkish territory,’ he said.

According to Rasmussen, <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey itself has asked to install the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO missile defense system radars on its territory. Noting the important role of <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey in world history, Rasmussen said that since the ‘cold war’ this country had ‘maintained its position on the world stage.’

‘<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey’s role in the ‘cold war’ was decisive. A new security system was established later, and I think that the recent events have proved the significant role of <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey. Events in North Africa and the Middle East have shown that <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey still is and will continue to be important,’ he said.

Rasmussen said that he considered <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey a strong and important ally, not only due to its geographical location, but also its historical, cultural and religious values.

====

CNN Poll: Should NATO Intervene In Syria?

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>2012/02/10/should-nato-intervene-in-<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>syria-2/

<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>CNN
February 10, <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>2012

Should <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO intervene in Syria?
Yes
No
It depends
Vote

 
Back in August 2011, we posed this question on the Global Public Square. Around 23,000 people responded.
67% said yes.
30% said no.
The remainder said it depends.
What do you all think now?
(Remember, this is not a scientific poll.)

====

Pentagon To Upgrade 30,000-Pound Earth Penetrator Bombs

http://www.newstrackindia.com/newsdetails/<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>2012/02/11/267439-<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>US–military-trying-to-upgrade-30-000-pound-bunker-buster-bomb.html

Asian News International
February 11, <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>2012

<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>US military trying to upgrade 30,000-pound bunker buster bomb

Washington: The <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>US military’s 30,000-pound bunker buster bomb called the Massive Ordnance Penetrator requires an ‘urgent’ upgrade, <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Pentagon officials have said.

<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>US officials are trying to ensure that 20 of the bombs are battle-ready though they have been tight-lipped on potential targets, Fox News reports.

The bomb has been developed by the air force in conjunction with Boeing to attack concrete bunkers and tunnel facilities, and the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Pentagon has requested 81 million dollar in reallocated funds from Congress to get it ready for use.

Defense appropriators on Capitol Hill granted the request, just a month after Iran announced it would begin uranium enrichment at a hardened underground facility near Qom in the Fardow mountain range.

The MOP is delivered by a B-2 or B-52 bomber plane.

Meanwhile, <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Israel successfully tested the upgraded radar for its Arrow Missile Defense shield that it jointly developed with the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Pentagon.

The Blue Sparrow 2 missile was fired from an undisclosed location deep in the Mediterranean Sea towards <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Israel.

====

NATO ABM: New-Generation Russian Radar Put On Combat Duty

http://english.ruvr.ru/<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>2012/02/11/65851071.html

Voice of Russia
February 11, <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>2012

Russia deploys new missile warning radar
Alexander Vatutin

       
A new-generation radar of the Voronezh class has been put on combat duty outside St. Petersburg as part of this country’s early warning system.

Two other Voronezh class radars are already operating in a test mode in Krasnodar region and in Russia’s westernmost exclave of Kaliningrad. Another one, near the Siberian city of Irkutsk, will go online later this year, and the Defense Ministry is mulling Voronezh radars for five more Russian regions soon.

The Voronezh class radars are a serious breakthrough compared to the previous generation radars. They are quick to install, more accurate and upgradable too.

The Voronezh-class radars are designed to work in sync with the missile defense ring around Moscow and also to keep an eye on space objects. All this meaning that Russia is deploying a new system of space defense with an effective operational range of up to 6,000 kilometers.

The current overhaul of Russia’s missile defenses is also due to the new strategic challenges presented by the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>US-led missile shield plans in Europe and also missile threats posed by the so-called rogue states – Iran and North Korea.

Russia has every reason to believe that the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>US-proposed European missile defense system being developed by <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO may in the next few years pose a real threat to Russia and despite all talk about a joint Russia-<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO missile shield, Moscow’s western partners still avoid making any definitive commitments on this all-important issue. Hence the decision to deploy Voronezh radars in the Russian northwest, says defense expert Vladimir Yevseyev. 

‘These radars can be integrated into a common early warning system with <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO’s because they can cover areas not covered by <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>US radars. As to their ability to counter the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>US anti-missiles in Europe, I think we will also need offensive missile complexes there…’

This, however, will only happen if Russia’s legitimate security concerns  are ignored by the West.

====

NATO Still Considering Israeli Missile Ship Participation

http://www.jpost.com/Defense/Article.aspx?id=257443

Jerusalem Post
February 12, <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>2012

<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO still considering Israeli participation in naval op
By Yaakov Katz

Announcement comes in response to exclusive ‘Post’ report that <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey torpedoed Israeli plan to contribute missile ship to mission.

<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO said on Friday that it is still considering an Israeli request to contribute missile ships to a naval operation in the Mediterranean Sea, despite opposition by <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey.

<strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO’s announcement came in response to an exclusive Jerusalem Post report that Turkish opposition had torpedoed an Israeli plan to contribute a missile ship to Active Endeavor, an operation launched after 9/11 to patrol the Mediterranean and share information concerning terrorism and suspicious ships.

The Post revealed that <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey decided to oppose <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Israel’s participation in the operation following the <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Israel Navy raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla in 2010 during which nine Turkish nationals were killed.

According to Today’s Zaman, <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>NATO said that <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Israel’s offer was still being evaluated. The paper also quoted a Turkish foreign ministry official who confirmed that <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Turkey had succeeded in preventing <strong class=’StrictlyAutoTagBold’>Israel from participating in the mission.



Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.